<sandro> (Excellent question for Ilona, Paula.)

<PaulaP> thanks :)

<MoZ> mute me

<MoZ> sandro, sorry cheap phone !

<sandro> Is it a speaker phone, MoZ?

<MoZ> sandro, yes

<sandro> Moz, Okay, yeah, speakerphones that work on conference calls are very expensive if they work at all. :-)

<csma> scribe: philippeB

CSMA: next meeting on thusday

<sandro> ACTION: [DONE] Christian will investigate RIF Telecon overlapping with DAWG/SPARQL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/04-rif-minutes.html#action04]

csma: overlapping with SPARQL. Done.

<sandro> PhilippeB, you can let me take care of recording which actions are done or not done.

<sandro> (I'm set up to cut & paste them)

csam: proposal to accept the last minute. proposed to postponed

<LeoraMorgenstern> about the minutes --- some action items weren't there

<sandro> ACTION: Leora to set up draft proposal on what we mean by FOL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html#action02]

<sandro> ACTION: Leora to Write up CSF for FOL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html#action03]

<sandro> (these were from last time, but not recorded.)

<sandro> csma: We'll put those in retro-actively.

csma: f2f meeting 4, last day for proposal

<sandro> ACTION: Sandro set up straw-poll on F2F4 (MITRE - 3 different dates - and Peter/ISWC) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html#action04]

Chris: straw-poll, indicate the preference between the 4 proposals

<PaulaP> one vote per organization?

<PaulaP> ok

csma: Straw-poll -> it is not a vote, just possibilities indication

<sandro> Deborah_Nichols: Will we have phone call-in ability for F2F3?

<sandro> ACTION: [DONE] Sandro to set up registration page for F2F3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/11-rif-minutes.html#action03]

csma: sandro action regarding the transportation

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/38457/f2f3reg/

sandro: action done

<johnhall> sorry, can't get on audio yet

csma: a form per individual, not organization.

<MoZ> csma, me too, i'm interest by telcon ability

<sandro> Paula: I think we'll have a conference phone open the whole day, but I'm not sure.

paula: phone possibiities not set yet

<SaidTabet> same question for IRC please

<sandro> ACTION: Paula to check on phone-call-in capability, and if we'll have a speaker phone, and network? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html#action06]

<scribe> ACTION: paula checking phone possibilities and speaker phone [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html#action07]

csma: what about IRC ?

<scribe> ACTION: paula check IRC too [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html#action08]

Liaisons

<MoZ> liason with Xquery is difficult

<MoZ> because of overlapping

moz: XQuery and XSL telcon in the same time ...?. nduce probleme of liaison with XQuery

csma: Design constraint
... sandro name of pure prolog

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Horn_Logic

sandor: propsal of a name -> "horn prolog"

<FrankMcCabe> I think ordered horn logic is better

<Francois> +q

<MoZ> +1 ordered horn clauses

<IanH> -1 to calling it a logic!

<edbark> I like Horn Prolog == Horn intersect Prolog

<Francois> zxakim, mute me

<FrankMcCabe> I think that the subset that you are interested in is sometimes called "clean prolog"

<Harold> Ian, so you also don't like linear 'logic' :-)

<Harold> What about "Sequential Horn Clauses"? Does not mention 'logic'.

<sandro> "Sequential Horn Clauses with Prolog Syntax"

<Harold> Fine with me!

csma: prolog -> to have a concrete syntax

francois: have a full compatibility with prolog

<MoZ> everybody agree to have "Horn" in the name

<Francois> I am not at all speaking in favour of a full compatibility with Prolog

<edbark> zakim q+

<Francois> I sam saying referring to the name Prolog would suggest a full compatibility with a programming language -- someting beyond what we can achieve in 1 year.

<Francois> Call it "Horn Clauses"!!!!

