DRAFT OWL Working Group Minutes, 29 July 2008

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, IanH; I see SW_OWL()8:00AM scheduled to start 2 minutes ago ←

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, uli, muting is not permitted when only one person is present ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see uli (muted), Meeting_Room, bparsia (muted) ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see msmith, Zhe, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, uli, ewallace, jar, Carsten, sandro, trackbot ←

Achille Fokoue: sandro could you please make me the scribe? I forgot the magic command ←

Ian Horrocks: as per the previous email, we decided to have xsd:float discret as in XML Schema ←

Mike Smith: we decide to postpone a decision on rational for the time of discussing N-ary datatype ←

Michael Schneider: if you ask for "{-0} subset [-1,+1]", then the reasoner should say yes, because the float *literal* "-0" denotes the *value* ZERO [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

Alan Ruttenberg: what happen when there is a constant above the 64 bit restriction? ←

Alan Ruttenberg: a datatype range greater that the max integer is still statisfiable ←

Alan Ruttenberg: let make the datatype document easily searchable for the key word conformance ←

Bijan Parsia: There are a lot of NaN. And for any NaN and any other float/double NaN != that number, including itself ←

Alan Ruttenberg: you should also consider the need for counting float elements ←

Bijan Parsia: It would help if he slowed down, becuase thphone seems to cut out on soft bits ←

Alan Ruttenberg: Is it required that every datatype for serialization is also a datatype for range restrictions? I don't think so. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

Michael Schneider: I can approximate as precisely as wish sqrt(2) using decimal but not with float or double ←

Bijan Parsia: But the way, I wasn't intending those searchs as determinative ←

Bijan Parsia: I'm worried about things like (not sure that is a correct case) 0.1^^xsd:float != 0.1^^xsd:decimal ←

Alan Ruttenberg: for base64Binary, should will allow length, minLength, maxLength? ←

Carsten Lutz: Wouldn't it make sense to make a lot of this exotic stuff optional? ←

Alan Ruttenberg: we are trying to get an well agreed list of acceptable datatype ←

Carsten Lutz: Seems bad to *force* implementors to have datatypes like base64bin ←

Bijan Parsia: the most important thing is to make sure that we say something meaningful about each datatype ←

... in swoogle I found a couple of these datatypes, but I need to investigate further ←

Boris Motik: i think it is not difficult to implement these types. All you need is to find the number of element in a given range ←

Uli Sattler: ...this finiteness could still cause performance problems, but i guess having a warning about this could suffice? ←

Alan Ruttenberg: what concern from Carsten, but everybody else seems to agree to support them ←

Carsten Lutz: Seems bad to *force* implementors to have datatypes like base64bin ←

Boris Motik: the implementation overhead is almost identical for string. So if we have string, we can also have binary datatype ←

... i am not sure that the only important point is the ability to count elements in a range ←

... for completeness we may have to also check that a range does not contain a given element ←

Carsten Lutz: ok, thanks for the explanation, I have to admit that it is not easy to follow the discussion remotely ←

... i can send u code to get the next float and the number of float in a range ←

Bijan Parsia: As a point of interest, ISO 8601 fixes a reference calendar date to the Gregorian calendar of 1875-05-20 as the date the Convention du Mètre was signed in Paris ←

Uli Sattler: ...I very much like Ian's suggestion about the 'may repair al gusto'! ←

Boris Motik: xsd makes an error here by saying that it is isomorphic to the timeline ←

Ian Horrocks: let's not reconsider our decision made yesterday about mandating timezone ←

Bijan Parsia: Btw, both generating and consuming tools can offer corrections and repairs ←

Michael Schneider: in practice, it is not a pb because any application that accept non-timezone has to come up with some strategy to deal with them ←

Ian Horrocks: that is precisely the point we cannot mandate any behavior to all apps ←

Sandro Hawke: we should talk to the XSD 1.1 WG what we think is wrong with non-timezoned dateTimeS [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ppatelsc, phaase) ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-176 - Draft a comment on XML Schema Datatypes 1.1 draft [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-05]. ←

Ian Horrocks: internally we require timezone, but let applications do the right repair ←

Bijan Parsia: I would also suggest that we document different repairs. Whether on the owl wg wiki or the owled one ←

Evan Wallace: straw poll: should we use XSD dateTime, or our own dateTime datatype ←

Peter Patel-Schneider: the comparison bt datetime with and w/o timezone is not feasable in our specification ←

Evan Wallace: straw poll: should we use XSD dateTime with a requirement for timezone component in text of spec ←

