OWL Working Group

Draft Minutes of 25 June 2008

Present
Ian Horrocks Boris Motik Michael Smith Zhe Wu Uli Sattler Ivan Herman Bernardo Cuenca Grau Ratnesh Sahay Sandro Hawke Peter Patel-Schneider Jie Bao Jeff Pan Alan Ruttenberg Achille Fokoue Rinke Hoekstra Diego Calvanese
Scribe
Michael Smith
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June) link
  2. Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June) link
  3. Accept Previous Minutes (18 June) link
  4. resolve Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith link
  5. resolve Issue 81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0156.html) link
Topics
00:00:00 <msmith> PRESENT: ianh, bmotik, msmith, zhe, uli, ivan, bcuencagrau, ratnesh, sandro, pfps, baojie, jeffp, Alan_Ruttenberg, achille, rinke, calvanese
17:00:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc

17:00:12 <pfps> Zakim, this will be owlwg

Peter Patel-Schneider: Zakim, this will be owlwg

17:00:12 <Zakim> ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 60 minutes ago

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 60 minutes ago

17:00:23 <pfps> RRSagent, make records public

Peter Patel-Schneider: RRSagent, make records public

17:00:32 <pfps> zakim, who is here?

Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is here?

17:00:36 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps

17:00:44 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

17:00:55 <Zhe> zakim, mute me

Zhe Wu: zakim, mute me

17:00:56 <Zakim> sorry, Zhe, I don't know what conference this is

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Zhe, I don't know what conference this is

17:01:21 <pfps> zakim, this will be owlwg

Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, this will be owlwg

17:01:21 <Zakim> ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 61 minutes ago

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 61 minutes ago

17:01:28 <pfps> zakim, who is here?

Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is here?

17:01:28 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps

17:01:29 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

17:02:03 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me

17:02:03 <Zakim> sorry, uli, I don't know what conference this is

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, uli, I don't know what conference this is

17:02:09 <bmotik> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Boris Motik: Zakim, who is on the phone?

17:02:09 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, bmotik

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, bmotik

17:02:10 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

17:02:11 <sandro> zakim, this will be owl

Sandro Hawke: zakim, this will be owl

17:02:11 <Zakim> ok, sandro, I see SW_OWL()12:00PM already started

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, sandro, I see SW_OWL()12:00PM already started

17:02:14 <msmith> ScribeNick: msmith

(Scribe set to Michael Smith)

17:02:15 <Zakim> +??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21

17:02:20 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here?

17:02:25 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip

Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip

17:02:34 <bmotik> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Boris Motik: Zakim, who is on the phone?

17:02:39 <Zakim> -??P3

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P3

17:02:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21

17:02:49 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made

17:02:52 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?

Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer?

17:02:52 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-02-52

RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-02-52

17:02:53 <Ratnesh> zakim, ??P21 is Ratnesh

Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, ??P21 is Ratnesh

17:02:55 <Zakim> +Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan

17:03:00 <sandro> RRSAgent, make log public

Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, make log public

17:03:01 <Zhe> zakim, +1.603.897.aaaa is me

Zhe Wu: zakim, +1.603.897.aaaa is me

17:03:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21, Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21, Ivan

17:03:12 <pfps> zakim, who is here?

Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is here?

17:03:13 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here?

17:03:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

17:03:17 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

17:03:25 <Zakim> +Ratnesh; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ratnesh; got it

17:03:27 <Zakim> -??P8

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P8

17:03:31 <Zakim> +Zhe; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe; got it

17:03:33 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P8 is me

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P8 is me

17:03:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro

17:03:39 <Zhe> Zakim, aaaa is me

Zhe Wu: Zakim, aaaa is me

17:03:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro

17:03:49 <Zhe> zakim, mute me

Zhe Wu: zakim, mute me

17:03:57 <Zakim> +??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1

17:04:03 <Zakim> I already had ??P8 as ??P8, bcuencagrau

Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P8 as ??P8, bcuencagrau

17:04:05 <Zakim> +??P2

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2

17:04:11 <Zakim> sorry, Zhe, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Zhe, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'

17:04:13 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

17:04:13 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me

17:04:24 <Zakim> Zhe should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should now be muted

17:04:29 <Zakim> -??P5

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P5

17:04:34 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me

17:04:36 <Zakim> sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

17:04:38 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aadd

17:04:42 <Zakim> +??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4

17:04:47 <baojie> zakim, aadd is me

Jie Bao: zakim, aadd is me

17:04:47 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P4

Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P4

17:04:52 <Zakim> sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

17:04:55 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P4 is me

Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P4 is me

17:04:59 <Zakim> +baojie; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie; got it

17:04:59 <IanH> zakim, aacc is me

Ian Horrocks: zakim, aacc is me

17:05:02 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P4', bmotik

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '??P4', bmotik

17:05:06 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it

17:05:08 <Zakim> -??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P1

17:05:12 <Zakim> +IanH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH; got it

17:05:12 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

17:05:24 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

17:05:26 <Zakim> +[IBM]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM]

17:05:26 <uli> zakim, ??P2 is me

Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P2 is me

17:05:29 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is me

Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is me

17:05:30 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here?

17:05:31 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me

17:05:40 <Zakim> +uli; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +uli; got it

17:05:44 <Zakim> + +0122427aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: + +0122427aaee

17:05:48 <Zakim> +Achille; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it

17:05:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli, baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, +0122427aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli, baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, +0122427aaee

17:05:55 <Zakim> uli should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted

17:05:55 <JeffP> zakim, aaee is me

Jeff Pan: zakim, aaee is me

17:06:04 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

17:06:09 <msmith> Agenda at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.06.25/Agenda

Agenda at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.06.25/Agenda

17:06:12 <Zakim> +JeffP; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +JeffP; got it

17:06:18 <Zakim> +??P8

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8

17:06:24 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P8 is me

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P8 is me

17:06:30 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here?