<sandro> ed Barkmeyer

<MoZ> MoZ prefer the extension of horn as the subseting or Prolog

<MalaMehrotra> 01#

<Francois> Can I say one more word?

francois: need smthing horn logic with a prolog like syntax.
... choose declarative semantics and not a procedural semantics.

<sandro> Francois: Just give RIF a simple declarative Semantics

<Francois> I do not understand Sandro's viewpoint.

<Francois> I would like SAndro ti write down hius viewpoint.

<Francois> I'll wirte my view point down.

<sandro> Sandro: I'm not saying RIF should have procedural semantics, I'm saying we need to show how to use RIF to exchange rules in languages which do have procedural semantics.

<Hassan> +1

<Hassan> +1 on moving on

<Francois> Sandro: THen why piuck up the very old lady Prolog is and not one of the young and sexy business rule languages?

csma: new requirement on RDF triple supported by RIF ?

<sandro> Francois, because we all more-or-less know Prolog.

<Zakim> sandro, you wanted to respond!

<Francois> Sandro, who is "we", the academic crowd or the Business Rule uses?

<sandro> Francois, "we" is the 22 people on this call.

<Francois> Do we design a RIF for the 22 people on this call? Or do we want people out there to use it and make the Semantic WQeb a reality?

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/The_RIF_Core_must_be_able_to_accept_RDF_triples_as_data

<sandro> Dave: The condition part of the a rule could match RDF triples

<sandro> csma: doesn't that mean RIF should have the query power of SPARQL

csma: accepting RDF triple as data -> SPQRQL query embeddabke in RIF ?

<sandro> dave: it's more a subset of sparql -- the triple-match part

<sandro> dave: reuqirement leaves open whether rdf data is translated or not

<sandro> dave: like jena rules, cwm, euler, ....

<sandro> csma: any consequences of accepting this requirement?

csma: what consequence on RIF expression ?

<sandro> csma: do we mean: any rif-compliant application, receiving a ruleset that referes to RDF triples should be able to process them?

csma: any application receiving RIF should be able to process RDF triple ?

<sandro> dave: cf RDF Compatibiliy pages --- binary predicates map to RDF triples; or a single "triple" predicate -- providing either of these would meet this requirement.

<sandro> (I find myself needing to see some designs before I can really understand CSMA's questions)

<JosDeRoo> q:

<sandro> csma/sandro: as phrased this requirement is perhaps too broad to be useful in distinquishing between designs.

allen: compatibility with RDF important.

<sandro> Allen: maybe there's a CSF here about RDF-compatibility.

<sandro> Dave: I agree, in my strawman breakdown I had "RDF Compatibility" as the 3rd CSF. This was one part of that.

<csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Apr/0005.html

dave: 1) RIF should accepte RDF triple as data, 2) ?

<sandro> Dave: A concrete example being an XML Schema for rules? No, this is not about the syntax of RIF.

csma: impact on implementing of the design of RIF ?

<sandro> JosDeRoo: also RDF simple entailment rules? are they covered by this requirement? RDFS-Closure

<Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask about RDF/XML Parser

csma: volunteer for a use case on accepting RDF triple ?

<sandro> sandro: I'd like to see this tied in with a use case, a scenario where RDF data is used and matters.

<PaulaP> there is a use case concerning access to RDF and XML data

<Francois> PaulaP is right. We already have such a use case

<PaulaP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Rule-Based_Combined_Access_to_XML_and_RDF_Data

<sandro> sandro: And I'd like to see whether or not we need an RDF/XML parser in all RIF software

<PaulaP> contains examples of rules

<MoZ> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/UCR/Interchanging_Rule_Extensions_to_OWL

francois: central feature. If no supported, RIF not for semantic web. behond prolog, having the semantic of RDF triple.

<Francois> THanks Christian for clarifying!

csma: dave should explicit the link between use case and requirement ?

<PaulaP> the use case is not in the UCR document

dave: requiement of the charter not covered by the current use case.

<Allen> probably in the last one: Vocabularly Mapping for Data Integration

<Francois> +1 with RIF accepting RDF data witrh its semantics.

