IRC log of webont on 2003-11-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:54:15 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #webont

16:54:20 [sandro]

zakim, this will be webont

16:54:20 [Zakim]

ok, sandro; I see SW_WebOnt()12:00PM scheduled to start in 6 minutes

16:58:41 [seanb]

seanb has joined #webont

16:58:59 [guus]

guus has joined #webont

16:59:38 [IanH]

IanH has joined #webont

16:59:43 [Zakim]

SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has now started

16:59:50 [Zakim]

+??P17

17:01:17 [Zakim]

+Ian_Horrocks

17:01:31 [Zakim]

+[EDS]

17:01:52 [guus]

zakim, ??P17 is Guus

17:01:52 [Zakim]

+Guus; got it

17:01:54 [Zakim]

+Sandro

17:03:13 [Zakim]

+??P20

17:03:17 [Zakim]

+JimH

17:05:10 [Zakim]

+Tayeb

17:05:32 [sandro]

Zakim, ??P20 is SeanB

17:05:32 [Zakim]

+SeanB; got it

17:05:37 [Zakim]

+Marwan_Sabbouh

17:05:38 [sandro]

zakim, who is on the phone?

17:05:38 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Guus, Ian_Horrocks, [EDS], Sandro, SeanB, JimH, Tayeb, Marwan_Sabbouh

17:06:46 [Zakim]

+Mike_Dean

17:07:30 [mdean]

mdean has joined #webont

17:07:37 [jjc]

jjc has joined #webont

17:07:44 [jjc]

what's the code?

17:08:11 [Zakim]

+ +1.408.892.aaaa

17:08:12 [sandro]

"webo", jjc

17:08:26 [jjc]

in numbers - in europe we don't get letters?

17:08:28 [guus]

zakim, Tayeb is Jerome

17:08:28 [Zakim]

+Jerome; got it

17:08:39 [sandro]

zakim, +1.408.892.aaaa is Charles White

17:08:39 [Zakim]

I don't understand '+1.408.892.aaaa is Charles White', sandro

17:08:48 [sandro]

zakim, +1.408.892.aaaa is Charles_White

17:08:48 [Zakim]

+Charles_White; got it

17:08:56 [seanb]

9326

17:09:00 [jjc]

ta

17:09:02 [Zakim]

+HermanT

17:09:25 [Zakim]

+??P6

17:09:32 [jjc]

Zakim, ?P6 is Jeremy

17:09:32 [Zakim]

sorry, jjc, I do not recognize a party named '?P6'

17:09:36 [jjc]

Zakim, ??P6 is Jeremy

17:09:36 [Zakim]

+Jeremy; got it

17:09:37 [guus]

zakim, pick a scribe

17:09:37 [Zakim]

Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Jeremy

17:10:09 [guus]

zakim, pick a scribe

17:10:09 [Zakim]

Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Sandro

17:10:30 [sandro]

Sandro is Scribing.

17:10:37 [sandro]

zakim, who is on the phone?

17:10:37 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Guus, Ian_Horrocks, [EDS], Sandro, SeanB, JimH, Jerome, Marwan_Sabbouh, Mike_Dean, Charles_White, HermanT, Jeremy

17:11:20 [sandro]

zakim, [EDS] is temporarily Mike_Smith

17:11:20 [Zakim]

+Mike_Smith; got it

17:11:45 [sandro]

[Guus reads Roll from Zakim.]

17:11:55 [sandro]

Next Meeting....?

17:12:18 [sandro]

Nov 27 is US Thanksgiving.

17:12:42 [Zakim]

+Jeff_Heflin

17:12:46 [sandro]

so Next Meeting: Dec 4, Guus to Chair, JimH to Scribe.

17:13:11 [sandro]

Proposed to approve minutes?

17:13:29 [sandro]

as sent by mike smith, with Guus' ammendment sent yesterday.

17:13:33 [sandro]

RESOLVED

17:13:45 [sandro]

Agenda Amendments?

17:14:34 [sandro]

Action DanC review -- not yet done, asked for continued

17:14:48 [sandro]

Action Guus review rdf schema -- done

17:25:18 [sandro]

Re: Mike Smith: Update Issue 5.26.

17:25:30 [sandro]

JimH: we need a little more text on this for PR

17:26:06 [sandro]

ACTION Mike_Smith: put some text on this in Guide

17:26:54 [IanH]

IanH has joined #webont

17:27:04 [sandro]

JimH: He'll inform group; people can comment/object if necessary, but we'll assume his change is okay if none.

17:28:54 [sandro]

======= 3.

17:29:03 [sandro]

Jos's new list of tests, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Nov/0041.html

17:30:28 [sandro]

JJC: AnnotationProperty-003 recently updated -- not sure if test results are current. We should delay approving that.