17:06:38 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it

17:06:42 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau

17:06:44 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me

17:06:55 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted

17:06:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot

17:07:04 <Zakim> +Alan

Zakim IRC Bot: +Alan

17:07:33 <msmith> topic: Admin

1. Admin

17:07:33 <msmith> subtopic: Roll Call

1.1. Roll Call

17:07:33 <msmith> Regrets, ElisaKendall, EvanWallace, CarstenLutz, Markus_Krötzsch

Regrets, ElisaKendall, EvanWallace, CarstenLutz, Markus_Krötzsch

17:07:41 <msmith> subtopic: Agenda Amendments

1.2. Agenda Amendments

17:07:58 <msmith> ianh: no agenda amendments

Ian Horrocks: no agenda amendments

17:08:06 <Zakim> -bmotik

Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik

17:08:20 <msmith> subtopic: Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June)

1.3. Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June)

17:08:26 <Zakim> +??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4

17:08:30 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P4 is me

Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P4 is me

17:08:30 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it

17:08:32 <pfps> 4 june minutes look acceptable

Peter Patel-Schneider: 4 june minutes look acceptable

17:08:36 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

17:08:36 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

17:08:54 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June)

RESOLVED: Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June)

17:09:11 <msmith> subtopic: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)

1.4. Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)

17:09:12 <pfps> 11 june minutes look acceptable

Peter Patel-Schneider: 11 june minutes look acceptable

17:09:18 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:09:20 <msmith> PROPOSED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)

PROPOSED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)

17:09:21 <uli> +1

Uli Sattler: +1

17:09:26 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)

RESOLVED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)

17:09:38 <msmith> subtopic: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)

1.5. Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)

17:09:40 <pfps> 18 june minutes are *perfect*  :-)

Peter Patel-Schneider: 18 june minutes are *perfect* :-)

17:09:43 <msmith> PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)

PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)

17:09:52 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:10:09 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)

RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)

17:10:31 <msmith> subtopic: F2F3

1.6. F2F3

17:10:37 <Zakim> + +39.047.101.aaff

Zakim IRC Bot: + +39.047.101.aaff

17:10:49 <msmith> ianh: clarify status on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People

Ian Horrocks: clarify status on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People

17:11:00 <calvanese> zakim, mute me

Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me

17:11:00 <Zakim> sorry, calvanese, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, calvanese, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

17:11:06 <msmith> topic: Action Item Status

2. Action Item Status

17:11:06 <msmith> subtopic: Pending Review Actions

2.1. Pending Review Actions

17:11:14 <calvanese> zakim, +39.047.101.aaff is me

Diego Calvanese: zakim, +39.047.101.aaff is me

17:11:14 <Zakim> +calvanese; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +calvanese; got it

17:11:20 <calvanese> zakim, mute me

Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me

17:11:20 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted

17:11:22 <Zakim> +??P18

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18

17:11:23 <uli> zakim, unmute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me

17:11:23 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted

17:11:30 <Rinke> zakim, ??P18 is me

Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, ??P18 is me

17:11:34 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it

17:11:41 <Rinke> zakim, mute me

Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me

17:11:41 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted

17:11:48 <msmith> ianh: on action-160 wasn't there question on top/bottom in profiles?  keys in profiles?  there was an action on uli re: top/bottom in profiles

Ian Horrocks: on ACTION-160 wasn't there question on top/bottom in profiles? keys in profiles? there was an action on uli re: top/bottom in profiles

17:12:09 <calvanese> zakim, unmute me

Diego Calvanese: zakim, unmute me

17:12:13 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me

17:12:13 <Zakim> uli should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted

17:12:32 <msmith> uli: I sent an email on top/bottom in dl-lite.  diego?

Uli Sattler: I sent an email on top/bottom in dl-lite. diego?

17:12:57 <uli> zakim, unmute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me

17:12:57 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted

17:13:14 <msmith> calvanese: dl-lite has no top concept... there is no point to having it.  we don't believe it would impact properties, but there is not point. if it doesn't change computation properties, it is just by chance. you don't gain any expressivity

Diego Calvanese: dl-lite has no top concept... there is no point to having it. we don't believe it would impact properties, but there is not point. if it doesn't change computation properties, it is just by chance. you don't gain any expressivity

17:13:50 <msmith> ianh: its already that it doesn't add expressive power to DL

Ian Horrocks: its already that it doesn't add expressive power to DL

17:14:01 <uli> zakim, unmute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me

17:14:01 <Zakim> uli was not muted, uli

Zakim IRC Bot: uli was not muted, uli

17:14:09 <msmith> calvanese: yes, b/c you have nominals, that might not apply to profile which is strict subset

Diego Calvanese: yes, b/c you have nominals, that might not apply to profile which is strict subset

17:14:25 <msmith> uli: reason to add is not to add expressivity, it is to add useful syntactic sugar. e.g., rooting a property hierarchy from a top property

Uli Sattler: reason to add is not to add expressivity, it is to add useful syntactic sugar. e.g., rooting a property hierarchy from a top property

17:15:11 <msmith> ianh: with profiles, ruling things out is costly rather than having them. we should only rule things out if e.g., they have adverse impact on properties

Ian Horrocks: with profiles, ruling things out is costly rather than having them. we should only rule things out if e.g., they have adverse impact on properties

17:15:27 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me

17:15:27 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

17:15:33 <msmith> msmith: +1 to ianh

Michael Smith: +1 to ianh

17:16:22 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me

17:16:22 <Zakim> uli should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted

17:16:34 <msmith> calvanese: I partially agree.  adding construct gives indication it is to be used.  this may have bad impact, even if it can be simulated with existing constructs. similar argument for dl-lite profile

Diego Calvanese: I partially agree. adding construct gives indication it is to be used. this may have bad impact, even if it can be simulated with existing constructs. similar argument for dl-lite profile

17:16:43 <JeffP> +1 calvanese

Jeff Pan: +1 calvanese

17:16:57 <Zakim> -Ratnesh

Zakim IRC Bot: -Ratnesh

17:17:27 <msmith> bmotik: only profile now including top/bottom is EL++. I don't think property must be in profile for editor to hang things off it in UI

Boris Motik: only profile now including top/bottom is EL++. I don't think property must be in profile for editor to hang things off it in UI

17:18:14 <uli> 1-

Uli Sattler: 1-

17:18:14 <msmith> ianh: we had discussion about top/bottom being useful and addressed if it *tempts* users in a negative way. it seems we can have it in dl-lite

Ian Horrocks: we had discussion about top/bottom being useful and addressed if it *tempts* users in a negative way. it seems we can have it in dl-lite

17:18:21 <Zakim> +??P15

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15

17:18:33 <Ratnesh> zakim, ??P15 is Ratnesh

Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, ??P15 is Ratnesh

17:18:33 <Zakim> +Ratnesh; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ratnesh; got it

17:18:37 <msmith> calvanese: I'd like to check the details on whether we can have it

Diego Calvanese: I'd like to check the details on whether we can have it

17:19:15 <msmith> ianh: revisit this in future telecon. top/bottom is in el++

Ian Horrocks: revisit this in future telecon. top/bottom is in el++

17:19:30 <msmith> bmotik: not in owl-r

Boris Motik: not in owl-r

17:19:43 <msmith> ianh: should we action someone to investigate easy keys

Ian Horrocks: should we action someone to investigate easy keys

17:19:58 <msmith> bmotik: no.  its clear no easy keys in dl-lite. I added it to owl-r. unknown for EL++

Boris Motik: no. its clear no easy keys in dl-lite. I added it to owl-r. unknown for EL++

17:20:34 <msmith> jeffp: top/bottom in el++ ?