<edbark> I think I will object to Sandro's rqmt for RDF parser

<sandro> why, edbark?

csma: specif requirement on RIF ? need XML-RDF parser ?

<Francois> Christian: the specific requirement is to work out a semantics covering Blank Nodes. This is a tough issue. But the only tough issue.

<csma> qq?

<edbark> +1 to accepting RIF data with its semantics

<MoZ> csma there is a UCR with "Requirements on the rule interchange format include semantic compatibility with OWL-DL and RDF"

<edbark> Sandro, it's not about syntax, it's about assertions

frank: impossbiel situation. The semantic of prolog is incompatible of RDF.

<Francois> What means "The semantic of prolog is incompatible of RDF"?

<Francois> s it is defined, it is different.

<Francois> ut one can make both of them compatible.

<Hassan> +1 with Frank

<IanH> Then we are done already aren't we? Surely exchanging rules is trivial if we don't care about interoperability.

<DaveReynolds> +1 to IanH

<Francois> +1 with accepting RDF assertions with their semantics

francois: lookat the data : XML, RDF. What kind of rules we need ? prolog syntax (its idea) working with XML, RDF and OWL datas.

<edbark> +1 to Francois

francois: cna't take old rule language. What is is the meaning of rules ? deduction rules, DB constraints (OWL, RDF), rules realizing changing (production rule).

<PaulaP> there are requirements regarding the different types of rules

<PaulaP> on the design constraints wiki page

<sandro> ACTION: Francois write up what he's saying on the DesignConstraints page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html#action09]

<MoZ> Zakim who is making the noise

francois: need clear declarative semantics. RIF should be more abstract than traditionnal programming language.

<johnhall> Sorry, have to go.

<sandro> Uh oh, we're over time. And I have to say, I'm finding this meeting too long as it is. :-/

francois: need to follow "SQL properties" : declarative but not too procedural.. ?

<sandro> Francois: I'm 99% sure no one in the Working Group wants procedural semantics for RIF.

<sandro> Frank: We're not necessarily designing a new language, we're talking about interchanging existing rule languages.

<sandro> MichaelKifer: I propose we resolve to never mention Prolog in the telecon.

<Francois> Phlippe: I was saying SQL's semantics leaves room for several procedural interpretartions that all are correct.

Sorry for miss interpreting your thoughts !

<sandro> ...: It's an illformed question. If you send me some prolog text, what should I do with it? How many answers will it give before it perhaps goes into a loop where it doesn't terminate.

<sandro> PhilippeB, you're doing very well -- this is an extremely hard meeting to scribe.

<Francois> Sandro and Michael: Look at practical Use Cases like EU-Rent. The points are right but academic.

<sandro> Move to adjourn!

<Hassan> +1

<JosDeRoo> Francois, the rules I meant are http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#RDFSRules

OK !

<Allen> Bye

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: philippeB
Inferring ScribeNick: PhilippeB

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Allen_Ginsberg CSMA Chris Chris_Welty Christian Darko Darko_Anicic Dave DaveReynolds Dave_Reynolds DavidHirtle David_Hirtle Deborah_Nichols Ed_Barkmeyer EvanWallace Francois Frank FrankMcCabe Fujitsu GaryHallmark Gary_Hallmark Harold Hassan Hassan_Ait-Kaci IPcaller IanH JosDeRoo Jos_De_Roo Keeper LeoraMorgenstern MalaMehrotra Mala_Mehrotra MarkusK MichaelKifer Michael_Kifer NRCC P21 P3 P35 P37 P38 P46 PaulaP PhilippeB Philippe_Bonnard Phlippe SaidTabet Said_Tabet aaaa aabb allen csam edbark johnhall moz patranja paula pfps sandor sandro was
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy


WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting

Got date from IRC log name: 18 Apr 2006
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-rif-minutes.html
People with action items: francois leora paula sandro

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.