STRAWPOLL: Should we use owl:dateTime instead of xsd:dateTime (+1 = owl:dateTime, -1 = xsd:dateTime) ←

Bijan Parsia: I would prefer that we calledit xsd:dateTime and said that we add additional restrictions (the way implemetnation might only support 64 bit integers) ←

Ian Horrocks: we defeer the issue of xsd:dateTime vs owl:dateTime for the next meeting ←

... if you decide to support it we specify exactly how it should be implemented ←

Alan Ruttenberg: when you use that aspect of the spec it is unlikely that you will be portable ←

Mike Smith: +1 to bijan. There can be OWL DL conformance and OWL Nary datatype conformance as separate things ←

Bijan Parsia: i don't see why this is a pb. it is hard to me to imagine that someone using an equation would not be aware that he is doing something hard for implementation ←

Bijan Parsia: i really don't understand why putting it in a different document that solve the problem ←

Bijan Parsia: species validation will help you understand whether you stand w.r.t. portability ←

Ian Horrocks: what is missing is whether the proposal will be acceptable and what is the boundary bt the main spec and the separate proposal? ←

Ian Horrocks: boris thinks that boundary should be as the spec stands now w/o N-ary ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see uli (muted), Meeting_Room, bparsia, Carsten (muted) ←

Michael Schneider: i have no clue about what will be possible for implementator to do ←

Boris Motik: Perhaps not the full programming. My main problem is that I haven't seen an *exact* pointer to the literature what it is that I need to do to implement it. ←

Boris Motik: Some people promissed it, but I haven't seen any actual pointers to literature. ←

Alan Ruttenberg: I'd like each extension to be as good and precise as in the current spec ←

... a lot of users pushed for linear equation , we should decide about the boundary later ←

Ian Horrocks: do we agree about the separe N-ary document outside the main spec doc? we will have to decide later where the boundaryt ←

STRAWPOLL: do we agree about the separe N-ary document outside the main spec doc? ←

Uli Sattler: +1 to 'data predicates' (instead of n-ary -- though it might take a while to get used to) ←

Ian Horrocks: on nary, I understand that a second doc describing nary data types will be produce to same quality as main spec ←

... based on use cases, implementation support, and specification of "how" to implement (boris' concern) ←

... there is a proposal to resolve ISSUE-116, by saying OWL-R should includes rules for axiomatic triples ←

... I think the whole issue was about the "additional" stuff (not the RDFS axiomatic triples) ←

Alan Ruttenberg: we intend to try to accommodate such axiomatic triples, if you produce them ←

Ian Horrocks: axiomatic triples are the RDFS guys, I suggest making a new issue that says m_schnei wants to extend the ruleset ←

Michael Schneider: fine with me. I will talk with Ivan, I believe this was his intention ←

Alan Ruttenberg: there is a proposal that OWL-R is an extension of RDFS, but in order to be true, it must match where? ←

Ian Horrocks: proposal that we extend ruleset with axiomatic triples with RDFS ←

... lets resolve this ISSUE-116 based on this understanding, then open another issue with more clear difference in interpretation ←

Michael Schneider: if we make OWL-R rules "catch-up" with the semantics of the DL part....(sidetracked) ←

ACTION: bmotik2 to Enact the resolution of ISSUE-126 (datatype system) in the spec ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-177 - Enact the resolution of ISSUE-126 (datatype system) in the spec [on Boris Motik - due 2008-08-05]. ←

ACTION: schneider to clarify what ISSUE-116 is about, considering splitting to clarify ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-178 - Clarify what ISSUE-116 is about, considering splitting to clarify [on Michael Schneider - due 2008-08-05]. ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room, bparsia (muted), ??P68, uli (muted), dlm ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see dlm, vipul, baojie, cgi-irc, Zhe, jar, Achille, m_schnei, bmotik, ekw, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, uli, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, ←

... design principle to be close to existing OWL Full draft with minor changes ←

... mostly many tables that say "if you have something on left, you get thing on right" ←

Michael Schneider: 2: there will be some deviation from OWL 1 full regarding relationship between Full and DL ←

Michael Schneider: I'd like a reviewer that is not familiar with OWL full details ←

Michael Schneider: this is closed if we're ok with previously stated deviation from OWL 1 ←

Alan Ruttenberg: it has been suggested that new semantics are provably coherent. are they? ←

Michael Schneider: there's a good chance. not aiming to do that in time of this wg ←