Jeff Pan: top/bottom in el++ ?

17:20:43 <msmith> bmotik: yes, checked with Carsten

Boris Motik: yes, checked with Carsten

17:20:53 <msmith> jeffp: it doesn't have nominals

Jeff Pan: it doesn't have nominals

17:21:03 <msmith> ianh: yes, presumably it doesn't hurt

Ian Horrocks: yes, presumably it doesn't hurt

17:21:13 <msmith> bmotik: yes, it doesn't hurt

Boris Motik: yes, it doesn't hurt

17:21:18 <msmith> jeffp: what about el+

Jeff Pan: what about el+

17:21:20 <bcuencagrau> EL++ without nominals

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: EL++ without nominals

17:21:26 <msmith> bmotik: what's el+

Boris Motik: what's el+

17:21:46 <msmith> jeffp: el+ is supported by CEL

Jeff Pan: el+ is supported by CEL

17:21:56 <JeffP> ok

Jeff Pan: ok

17:22:04 <msmith> ianh: a bit off topic, we're only concerned with EL++ profile, not other fragments. interesting that CEL doesn't support all of EL++ since we'll need to follow-up moving forward the recs

Ian Horrocks: a bit off topic, we're only concerned with EL++ profile, not other fragments. interesting that CEL doesn't support all of EL++ since we'll need to follow-up moving forward the recs

17:23:36 <msmith> calvanese: follow-up on keys in dl-lite, and boris's comments on it adding recursion.  we'd like to see some version of keys, could we consider a restricted version.

Diego Calvanese: follow-up on keys in dl-lite, and boris's comments on it adding recursion. we'd like to see some version of keys, could we consider a restricted version.

17:23:41 <msmith> ianh: are you willing to take action

Ian Horrocks: are you willing to take action

17:23:56 <msmith> action: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite

ACTION: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite

17:23:56 <trackbot> Created ACTION-162 - Investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [on Diego Calvanese - due 2008-07-02].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-162 - Investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [on Diego Calvanese - due 2008-07-02].

17:24:12 <msmith>  action: calvanese to investigate easy keys in dl-lite

 action: calvanese to investigate easy keys in dl-lite

17:24:31 <msmith> ACCEPT ACTION-160 as completed

ACCEPT ACTION-160 as completed

17:24:36 <msmith> subtopic: due and overdue actions

2.2. due and overdue actions

17:24:57 <msmith> ianh: action-155

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-155

17:25:12 <pfps> could we have a pointer to the document from the ACTION-155 page?

Peter Patel-Schneider: could we have a pointer to the document from the ACTION-155 page?

17:25:29 <msmith> ianh: there is a document, we also need implementation

Ian Horrocks: there is a document, we also need implementation

17:25:40 <calvanese> zakim, mute me

Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me

17:25:40 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted

17:25:46 <msmith> ianh: yes, we should add pointer to doc to action. bump date forward for action-155 pending arrival of an implementation?

Ian Horrocks: yes, we should add pointer to doc to action. bump date forward for ACTION-155 pending arrival of an implementation?

17:26:01 <ivan> no

Ivan Herman: no

17:26:26 <msmith> ianh: ok, that's what we'll do

Ian Horrocks: ok, that's what we'll do

17:26:40 <msmith> ianh: action-156, action-157

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-156, ACTION-157

17:26:47 <msmith> alanr: push them both a week

Alan Ruttenberg: push them both a week

17:26:52 <msmith> ianh: ok

Ian Horrocks: ok

17:27:15 <msmith> topic: Issues

3. Issues

17:27:15 <msmith> subtopic: Proposals to Resolve Issues

3.1. Proposals to Resolve Issues

17:27:15 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-21 (import-target-match) and ISSUE-24 (1-version-allowed-policy)
3.1.1. ISSUE-21 (import-target-match) and ISSUE-24 (1-version-allowed-policy)
17:27:53 <msmith> ianh: proposal to resolve says "per pfps email and subsequent discussion", are we really here?  it doesn't seem complete

Ian Horrocks: proposal to resolve says "per pfps email and subsequent discussion", are we really here? it doesn't seem complete

17:28:07 <msmith> alanr: we're close, have 1 issue open. is inconsistent independent of header? bmotik and I disagreed. it may be case inconsistency is noticed by user, not maintainer, we'd like to state this

Alan Ruttenberg: we're close, have 1 issue open. is inconsistent independent of header? bmotik and I disagreed. it may be case inconsistency is noticed by user, not maintainer, we'd like to state this

17:29:06 <msmith> bmotik: one ontology saying something about another is recipe for disaster. breaks encapsulation.  let's people say anything about anything.detecting these incompatibilities and maintenance could get out of hand

Boris Motik: one ontology saying something about another is recipe for disaster. breaks encapsulation. let's people say anything about anything.detecting these incompatibilities and maintenance could get out of hand

17:29:35 <alanr> how is this different from having axioms on a class in two different ontologies?

Alan Ruttenberg: how is this different from having axioms on a class in two different ontologies?

17:29:40 <Rinke> Not sure whether this has anything to do with the issues per se? Seems that the issues are being overloaded with side-issues that prevent them from being resolved.

Rinke Hoekstra: Not sure whether this has anything to do with the issues per se? Seems that the issues are being overloaded with side-issues that prevent them from being resolved.

17:29:49 <alanr> detecting is trivial

Alan Ruttenberg: detecting is trivial

17:30:31 <msmith> alanr: I'm not persuaded

Alan Ruttenberg: I'm not persuaded

17:31:04 <msmith> bmotik: allowing one ont to say something about another seems to me as a conceptual hack

Boris Motik: allowing one ont to say something about another seems to me as a conceptual hack

17:31:26 <Rinke> +1 to separate issue!

Rinke Hoekstra: +1 to separate issue!