17:31:10 [sandro]

Guus: Proposed we approve someValuesFrom-003 AnnotationProperty-002 I5.3-010 I5.8-016

17:31:24 [sandro]

ACTION Sandro: deal with syntactic tests showing up as proposed

17:31:29 [sandro]

RESOLVED

17:31:35 [sandro]

ACTION JJC: update the status

17:32:38 [sandro]

Sandro: if AP-003 has changed, how will we ever know when results are about the new version? Shouldn't we obselete it and add a new one?

17:33:28 [sandro]

JJC: I don't think so.

17:33:37 [sandro]

JimH: editor's descretion

17:33:55 [sandro]

ACTION JJC: look at AnnotationProperty-003 and deal with it.

17:33:58 [Zakim]

+JosD

17:34:03 [jjc]

http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposed-dl-200-instance#description-logic-209

17:36:07 [sandro]

JJC: DL-209 This is an obvious child of DL-208, so there shouldn't be problems. Just people haven't run it yet, I guess.

17:36:21 [sandro]

JimH: I'm okay with leaving it proposed for now.

17:37:03 [sandro]

<agreement>

17:37:11 [sandro]

(leave it proposed for now)

17:37:15 [sandro]

For DL-502....

17:37:40 [sandro]

JJC: it's been in there with DL-501 for a long time, and no one has passed them. They are SAT problems.

17:38:46 [sandro]

Ian: Were these tests you got from us?

17:39:04 [sandro]

JJC: No, I'm the author. It uses a lot of individuals, and it seems like that's too hard.

17:39:18 [sandro]

JJC: Racer might do it, but no results yet.

17:39:28 [sandro]

JJC: Proposed make it Extra Credit.

17:39:45 [sandro]

RRSAgent, pointer?

17:39:45 [RRSAgent]

See http://www.w3.org/2003/11/13-webont-irc#T17-39-45

17:41:03 [sandro]

Sandro: has anyone else looked at it?

17:41:16 [sandro]

Jos: Yes, it's the same as 504 with a different encoding.

17:41:28 [sandro]

Ian: I looked at it, and suggested it be recoded as 504

17:42:00 [sandro]

RESOLVED, 502 is ExtraCredit test

17:42:16 [sandro]

ACTION JJC: update status of DL-502

17:43:14 [sandro]

JJC: looks like misc-011 is just an editorial problem.

17:43:20 [sandro]

Guus: Is this really a Lite test?

17:44:37 [sandro]

JimH: is this important?

17:44:48 [sandro]

JJC: it was added as a result of our concern about guide tests.

17:44:59 [sandro]

JJC: it's a new test -- I think people just haven't addressed it yet.

17:45:17 [sandro]

JJC: It's meant to be easy

17:45:29 [sandro]

JimH: Okay, guide tests were important. keep it.

17:46:07 [sandro]

Jos: Euler is passing the syntactic level test for it.

17:46:15 [sandro]

Jos: Euler also passes it.

17:46:49 [sandro]

JJC: it refers to things outside the test space with URIs; I dont support approving it today. I already have an action to look at it.

17:47:17 [sandro]

Ian: It's hard for me to find the test.

17:48:23 [sandro]

JJC: it's too recent to be in even the latest editor's draft. Sorry!

17:49:25 [seanb]

While we're on this, the following link is broken: http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/dl-500-SAT#description-logic-503

17:49:27 [sandro]

Ian: Link on 7.3.4 (3SAT) is dead

17:49:56 [sandro]

JJC: I run the link checker around Pub time, not regularly.

17:50:14 [sandro]

JJC: What about the proposed tests with 1 pass?

17:51:09 [sandro]

Jim: moving to PR does not mean we stop approving tests.

17:51:55 [sandro]

Jim: Leaving these proposed and deciding to accept them later is fine; accepting something now which isnt passed would hinder PR.

17:52:53 [sandro]

JJC: We're asking the WG to approve the Test document, and as editor, I don't even know what's to be in it.

17:53:20 [sandro]

JJC: We have about 30 proposed tests with one pass

17:54:09 [sandro]

Jim: If we move to PR this minute, we'd not approve them. But in the next 2-3 weeks we can approve them. Get the WG out of critical path on publishing.

17:54:24 [sandro]

Jim: It's just editorial w.r.t. Test document

17:54:40 [sandro]

JJC: I'm not comfortable.

17:54:48 [sandro]

Jos: I'm also uncomfortable.

17:55:32 [sandro]

JJC: 3 tests from datatypes section, knowing cardinality of datatypes, Euler does it....

17:56:00 [sandro]

JJC: That's not compelling for DL reasoners.