... I prefer some variant of Michael's initial name, something including RDF ←

Michael Schneider: I have changed the name of the Editior's Draft from "RDF Semantics" to "Full Semantics" ←

Uli Sattler: -1 (to rdf since it would imply that the other is incompatible) ←

Ian Horrocks: we mean what's new with OWL Full semantics, e.g., this thing about comprehension principles ←

... the previous "sledge-hammer" approach made it problematic to establish consistency ←

ACTION: Jie to review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-179 - Review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. [on Jie Bao - due 2008-08-05]. ←

ACTION: pfps to review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. ←

ACTION: peter to review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ppatelsc, phaase) ←

ACTION: ppatelsc to review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-180 - Review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-05]. ←

ACTION: zhe to review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-181 - Review RDF-Based Semantics. Document to be frozen Aug 19, review by Aug 22. [on Zhe Wu - due 2008-08-05]. ←

16:04:24 <msmith> omit: pha: (presenting slides)

16:05:19 <msmith> omit: slides will go to list or wiki soon

16:05:29 <uli> omit: I didn't crumble!

16:05:47 <uli> omit: thanks, Mike

16:05:48 <IanH> Boris will email slides to the list

Ian Horrocks: Boris will email slides to the list ←

16:05:48 <IanH> omit: Boris will emial slides to the list

16:06:28 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:06:46 <IanH> omit: s/emial/email/

16:07:00 <msmith> vipul: as visual syntax UML is useful, but it comes with its own semantics.  can you provide guidance

Vipul Kashyap: as visual syntax UML is useful, but it comes with its own semantics. can you provide guidance ←

16:07:19 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:07:45 <msmith> pha: uml is used on different levels.  I'm saying only as visual syntax.  having diagram in UML doesn't specify semantics, impact OWL semantics

Peter Haase: uml is used on different levels. I'm saying only as visual syntax. having diagram in UML doesn't specify semantics, impact OWL semantics ←

16:08:08 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:09:43 <msmith> bmotik: example of confusion in OWL 1 - lack of rqmt that about disjoint entities

Boris Motik: example of confusion in OWL 1 - lack of rqmt that about disjoint entities ←

16:09:50 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:09:58 <msmith> ... example, what it means to declare an entity

... example, what it means to declare an entity ←

16:10:25 <msmith> ekw: so structural syntax is what clarifies, not the metamodel

Evan Wallace: so structural syntax is what clarifies, not the metamodel ←

16:10:36 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:10:39 <msmith> bmotik: this bumps up the precision to the next level

Boris Motik: this bumps up the precision to the next level ←

16:11:07 <bparsia> Matthew Horridge (OWL API author) really valued the current diagrams.

Bijan Parsia: Matthew Horridge (OWL API author) really valued the current diagrams. ←

16:11:19 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:12:03 <msmith> vipul: this is using metaclass from UML?

Vipul Kashyap: this is using metaclass from UML? ←

16:12:08 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:12:18 <msmith> pha: we're using MOF, a constrained form of UML

Peter Haase: we're using MOF, a constrained form of UML ←

16:12:23 <msmith> ekw: +1 to pha

Evan Wallace: +1 to pha ←

16:13:23 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:13:36 <msmith> ianh: proposal is to claim consistency and provide MOF

Ian Horrocks: proposal is to claim consistency and provide MOF ←

16:13:45 <bparsia> q+ to ask about incorporating the MOF into the structural spec

Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask about incorporating the MOF into the structural spec ←

16:14:13 <msmith> bmotik: I would switch to same tool as pha to be certain consistency is maintained

Boris Motik: I would switch to same tool as pha to be certain consistency is maintained ←

16:14:13 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:14:34 <IanH> I do see you Bijan

Ian Horrocks: I do see you Bijan ←

16:14:57 <bparsia> I want to wait until he's done anyway

Bijan Parsia: I want to wait until he's done anyway ←

16:14:59 <bparsia> No worries

Bijan Parsia: No worries ←

16:15:10 <bparsia> ack me

Bijan Parsia: ack me ←

16:15:11 <Zakim> bparsia, you wanted to ask about incorporating the MOF into the structural spec

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia, you wanted to ask about incorporating the MOF into the structural spec ←

16:15:22 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:15:48 <msmith> bijan: I like a lot of what I hear.  particularly machine processable definition of non-structural restrictions

Bijan Parsia: I like a lot of what I hear. particularly machine processable definition of non-structural restrictions ←

16:16:02 <msmith> ... do I understand that the machine readable for would be in the structural spec

... do I understand that the machine readable for would be in the structural spec ←

16:16:02 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

16:16:02 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

16:16:07 <msmith> bmotik: yes

Boris Motik: yes ←

16:16:10 <bparsia> ?