17:31:29 <msmith> alanr: you're arguing conceptual integrity vs. use case from personal experience. we can spin this off to another issue and resolve the rest

Alan Ruttenberg: you're arguing conceptual integrity vs. use case from personal experience. we can spin this off to another issue and resolve the rest

17:31:40 <uli> zakim, unmute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me

17:31:40 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted

17:31:56 <msmith> uli: +1 on separate issue. +1 to bmotik that this will open can of worms and may be difficult to explain behavior

Uli Sattler: +1 on separate issue. +1 to bmotik that this will open can of worms and may be difficult to explain behavior

17:33:02 <msmith> ianh: I see what you mean, just as you don't have control over another on, you may not have control over statements saying what onts are incompatible

Ian Horrocks: I see what you mean, just as you don't have control over another on, you may not have control over statements saying what onts are incompatible

17:33:10 <msmith> bmotik: already what we have is an improvement

Boris Motik: already what we have is an improvement

17:33:19 <msmith> alanr: not sure that's the case for owl 1

Alan Ruttenberg: not sure that's the case for owl 1

17:33:26 <msmith> bmotik: but there was no semantics

Boris Motik: but there was no semantics

17:33:37 <msmith> alanr: yes, problem was no teeth to semantics

Alan Ruttenberg: yes, problem was no teeth to semantics

17:34:06 <msmith> bmotik: tool is more that welcome to do this.  seems to be extrapolating from one use case

Boris Motik: tool is more that welcome to do this. seems to be extrapolating from one use case

17:34:37 <msmith> ianh: given we have agreement other than this, can we move forward closing ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 and open new issue to discuss versioning?

Ian Horrocks: given we have agreement other than this, can we move forward closing ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 and open new issue to discuss versioning?

17:34:48 <msmith> alanr: incompatible with, not versioning

Alan Ruttenberg: incompatible with, not versioning

17:34:50 <pfps> fine by me

Peter Patel-Schneider: fine by me

17:34:56 <Rinke> +1

Rinke Hoekstra: +1

17:35:07 <msmith> ianh: yes, incompatibleWith

Ian Horrocks: yes, incompatibleWith

17:35:55 <IanH> PROPOSED: resolve Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, modulo opening new issue on incompatibleWith

PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, modulo opening new issue on incompatibleWith

17:36:34 <msmith> bmotik: if we move forward splitting, I think we should take everything out

Boris Motik: if we move forward splitting, I think we should take everything out

17:36:49 <msmith> alanr: I disagree unless strong opposition.  it would be a step backwards

Alan Ruttenberg: I disagree unless strong opposition. it would be a step backwards

17:37:09 <msmith> ianh: if we resolve in favor of your approach, doesn't that mean ripping out what's there now?

Ian Horrocks: if we resolve in favor of your approach, doesn't that mean ripping out what's there now?

17:37:27 <msmith> alanr: ontology header is better than nothing, if we remove it we may have to readd it later

Alan Ruttenberg: ontology header is better than nothing, if we remove it we may have to readd it later

17:37:40 <msmith> bmotik: I'd prefer to discuss if we need incompatibleWith at all

Boris Motik: I'd prefer to discuss if we need incompatibleWith at all

17:38:19 <msmith> alanr: it seems we're now moving backwards

Alan Ruttenberg: it seems we're now moving backwards

17:38:39 <msmith> pfps: I suggest going as proposal says, discuss incompatible with as separate issue

Peter Patel-Schneider: I suggest going as proposal says, discuss incompatible with as separate issue

17:38:48 <msmith> bmotik: out of document?

Boris Motik: out of document?

17:39:06 <msmith> pfps: minimal change to current doc.  it is an interim state, even if no one likes it

Peter Patel-Schneider: minimal change to current doc. it is an interim state, even if no one likes it

17:39:12 <msmith> bmotik: ok

Boris Motik: ok

17:39:34 <IanH> PROPOSED: resolve Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith

PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith

17:39:46 <pfps> +1 to resolve this way

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to resolve this way

17:39:49 <bmotik> +1

Boris Motik: +1

17:39:51 <alanr> +1

Alan Ruttenberg: +1

17:39:53 <uli> +1

Uli Sattler: +1

17:39:53 <Rinke> +1

Rinke Hoekstra: +1

17:39:56 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:39:58 <ivan> 0

Ivan Herman: 0

17:39:59 <msmith> msmith: +1

Michael Smith: +1

17:40:03 <baojie> 0

Jie Bao: 0

17:40:08 <Ratnesh> +1

Ratnesh Sahay: +1

17:40:17 <bcuencagrau> +1

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: +1

17:40:25 <IanH> RESOLVED: resolve Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith

RESOLVED: resolve ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith

17:40:37 <Zhe> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

17:40:38 <alanr> happy happy

Alan Ruttenberg: happy happy

17:40:42 <alanr> joy joy

Alan Ruttenberg: joy joy

17:40:46 <bmotik> ACTION to bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24

Boris Motik: ACTION to bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24

17:40:46 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - to

17:41:00 <bmotik> ACTION bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24

Boris Motik: ACTION bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24

17:41:00 <trackbot> Created ACTION-163 - Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-07-02].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-163 - Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-07-02].

17:41:03 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-81 (reification, negative assertions)
3.1.2. ISSUE-81 (reification, negative assertions)
17:41:53 <msmith> ianh: ISSUE-81 can be resolved using bmotik's proposal to use an alternative vocabulary for reification. any reasons not to resolve?

Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-81 can be resolved using bmotik's proposal to use an alternative vocabulary for reification. any reasons not to resolve?

17:42:18 <IanH> PROPOSED: resolve Issue 81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email

PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email

17:42:21 <pfps> +1 to proceed apace

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to proceed apace

17:42:24 <bmotik> +1

Boris Motik: +1

17:42:25 <Rinke> +1

Rinke Hoekstra: +1

17:42:26 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:42:27 <msmith> msmith: +1

Michael Smith: +1

17:42:28 <bcuencagrau> +1

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: +1

17:42:37 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1

17:42:37 <Ratnesh> +1

Ratnesh Sahay: +1

17:42:46 <uli> +1

Uli Sattler: +1

17:42:58 <IanH> RESOLVED: resolve Issue 81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0156.html)

RESOLVED: resolve ISSUE-81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0156.html)

17:43:06 <alanr> +1

Alan Ruttenberg: +1

17:43:09 <ivan> happy happy

Ivan Herman: happy happy

17:43:15 <Zhe> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

17:43:16 <JeffP> +1

Jeff Pan: +1

17:43:35 <msmith> subtopic: Other Issue Discussions

3.2. Other Issue Discussions

17:43:35 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-108 (profilenames)
3.2.1. ISSUE-108 (profilenames)
17:43:47 <Rinke> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0171.html

Rinke Hoekstra: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0171.html

17:43:57 <msmith> ianh: brief revisit of profile naming (ISSUE-108) (as in Carsten's email) at least OWL-R and OWL-EL names are ok, DL-Lite needs a name. Carsten proposed calling it owl-db, but that's likely to be contentious

Ian Horrocks: brief revisit of profile naming (ISSUE-108) (as in Carsten's email) at least OWL-R and OWL-EL names are ok, DL-Lite needs a name. Carsten proposed calling it owl-db, but that's likely to be contentious

17:44:52 <Zhe> :_

Zhe Wu: :_

17:45:29 <msmith> msmith: why can't we call it dl-lite?