17:57:17 [sandro]

JJC: If we accept these tests, the Chair has to make the case why they are okay only being passed by one system.

17:57:29 [sandro]

Jim: THat doesnt bear on our exit criteria

17:58:42 [sandro]

JJC: if we start approving some of the 29 tests to with one pass ... maybe a meeting next week ....

18:00:30 [sandro]

sandro: no Team Contact likely possible next week

18:00:39 [Zakim]

-Mike_Smith

18:00:52 [sandro]

JJC/JimH: we could delegate a subgroup to consider remaining tests.

18:01:48 [sandro]

Ian: Why not just wait until more systems pass them.

18:02:27 [sandro]

Jim: Can we still approve more after PR?

18:02:31 [IanH]

IanH has joined #webont

18:02:37 [sandro]

Sandro: Yes -- many WG's approve tests after REC.

18:02:51 [sandro]

JJC: We could approve them between PR and Rec.

18:03:31 [sandro]

JimH: so we don't have to worry about the test results today. I'm still waiting for Racer results!!

18:03:54 [sandro]

Ian: Yes! Let's not freeze it now -- new systems should keep emerging.

18:04:26 [sandro]

JimH: there is the exit criteria percentage bits -- we can't approve to many tests not being widely passed before PR.

18:05:08 [sandro]

JJC: Sounds like we still want two systems passing a test before we approve them.

18:05:30 [sandro]

Jim: Maybe be good to look at them -- may decide to move them to extra credit.

18:05:57 [sandro]

Ian: Fine, as long as we don't postpone PR vote

18:06:35 [JosD]

JosD has joined #webont

18:06:48 [sandro]

ACTION JJC: draw up agenda of tests to discuss next week

18:06:54 [sandro]

Guus: I'm at risk

18:06:59 [sandro]

JimH: not sure.

18:07:08 [sandro]

(Not a formal WG meeting)

18:07:36 [sandro]

Jos: I'll try to be there; might be late coming from other meeting

18:07:39 [sandro]

Sean: me

18:07:42 [sandro]

Charles: me

18:07:43 [sandro]

Ian: me

18:08:21 [sandro]

JJC: Charles, can you represent Cerebra results?

18:08:24 [sandro]

Charles: yes.

18:09:30 [sandro]

INFORMAL WG MEETING next week, to discuss Proposed Tests, Ian to Chair.

18:09:35 [sandro]

============= 4./

18:10:08 [sandro]

Guus: mostly about Herman's e-mail

18:10:38 [sandro]

Herman: WG would need to pick one description of DL reasoning normative. I proposed making 5.4 informative.

18:11:24 [sandro]

Herman: Because equivalence depends on the proof ....

18:11:42 [sandro]

Jim: You're claiming during CR that you no longer like our design?

18:11:42 [seanb]

Apologies -- I have to leave now.

18:11:54 [Zakim]

-SeanB

18:12:12 [sandro]

Herman: Two normative descriptions.

18:12:41 [sandro]

Jim: You did a review of the RDF document, but now you're coming back with issues on our documents. How is that?

18:13:56 [sandro]

Herman: RDF Core did a review, found a conflict. If we have that same situation, we'll be better off having picked one section as normative.

18:14:17 [sandro]

Jim: Does our design need any changing due to RDF Core changes?

18:14:31 [sandro]

Jim: (are they now techincally alligned.)

18:14:54 [sandro]

Herman: S&AS needs techinical editorial changes to be completely aligned. This is different from the normative/informative issue.

18:15:28 [sandro]

Herman: The new version of RDF Semantics only leads to many editorial changes, but ONLY EDITORIAL changes in S&AS.

18:15:57 [sandro]

Herman: Having done this review, it became clear again to me that we have defined two different descriptions, which might conflict.

18:16:32 [sandro]

Sandro: Test + S&AS is also "both normative"

18:16:59 [sandro]

Ian: Test does say it defers to S&AS, so it can't be in conflict that way.

18:17:19 [sandro]

Ian: I think there's a lot in what Herman says. The original design slipped while no one was noticing.

18:18:22 [sandro]

Ian: the DL MT was supposed to be definitive, and then equivalence with Full came later. I don't think the correspondence theory was every supposed to be Normative.

18:18:51 [sandro]

JJC: Possiblity of conflicts, even with Herman's change, with other bits of section 5, etc 5.3.

18:19:06 [Zakim]

-Charles_White

18:19:14 [sandro]

Ian: Two different languages, DL and Full.

18:19:19 [Zakim]

-Marwan_Sabbouh

18:19:32 [sandro]

Jim: I haven't see a single comment suggesting there is any conflict.

18:19:48 [sandro]

Jim: If we discover they are broken, we have errata.