Bijan Parsia: ? ←

16:16:21 <msmith> ianh: only change to structual spec would be diagrams

Ian Horrocks: only change to structual spec would be diagrams ←

16:16:47 <msmith> ... where machine readable model goes is another issue

... where machine readable model goes is another issue ←

16:16:24 <bparsia> +1 to appendix

Bijan Parsia: +1 to appendix ←

16:16:28 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:16:58 <msmith> alanr: this is a single ontology or imports closure?

Alan Ruttenberg: this is a single ontology or imports closure? ←

16:17:12 <msmith> bmotik: neither, this is a description of the structural of all ontologies

Boris Motik: neither, this is a description of the structural of all ontologies ←

16:17:17 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:17:23 <bparsia> This could help with teh accessibility of the diagrams

Bijan Parsia: This could help with teh accessibility of the diagrams ←

16:17:37 <msmith> alanr: you mentioned something about integrity constraints on declarations, this is only in imports closure

Alan Ruttenberg: you mentioned something about integrity constraints on declarations, this is only in imports closure ←

16:17:54 <msmith> bmotik: so far this hasn't been specified, we'd have to see if it was possible with OCL

Boris Motik: so far this hasn't been specified, we'd have to see if it was possible with OCL ←

16:18:10 <msmith> ... same with non-structural constraints

... same with non-structural constraints ←

16:18:15 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:18:22 <msmith> ... simpler things would be captured

... simpler things would be captured ←

16:18:26 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:18:47 <msmith> ekw: its a model of OWL, the language

Evan Wallace: its a model of OWL, the language ←

16:18:56 <msmith> alanr: of the syntax of the language?

Alan Ruttenberg: of the syntax of the language? ←

16:19:00 <msmith> bmotik: yes

Boris Motik: yes ←

16:19:25 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:19:29 <msmith> ianh: not really different than current diagrams, just with an XML representation

Ian Horrocks: not really different than current diagrams, just with an XML representation ←

16:19:46 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:19:47 <msmith> ekw: not quite, its all of those diagrams in a package, modeled, with additional constraints

Evan Wallace: not quite, its all of those diagrams in a package, modeled, with additional constraints ←

16:20:01 <msmith> alanr: it would be great to have a machine readable normative version of OWL language

Alan Ruttenberg: it would be great to have a machine readable normative version of OWL language ←

16:20:24 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:20:25 <msmith> ... I'm concerned we'll have several things like this.  structural syntax, rdf doc, xml doc, etc.

... I'm concerned we'll have several things like this. structural syntax, rdf doc, xml doc, etc. ←

16:20:49 <msmith> ... I'd like something to leverage this to check the consistency of all these bits

... I'd like something to leverage this to check the consistency of all these bits ←

16:21:10 <msmith> ... absent that, I worry that this additional work that uses limited resources

... absent that, I worry that this additional work that uses limited resources ←

16:20:38 <Elisa> There are also additional tools we can use to validate the abstract syntax, and some rules we can apply for naming of things in an abstract syntax, etc. that hopefully would have a positive impact on the language itself

Elisa Kendall: There are also additional tools we can use to validate the abstract syntax, and some rules we can apply for naming of things in an abstract syntax, etc. that hopefully would have a positive impact on the language itself ←

16:21:29 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:21:55 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:21:58 <msmith> vipul: i think its a good idea.

Vipul Kashyap: i think its a good idea. ←

16:22:06 <msmith> bmotik: i don't think it requires a lot of resources

Boris Motik: i don't think it requires a lot of resources ←

16:22:18 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:22:24 <msmith> ... because pha already did it and the diagrams match

... because pha already did it and the diagrams match ←

16:22:38 <msmith> ... one could generate an XML syntax from it

... one could generate an XML syntax from it ←

16:22:56 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:22:59 <msmith> ... its a possibility

... its a possibility ←

16:23:15 <msmith> pfps: can you produce relaxng instead?