Michael Smith: why can't we call it dl-lite?

17:45:30 <calvanese> unmute me

Diego Calvanese: unmute me

17:45:39 <calvanese> unmute me

Diego Calvanese: unmute me

17:45:40 <alanr>  we want to market to a larger community!!

Alan Ruttenberg: we want to market to a larger community!!

17:45:48 <msmith> ianh: owl-lite is deprecated, owl dl-lite seems rather long winded

Ian Horrocks: owl-lite is deprecated, owl dl-lite seems rather long winded

17:45:51 <calvanese> zakim, unmute me

Diego Calvanese: zakim, unmute me

17:45:51 <Zakim> calvanese should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should no longer be muted

17:46:04 <sandro> "OWL2 Lite" ?

Sandro Hawke: "OWL2 Lite" ?

17:46:21 <alanr> OWL-D

Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-D

17:46:27 <msmith> calvanese: we believe name owl-db would be suitable, since owl-r people like owl-r lets use owl-db. owl-d doesn't evoke anything related to dl-lite. I am not in favor of owl-d. owl-db name implies something

Diego Calvanese: we believe name owl-db would be suitable, since owl-r people like owl-r lets use owl-db. owl-d doesn't evoke anything related to dl-lite. I am not in favor of owl-d. owl-db name implies something

17:46:30 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me

Zhe Wu: zakim, unmute me

17:46:30 <Zakim> Zhe should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should no longer be muted

17:46:50 <alanr> OWL-I

Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-I

17:47:07 <msmith> zhe: is this profile specific for db modeling integration and nothing else?

Zhe Wu: is this profile specific for db modeling integration and nothing else?

17:47:44 <alanr> quantify "large"?

Alan Ruttenberg: quantify "large"?

17:47:50 <uli> zakim, who is speaking

Uli Sattler: zakim, who is speaking

17:47:50 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is speaking', uli

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'who is speaking', uli

17:47:50 <msmith> calvanese: profile was created to connect to large databases.  we believe it is specifically suited to databases. also conceptually matches expressivity of databases

Diego Calvanese: profile was created to connect to large databases. we believe it is specifically suited to databases. also conceptually matches expressivity of databases

17:47:55 <alanr> millions, 100s of millions?

Alan Ruttenberg: millions, 100s of millions?

17:48:03 <JeffP> zakim, who is talking?

Jeff Pan: zakim, who is talking?

17:48:07 <alanr> 10s of billions?

Alan Ruttenberg: 10s of billions?

17:48:16 <Zakim> JeffP, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (4%), Ratnesh (9%), calvanese (27%), Zhe (82%)

Zakim IRC Bot: JeffP, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (4%), Ratnesh (9%), calvanese (27%), Zhe (82%)

17:48:33 <msmith> zhe: misleading to me because dl-lite can be provided to other domains. plus gives users belief dedicated to storing owl. gives impression only implementable with db, nothing else. dl-lite could apply to sparql endpoint as well

Zhe Wu: misleading to me because dl-lite can be provided to other domains. plus gives users belief dedicated to storing owl. gives impression only implementable with db, nothing else. dl-lite could apply to sparql endpoint as well

17:49:00 <Ratnesh> zakim,  mute me

Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, mute me

17:49:00 <Zakim> Ratnesh should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ratnesh should now be muted

17:49:42 <msmith> calvanese: one point is that its implemented using database technologies

Diego Calvanese: one point is that its implemented using database technologies

17:49:55 <msmith> zhe: is this implementation specific?

Zhe Wu: is this implementation specific?

17:50:02 <msmith> calvanese: its how the profile came about. its tuned to these features

Diego Calvanese: its how the profile came about. its tuned to these features

17:50:45 <msmith> ianh: useful exchange, and what we suspected.  owl-db is controversial.  any other less controversial names?

Ian Horrocks: useful exchange, and what we suspected. owl-db is controversial. any other less controversial names?

17:50:45 <Rinke> Profile names are easily interpreted as denoting disjoint `features'

Rinke Hoekstra: Profile names are easily interpreted as denoting disjoint `features'

17:50:55 <msmith> bmotik: why not 1,2,3 or A,B,C?

Boris Motik: why not 1,2,3 or A,B,C?

17:51:07 <alanr> the only reasonable mnemonic is "R"

Alan Ruttenberg: the only reasonable mnemonic is "R"

17:51:20 <msmith> ianh: we have reasonable names for EL++ and OWL-R which people are comfortable with.  isn't 1,2,3 silly?

Ian Horrocks: we have reasonable names for EL++ and OWL-R which people are comfortable with. isn't 1,2,3 silly?

17:51:28 <msmith> bmotik: what's wrong with current names?

Boris Motik: what's wrong with current names?

17:51:38 <msmith> ianh: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful

Ian Horrocks: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful

17:52:06 <msmith> alanr: only name with good pneumonic is OWL-R, EL++ is historical and only relevant to small audience. I support getting away from historical names and suggest 1 letter (fairly meaningless) names

Alan Ruttenberg: only name with good pneumonic is OWL-R, EL++ is historical and only relevant to small audience. I support getting away from historical names and suggest 1 letter (fairly meaningless) names

17:52:25 <sandro> +1 get away from history.

Sandro Hawke: +1 get away from history.

17:53:07 <alanr> yes, peter, but for how many others?

Alan Ruttenberg: yes, peter, but for how many others?

17:53:08 <sandro> "DL" is another bad name.

Sandro Hawke: "DL" is another bad name.

17:53:10 <msmith> bmotik: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful, what about just dl-lite. el++ has established itself, it doesn't need the owl prefix

Boris Motik: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful, what about just dl-lite. el++ has established itself, it doesn't need the owl prefix

17:53:18 <alanr> I agree, that DL is another bad name

Alan Ruttenberg: I agree, that DL is another bad name

17:53:48 <msmith> ianh: that may be a step too far

Ian Horrocks: that may be a step too far

17:53:49 <alanr> OWL-C for OWL-DL (OWL-Complete)

Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-C for OWL-DL (OWL-Complete)

17:54:02 <alanr> OWL-A for (OWL-Anything for OWL-Full)

Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-A for (OWL-Anything for OWL-Full)

17:54:04 <Rinke> DL-Lite is about assertions, why not OWL-A

Rinke Hoekstra: DL-Lite is about assertions, why not OWL-A

17:54:22 <msmith> sandro: we are worst people to pick names.  someone should subject a marketing department to this not us. knowledge of history is an impediment

Sandro Hawke: we are worst people to pick names. someone should subject a marketing department to this not us. knowledge of history is an impediment