18:20:09 [Zakim]

+Charles_White

18:20:33 [sandro]

Jim: Process-wise, doing some changes when no one has complained is.... odd.

18:20:42 [sandro]

Guus: I concur with Jim.

18:21:17 [sandro]

Guus: "In case of conflict, section 3 prevails". That would be an okay editorial change.

18:21:26 [sandro]

re section 3 and 5.4

18:21:55 [sandro]

JimH: I wouldn't object, but that seems unnecessary.

18:22:44 [sandro]

JJC: I think we already have this. Test defers to different bits of S&AS for different kinds of conformance, so 5.4 doesn't come in. I also wouldn't oppose; can live with.

18:22:57 [sandro]

Herman: Why object to making 5.4 informative.

18:23:16 [sandro]

JimH: Because that's what my implementors often use.

18:23:23 [sandro]

JJC: I would object on procedural grounds.

18:23:49 [sandro]

Guus: let's leave adding that sentence, as discussed, to S&AS editor.

18:24:31 [sandro]

Herman: in RDF semantics, there is a parallel situation, with *informative* entailment rules.

18:24:58 [sandro]

Guus: Herman, process-wise we couldn't change it at this meeting (even if we had consensus)

18:25:23 [sandro]

Ian: I'm okay with adding the sentence. "If any conflict should ever arise between these two forms, the model theory takes precedence"

18:25:56 [sandro]

========

18:26:07 [sandro]

Guus: any objectsion to extending up toe 15 minutes?

18:26:08 [sandro]

None.

18:27:54 [sandro]

Guus: PROPOSED as in agenda.

18:32:42 [sandro]

zakim, who is here?

18:32:42 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Guus, Ian_Horrocks, Sandro, JimH, Jerome, Mike_Dean, HermanT, Jeremy, Jeff_Heflin, JosD, Charles_White

18:32:44 [Zakim]

On IRC I see JosD, IanH, jjc, mdean, guus, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, logger

18:36:38 [sandro]

Vote: 14 yes, 1 abstain, 0 object

18:36:43 [sandro]

RESOLVED

18:37:02 [sandro]

Action editors: get their documents ready

18:37:09 [sandro]

tentative date Dec 9.

18:37:14 [sandro]

RDF Core also.

18:37:45 [sandro]

(DanBri's bday...)

18:38:23 [sandro]

Action team-contact: get ready

18:38:41 [sandro]

Action JimH: arrange directors meeting

18:39:03 [sandro]

Overview?

18:39:12 [sandro]

Action Guus: approach editor of Overview

18:39:15 [sandro]

Action Guus: approach editor of Guide

18:39:25 [sandro]

cancel

18:39:34 [sandro]

Action Guus: approach editor of Guide

18:39:45 [sandro]

Action Guus: Make changes to reference

18:40:40 [sandro]

Action Ian: Make changes to S&AS (includes changes from Herman from RDF Semantics)

18:40:51 [sandro]

Herman volunteers to help Ian get it right. :-)

18:41:01 [sandro]

Action JJC: make Test ready for PR.

18:42:08 [sandro]

JJC: I have some new proposed tests from Racer, shall I include them?

18:42:10 [sandro]

JimH: Sure.

18:42:21 [sandro]

JJC: I'll obsolete them if they don't send us results. :-)

18:42:52 [sandro]

Action Jeff: get Requirements ready

18:43:42 [sandro]

Action Sandro: get ready -- tell editors what's expected of them.

18:43:56 [sandro]

Action Sandro: provide some SOTD text

18:44:06 [sandro]

... to JimH for PR.

18:44:24 [sandro]

JJC: some concerns about structure of Test; will send doc.

18:45:12 [sandro]

Action sandro: get editors std list of RDF + OWL documents names and Dec-09 URLs.

18:45:40 [Zakim]

-JimH

18:45:47 [sandro]

Action sandro: send out WG members list, (confirm with Chairs first).

18:46:14 [sandro]

Guus: time for a collective sigh of relief!

18:46:20 [sandro]

Guus: thanks for staying late!

18:46:24 [sandro]

Guus: Congradulations!

18:46:26 [sandro]

ADJOURN.

18:46:27 [Zakim]

-Charles_White

18:46:30 [Zakim]

-Jeff_Heflin

18:46:31 [Zakim]

-Jeremy

18:46:32 [Zakim]

-Ian_Horrocks

18:46:32 [Zakim]

-Mike_Dean

18:46:33 [Zakim]

-HermanT

18:46:38 [Zakim]

-Jerome

18:46:43 [Zakim]

-JosD

18:46:56 [Zakim]

-Sandro

18:47:02 [Zakim]

-Guus

18:47:03 [Zakim]

SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has ended

20:55:32 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #webont