Peter Patel-Schneider: can you produce relaxng instead? ←

16:23:21 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:23:25 <msmith> pha: I'll look

Peter Haase: I'll look ←

16:24:13 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:24:22 <msmith> bmotik: if you have MOF metamodel of one language and another, you write transformation between the two

Boris Motik: if you have MOF metamodel of one language and another, you write transformation between the two ←

16:24:29 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:24:42 <msmith> alanr: relaxng might not have a MOF metamodel

Alan Ruttenberg: relaxng might not have a MOF metamodel ←

16:24:46 <bparsia> I wrote a script to go from fucntioanl script to relax-ng

Bijan Parsia: I wrote a script to go from fucntioanl script to relax-ng ←

16:24:51 <ekw> The transformation language that Boris mentioned is called MOF Queries, Views and Transformation (QVT)

Evan Wallace: The transformation language that Boris mentioned is called MOF Queries, Views and Transformation (QVT) ←

16:25:00 <Elisa> this is one of the primary reasons why we developed the ODM metamodels for OWL 1 in the first place, fyi

Elisa Kendall: this is one of the primary reasons why we developed the ODM metamodels for OWL 1 in the first place, fyi ←

16:25:36 <msmith> ianh: I think alan likes MOF as normative, all others as non-normative

Ian Horrocks: I think alan likes MOF as normative, all others as non-normative ←

16:25:43 <msmith> ... any reason to be non-normative

... any reason to be non-normative ←

16:25:51 <msmith> bmotik: can you post xml schema to wiki

Boris Motik: can you post xml schema to wiki ←

16:25:57 <msmith> pha: yes

Peter Haase: yes ←

16:25:59 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:26:46 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:27:08 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

16:27:12 <msmith> msmith: this would make the burden for review higher

Mike Smith: this would make the burden for review higher ←

16:27:24 <Elisa>  IBM RSA does have a publication capability so that you can publish an html version that can be "walked", with all of the model elements being alive

Elisa Kendall: IBM RSA does have a publication capability so that you can publish an html version that can be "walked", with all of the model elements being alive ←

16:27:25 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←

16:27:25 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←

16:27:26 <msmith> bmotik: you would have to install IBM rational architect

Boris Motik: you would have to install IBM rational architect ←

16:27:30 <msmith> pha: or other free tools

Peter Haase: or other free tools ←

16:27:30 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:27:36 <IanH> ack bparsia

Ian Horrocks: ack bparsia ←

16:27:44 <Zakim> -christine

Zakim IRC Bot: -christine ←

16:28:00 <Elisa> There is no need, in other words, for everyone to have IBM RSA in order to examine the MOF implementation

Elisa Kendall: There is no need, in other words, for everyone to have IBM RSA in order to examine the MOF implementation ←

16:28:13 <alanr> http://www.tucs.fi/publications/attachment.php?fname=TR606.pdf

Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.tucs.fi/publications/attachment.php?fname=TR606.pdf ←

16:28:24 <alanr> In this paper, we study the relation between

Alan Ruttenberg: In this paper, we study the relation between ←

16:28:25 <alanr> context-free (Backus-Naur Form) grammars and Meta Object Facility metamodels

Alan Ruttenberg: context-free (Backus-Naur Form) grammars and Meta Object Facility metamodels ←

16:28:25 <alanr> and identify when and how we can convert a grammar to a metamodel and a meta-

Alan Ruttenberg: and identify when and how we can convert a grammar to a metamodel and a meta- ←

16:28:25 <alanr> model to a grammar. An example of this mapping for a subset of Java is shown

Alan Ruttenberg: model to a grammar. An example of this mapping for a subset of Java is shown ←

16:28:38 <msmith> bparsia: even if we have other constraints in MOF, not all constraints will be there.

Bijan Parsia: even if we have other constraints in MOF, not all constraints will be there. ←

16:28:46 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:28:53 <msmith> ... and down-translation to other syntaxes will probably lose some restrictions

... and down-translation to other syntaxes will probably lose some restrictions ←

16:29:00 <ekw> It constraints are expressed as OCL in the MOF model then there would be some extra review burden

Evan Wallace: It constraints are expressed as OCL in the MOF model then there would be some extra review burden ←

16:29:07 <msmith> bmotik: some things are easier written in english

Boris Motik: some things are easier written in english ←

16:29:09 <ekw> s/It/If/

Evan Wallace: s/It/If/ ←

16:29:17 <msmith> alanr: but comparison is work

Alan Ruttenberg: but comparison is work ←

16:30:05 <msmith> bmotik: review would be only slightly more than now

Boris Motik: review would be only slightly more than now ←

16:30:14 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:30:19 <msmith> alanr: diagrams are noise, I look at documents and frammar

Alan Ruttenberg: diagrams are noise, I look at documents and frammar ←

16:30:24 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:30:35 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

16:30:35 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

16:31:05 <bparsia> I don't mind a normative appendix which is: the MOF + a list of addtional constraints in english

Bijan Parsia: I don't mind a normative appendix which is: the MOF + a list of addtional constraints in english ←

16:31:17 <msmith> msmith: what is normative, the MOF or the structural spec document?