17:55:15 <msmith> ianh: another side, the marketing people ask you to explain because they  know nothing.  so, names they create will depend on who explains them

Ian Horrocks: another side, the marketing people ask you to explain because they know nothing. so, names they create will depend on who explains them

17:55:24 <Rinke> agree with Sandro, one complaint that came up in my  little survey was that people didn't know what the names meant

Rinke Hoekstra: agree with Sandro, one complaint that came up in my little survey was that people didn't know what the names meant

17:55:33 <ivan> +1 to Rinke

Ivan Herman: +1 to Rinke

17:55:46 <msmith> sandro: names should be targeted at people making the purchase decision

Sandro Hawke: names should be targeted at people making the purchase decision

17:55:56 <msmith> calvanese: name is indication, choice will be made on features. I made several good arguments for why owl-db is good for dl-lite. I didn't hear compelling, non-marketing counterarguments

Diego Calvanese: name is indication, choice will be made on features. I made several good arguments for why owl-db is good for dl-lite. I didn't hear compelling, non-marketing counterarguments

17:56:12 <alanr> I was convinced

Alan Ruttenberg: I was convinced

17:57:14 <msmith> zhe: why not call owl-r owl-db?  oracle is largest database in the world and implements owl-r?

Zhe Wu: why not call owl-r owl-db? oracle is largest database in the world and implements owl-r?

17:57:25 <JeffP> We can call it OWL-Aberdeen

Jeff Pan: We can call it OWL-Aberdeen

17:57:43 <ivan> JeffP: I would prefer OWL-Amsterdam!

Jeff Pan: I would prefer OWL-Amsterdam! [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ]

17:57:48 <JeffP> hehe

Jeff Pan: hehe

17:57:49 <Rinke> me too!

Rinke Hoekstra: me too!

17:57:49 <msmith> ianh: enough of this discussion.  owl-db is just too attractive, so probably no one can have it

Ian Horrocks: enough of this discussion. owl-db is just too attractive, so probably no one can have it

17:57:57 <sandro> +1 to random city names.  :-)

Sandro Hawke: +1 to random city names. :-)

17:58:12 <ivan> rowl, dowl?

Ivan Herman: rowl, dowl?

17:58:14 <calvanese> zakim, mute me

Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me

17:58:14 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted

17:58:21 <Rinke> howl?

Rinke Hoekstra: howl?

17:58:21 <alanr> who gets OWL-Bagdad?

Alan Ruttenberg: who gets OWL-Bagdad?

17:58:22 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-67 (reification)
3.2.2. ISSUE-67 (reification)
17:58:59 <msmith> ianh: anyone?

Ian Horrocks: anyone?

17:59:11 <msmith> pfps: I don't think anything needs to be done, current status is fine

Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't think anything needs to be done, current status is fine

17:59:22 <msmith> ianh: current status is that we're using rdf reification

Ian Horrocks: current status is that we're using rdf reification

17:59:30 <msmith> alanr: I'm happy with current reification. as long as triple being reified is included

Alan Ruttenberg: I'm happy with current reification. as long as triple being reified is included

17:59:32 <Zhe> second alanr

Zhe Wu: second alanr

17:59:52 <msmith> bmotik: I don't think we should output triple being reified. this can be handled in the semantics

Boris Motik: I don't think we should output triple being reified. this can be handled in the semantics

18:00:09 <alanr> that's not an argument against. It's an argument that says we can also do it a different way

Alan Ruttenberg: that's not an argument against. It's an argument that says we can also do it a different way

18:00:49 <msmith> zhe: conceptually, bmotik is 100% correct.  but with tons of annotations this makes implementers life difficult. what's the objection to adding the triple

Zhe Wu: conceptually, bmotik is 100% correct. but with tons of annotations this makes implementers life difficult. what's the objection to adding the triple

18:01:23 <msmith> alanr: yes, what's argument against?  this is a divergence from rdf semantics

Alan Ruttenberg: yes, what's argument against? this is a divergence from rdf semantics

18:01:56 <alanr> I put a proposal for how to solve this on the email

Alan Ruttenberg: I put a proposal for how to solve this on the email

18:02:11 <msmith> bmotik: impossible to know when mapping rdf to ontology if ontology contained axiom or just annotation of axiom. I consider sticking with current better solution

Boris Motik: impossible to know when mapping rdf to ontology if ontology contained axiom or just annotation of axiom. I consider sticking with current better solution

18:02:51 <msmith> msmith: +1 to supporting annotation of non-present axioms

Michael Smith: +1 to supporting annotation of non-present axioms

18:03:08 <alanr> There is also rdf/xml support for concise  reification when it includes the triple

Alan Ruttenberg: There is also rdf/xml support for concise reification when it includes the triple

18:03:36 <msmith> pfps: I don't believe argument that additional processing burden is accurate since it introduces an additional triple to parse

Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't believe argument that additional processing burden is accurate since it introduces an additional triple to parse

18:03:54 <msmith> zhe: bmotik, I believe you proposed solutions via email to some of these problems. pfps, oracle believes not including triple will make life harder

Zhe Wu: bmotik, I believe you proposed solutions via email to some of these problems. pfps, oracle believes not including triple will make life harder

18:04:59 <msmith> alanr: support for concise reification in RDF/XML, but only in some circumstances

Alan Ruttenberg: support for concise reification in RDF/XML, but only in some circumstances

18:05:10 <sandro> (er, no, you still need to parse the triples even when not using the RDF/XML trick.)

Sandro Hawke: (er, no, you still need to parse the triples even when not using the RDF/XML trick.)

18:05:27 <Zakim> -Rinke

Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke

18:05:29 <msmith> bmotik: are you proposing we use this special syntax

Boris Motik: are you proposing we use this special syntax

18:06:00 <msmith> alanr: if triple is in serialization, on can put an id on the predicate to indicate reification. there is no shorthand for only the reified part

Alan Ruttenberg: if triple is in serialization, on can put an id on the predicate to indicate reification. there is no shorthand for only the reified part

18:06:17 <msmith> ianh: closing discussion soon

Ian Horrocks: closing discussion soon

18:07:19 <alanr> no bad ida

Alan Ruttenberg: no bad ida

18:07:29 <alanr> better to add a special annotation so they are parallel

Alan Ruttenberg: better to add a special annotation so they are parallel

18:08:14 <alanr> I don't understand

Alan Ruttenberg: I don't understand

18:08:20 <ivan> me neither

Ivan Herman: me neither

18:08:26 <msmith> bmotik: one could use following procedure.... if re-ified and non-reified version are present... but this is non-monotonic.  question to zhe - if hint that reified triples in RDF/XML should use this shorthand, would that be ok?

Boris Motik: one could use following procedure.... if re-ified and non-reified version are present... but this is non-monotonic. question to zhe - if hint that reified triples in RDF/XML should use this shorthand, would that be ok?

18:08:43 <ivan> I do not think we can do that, Boris

Ivan Herman: I do not think we can do that, Boris

18:09:05 <Zhe> sounds good

Zhe Wu: sounds good

18:09:10 <msmith> ianh: take to email, then revisit discussion

Ian Horrocks: take to email, then revisit discussion

18:09:39 <msmith> topic: General Discussion

4. General Discussion

18:09:39 <msmith> subtopic: Schedule

4.1. Schedule

18:10:12 <msmith> ianh: agenda has short list of things needing attention. features: 1) rich annotations, 2) nary datatypes. no bijan?  :( perhaps uli on nary?

Ian Horrocks: agenda has short list of things needing attention. features: 1) rich annotations, 2) nary datatypes. no bijan? :( perhaps uli on nary?

18:10:27 <uli> Bijan isn't here

Uli Sattler: Bijan isn't here

18:10:32 <sandro> zakim, where is bijan?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, where is bijan?

18:10:32 <Zakim> sorry, sandro, I do not understand your question

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, sandro, I do not understand your question

18:10:52 <uli> zakim, unmute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me

18:10:52 <Zakim> uli was not muted, uli

Zakim IRC Bot: uli was not muted, uli

18:11:18 <msmith> uli: what are you after?

Uli Sattler: what are you after?

18:11:36 <msmith> ianh: I'd like some comments on schedule?

Ian Horrocks: I'd like some comments on schedule?

18:12:14 <msmith> uli: we could be moving really faster.  I won't be around for next two weeks, otherwise I'd say proposal in 1 week

Uli Sattler: we could be moving really faster. I won't be around for next two weeks, otherwise I'd say proposal in 1 week

18:12:27 <msmith> ianh: a concrete proposal for what should be added to spec? but not now?

Ian Horrocks: a concrete proposal for what should be added to spec? but not now?

18:12:51 <alanr> probably depends on what happens next week and the week after too...

Alan Ruttenberg: probably depends on what happens next week and the week after too...

18:12:57 <msmith> uli: depends on this week.

Uli Sattler: depends on this week.

18:13:05 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me

18:13:05 <Zakim> uli should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted

18:13:07 <msmith> ianh: this is reasonable guesstimate

Ian Horrocks: this is reasonable guesstimate

18:13:43 <msmith> alanr: we should get quick check-in on prioritizing things.  rich annotations, nary. how are people on nary? priorities, benefits vs cost of delaying? when do we say it's out?

Alan Ruttenberg: we should get quick check-in on prioritizing things. rich annotations, nary. how are people on nary? priorities, benefits vs cost of delaying? when do we say it's out?

18:14:45 <msmith> ianh: is my answer some number of weeks?

Ian Horrocks: is my answer some number of weeks?

18:15:11 <msmith> alanr: I would like to hear from people.  I'd like to hear input.

Alan Ruttenberg: I would like to hear from people. I'd like to hear input.

18:15:35 <msmith> ianh: is it significant delay worthy?

Ian Horrocks: is it significant delay worthy?

18:15:39 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the call?

18:15:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, msmith, IanH, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau (muted), Alan, bmotik, calvanese (muted), Ratnesh

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, msmith, IanH, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau (muted), Alan, bmotik, calvanese (muted), Ratnesh

18:15:43 <Zakim> ... (muted)

Zakim IRC Bot: ... (muted)

18:15:51 <msmith> msmith: I think nary are important and would be prepared to wait some

Michael Smith: I think nary are important and would be prepared to wait some

18:15:58 <uli> "How horrible would you think failing on n-ary be?"

Uli Sattler: "How horrible would you think failing on n-ary be?"

18:16:04 <pfps> i'm prepared to wait forever as long as it isn't more than 15 minutes (thanks Oscar Wilde)

Peter Patel-Schneider: i'm prepared to wait forever as long as it isn't more than 15 minutes (thanks Oscar Wilde)

18:16:11 <bmotik> I believe that n-ary datatypes are a high-risk feature

Boris Motik: I believe that n-ary datatypes are a high-risk feature

18:16:39 <Achille> we can leave without nary

Achille Fokoue: we can leave without nary

18:16:44 <alanr> I'm concerned about unknowns with n-aries, and known issues, like difficulty in combinations.

Alan Ruttenberg: I'm concerned about unknowns with n-aries, and known issues, like difficulty in combinations.

18:16:48 <msmith> bmotik: adding nary adds a huge burden to developers.  some algorithmic issues haven't been resolved and I'm skeptical

Boris Motik: adding nary adds a huge burden to developers. some algorithmic issues haven't been resolved and I'm skeptical

18:16:57 <msmith> msmith: notes Carsten also absent

Michael Smith: notes Carsten also absent

18:17:04 <uli> good point

Uli Sattler: good point

18:17:06 <Achille> it is not worth delaying the spec for it

Achille Fokoue: it is not worth delaying the spec for it

18:17:11 <uli> zakim, unmute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me

18:17:11 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted

18:17:16 <msmith> ianh: not time now to get to into the details

Ian Horrocks: not time now to get to into the details

18:17:30 <ivan> owl3?

Ivan Herman: owl3?

18:17:38 <msmith> uli: not having any nary support would be regretted later as something we missed

Uli Sattler: not having any nary support would be regretted later as something we missed

18:17:50 <msmith> ianh: perhaps we should set some implementation bar. 2 implementations to get to rec, correct?

Ian Horrocks: perhaps we should set some implementation bar. 2 implementations to get to rec, correct?

18:18:41 <msmith> sandro: in general, should only add things for which we think reasonable to there may be two implementations. if we're unsure, that means its at risk

Sandro Hawke: in general, should only add things for which we think reasonable to there may be two implementations. if we're unsure, that means its at risk

18:18:49 <pfps> +1 to "at risk"iness

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to "at risk"iness

18:19:19 <msmith> alanr: that doesn't help because there's significant work to get it into the spec

Alan Ruttenberg: that doesn't help because there's significant work to get it into the spec

18:19:47 <msmith> ianh: i agree with that, but the implementation point clarifies just how much expressive power we want to add. those wanting it very powerful must weight that against cost of implementing it so that it can proceed

Ian Horrocks: i agree with that, but the implementation point clarifies just how much expressive power we want to add. those wanting it very powerful must weight that against cost of implementing it so that it can proceed

18:20:46 <msmith> alanr: so far focused on one type of concrete domain extension, < > simple arithmetic. perhaps allen interval relations instead.  I'm taking this up with carsten

Alan Ruttenberg: so far focused on one type of concrete domain extension, &lt; &gt; simple arithmetic. perhaps allen interval relations instead. I'm taking this up with carsten

18:20:56 <uli> alanr, can you explain this?

Uli Sattler: alanr, can you explain this?

18:21:07 <alanr> uli, yes, via email

Alan Ruttenberg: uli, yes, via email

18:21:22 <msmith> bmotik: allen interval for time intervals will not solve problems for owl

Boris Motik: allen interval for time intervals will not solve problems for owl

18:21:44 <alanr> won't solve all time problems for time. But may solve some some time problems

Alan Ruttenberg: won't solve all time problems for time. But may solve some some time problems

18:21:46 <msmith> bmotik: nary datatypes won't help this ...(scribe interpret) because they only apply to data properties on a single individuals (not comparison between multiple events)

Boris Motik: nary datatypes won't help this ...(scribe interpret) because they only apply to data properties on a single individuals (not comparison between multiple events)

18:22:37 <msmith> ianh: will ask bijan next week about this

Ian Horrocks: will ask bijan next week about this

18:23:01 <msmith> ianh: also discussion about datatypes in general, what should be supported.  is this going to derail us?

Ian Horrocks: also discussion about datatypes in general, what should be supported. is this going to derail us?

18:23:20 <msmith> bmotik: thinks we can resolve.  we have to resolve. I don't think solution is difficult

Boris Motik: thinks we can resolve. we have to resolve. I don't think solution is difficult

18:23:21 <alanr> I have concerns that this will take time.

Alan Ruttenberg: I have concerns that this will take time.

18:23:54 <Zakim> -calvanese

Zakim IRC Bot: -calvanese

18:24:17 <uli> ;)

Uli Sattler: ;)

18:24:23 <uli> yes

Uli Sattler: yes

18:24:26 <uli> very

Uli Sattler: very

18:24:36 <msmith> ianh: ISSUE-118 is languishing. any champion for this issue?

Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-118 is languishing. any champion for this issue?

18:25:24 <msmith> alanr: I've suggested unnamed and bnodes as alternative constructs

Alan Ruttenberg: I've suggested unnamed and bnodes as alternative constructs

18:25:47 <msmith> ianh: documents need to be produced.  test, ufds

Ian Horrocks: documents need to be produced. test, ufds

18:25:48 <alanr> action: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes

ACTION: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes

18:25:48 <trackbot> Created ACTION-164 - Send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-07-02].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-164 - Send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-07-02].

18:26:30 <alanr> mike, you know about action=raw ? to get raw mediawiki pages?

Alan Ruttenberg: mike, you know about action=raw ? to get raw mediawiki pages?

18:26:46 <msmith> msmith: alanr, no.  thanks

Michael Smith: alanr, no. thanks

18:27:18 <msmith> msmith: re tests, I'm targeting f2f3 as a milestone.  two parts, the tests, and the documents. I'll try to get something to the group before f2f3 on each

Michael Smith: re tests, I'm targeting f2f3 as a milestone. two parts, the tests, and the documents. I'll try to get something to the group before f2f3 on each

18:27:32 <alanr> mike, see http://svn.neurocommons.org/svn/trunk/product/wiki/get-ncpage-ontology.pl

Alan Ruttenberg: mike, see http://svn.neurocommons.org/svn/trunk/product/wiki/get-ncpage-ontology.pl

18:27:49 <msmith> ianh: none for ufd

Ian Horrocks: none for ufd

18:28:00 <msmith> pfps: I think bijan is working on primer

Peter Patel-Schneider: I think bijan is working on primer

18:28:09 <msmith> topic: additional business

5. additional business

18:28:17 <msmith> ianh: no additional business, adjourn

Ian Horrocks: no additional business, adjourn

18:28:21 <Zakim> -uli

Zakim IRC Bot: -uli

18:28:24 <Zakim> -Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan

18:28:25 <Zakim> -baojie

Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie

18:28:26 <Zakim> -JeffP

Zakim IRC Bot: -JeffP

18:28:26 <Zakim> -Achille

Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille

18:28:28 <Zakim> -bmotik

Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik

18:28:28 <Zakim> -Ratnesh

Zakim IRC Bot: -Ratnesh

18:28:30 <Zakim> -Zhe

Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe

18:28:32 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

18:28:33 <Zakim> -IanH

Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH

18:28:38 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau

Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau

18:28:41 <sandro> msmith, I put some notes about scribing here: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Scribe_Conventions#After_scribing_.28New_Style_Minutes.29

Sandro Hawke: msmith, I put some notes about scribing here: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Scribe_Conventions#After_scribing_.28New_Style_Minutes.29

18:28:45 <Zakim> -msmith

Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith

18:29:02 <msmith> rrsagent, pointer

rrsagent, pointer

18:29:02 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-29-02

RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-29-02

18:29:14 <alanr> e.g http://sw.neurocommons.org/cgi-bin/get-ncpage-ontology.pl?page=CommonsPurl:Record/Ncbi_gene&section=purlRdf

Alan Ruttenberg: e.g http://sw.neurocommons.org/cgi-bin/get-ncpage-ontology.pl?page=CommonsPurl:Record/Ncbi_gene&amp;section=purlRdf

18:29:26 <sandro> Zakim, list attendees

Sandro Hawke: Zakim, list attendees

18:29:26 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli,

Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli,

18:29:30 <Zakim> ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke

Zakim IRC Bot: ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke

18:29:39 <Zakim> -Alan

Zakim IRC Bot: -Alan

18:31:07 <msmith> zakim, bye

zakim, bye

18:31:07 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli,

Zakim IRC Bot: leaving. As of this point the attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli,

18:31:10 <Zakim> ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke

Zakim IRC Bot: ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke

18:31:21 <msmith> rrsagent, make log public

rrsagent, make log public

18:31:32 <msmith> rrsagent, draft minutes

rrsagent, draft minutes

18:31:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-minutes.html msmith

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-minutes.html msmith

18:31:39 <msmith> rrsagent, bye

rrsagent, bye

18:31:39 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-actions.rdf :

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-actions.rdf :

18:31:39 <RRSAgent> ACTION: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [1]

ACTION: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [1]

18:31:39 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-23-56

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-23-56

18:31:39 <RRSAgent> ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24 [2]

ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 [2]

18:31:39 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-41-00

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-41-00

18:31:39 <RRSAgent> ACTION: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [3]

ACTION: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [3]

18:31:39 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-25-48

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-25-48


This revision (#3) generated 2008-07-02 13:23:52 UTC by 'sandro', comments: 'fix tracker links'