Mike Smith: what is normative, the MOF or the structural spec document? ←

16:31:27 <bparsia> As I understand it, the diagrams are normative

Bijan Parsia: As I understand it, the diagrams are normative ←

16:31:40 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:31:42 <msmith> ekw: this doesn't change things because the diagrams are in the normative structural spec

Evan Wallace: this doesn't change things because the diagrams are in the normative structural spec ←

16:32:01 <msmith> alanr: we must say if/when there is an error which document is normative

Alan Ruttenberg: we must say if/when there is an error which document is normative ←

16:32:19 <msmith> ... I assume the winner will be the text

... I assume the winner will be the text ←

16:32:27 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:32:48 <msmith> ... this is separate from MOF metamodel to the extent that it competes for limited resources

... this is separate from MOF metamodel to the extent that it competes for limited resources ←

16:33:03 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:33:19 <msmith> bmotik: diagrams are in spec now (as normative)

Boris Motik: diagrams are in spec now (as normative) ←

16:33:47 <msmith> ... diagrams specify normative structure

... diagrams specify normative structure ←

16:33:56 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:34:06 <msmith> ... functional style spec is different because we wanted it to be

... functional style spec is different because we wanted it to be ←

16:34:27 <msmith> pfps: any document has duplication, why try to remove this type of duplication

Peter Patel-Schneider: any document has duplication, why try to remove this type of duplication ←

16:34:35 <Elisa> what we did for common logic, to assist in addressing this, was to include the ebnf on every diagram in the ODM

Elisa Kendall: what we did for common logic, to assist in addressing this, was to include the ebnf on every diagram in the ODM ←

16:34:45 <msmith> alanr: that the diagrams and the syntax are different is of concern

Alan Ruttenberg: that the diagrams and the syntax are different is of concern ←

16:34:56 <Elisa> we were able to show a 1-1 correspondence between the ebnf and the MOF metamodel

Elisa Kendall: we were able to show a 1-1 correspondence between the ebnf and the MOF metamodel ←

16:35:10 <msmith> m_schnei: diagrams and bnf are complementary

Michael Schneider: diagrams and bnf are complementary ←

16:36:02 <msmith> ... a 1:1 between a MOF and bnf is a surprise to me

... a 1:1 between a MOF and bnf is a surprise to me ←

16:36:04 <msmith> ianh: me too

Ian Horrocks: me too ←

16:36:16 <ekw> elisa - do you mean the different representations in the CL spec were isomorphic?

Evan Wallace: elisa - do you mean the different representations in the CL spec were isomorphic? ←

16:36:23 <sandro> (This must be a constrained form of BNF, eg where Order Never Matters.)

Sandro Hawke: (This must be a constrained form of BNF, eg where Order Never Matters.) ←

16:36:24 <msmith> bmotik: you want MOF precisely so you can avoid ordering issues

Boris Motik: you want MOF precisely so you can avoid ordering issues ←

16:36:36 <bparsia> Abstract syntax

Bijan Parsia: Abstract syntax ←

16:36:38 <bparsia> Not concrete syntax

Bijan Parsia: Not concrete syntax ←

16:36:45 <msmith> alanr: but syntax is about order

Alan Ruttenberg: but syntax is about order ←

16:37:01 <Elisa> yes, but also we were able to be very precise because the language was simple, and order was less important aside from parameters for certain expressions

Elisa Kendall: yes, but also we were able to be very precise because the language was simple, and order was less important aside from parameters for certain expressions ←

16:37:06 <msmith> sandro: RIF went down the unified mgmt path, but abandoned it as too much work

Sandro Hawke: RIF went down the unified mgmt path, but abandoned it as too much work ←

16:37:36 <uli> q+

Uli Sattler: q+ ←

16:37:42 <msmith> ... this is a parallelizable  problem, someone can be responsible for making the MOF track

... this is a parallelizable problem, someone can be responsible for making the MOF track ←

16:37:54 <msmith> ianh: we already have the MOF model, informally and as diagrams

Ian Horrocks: we already have the MOF model, informally and as diagrams ←

16:39:02 <msmith> ... the only change is a serialization that can be used directly, not just as diagrams

... the only change is a serialization that can be used directly, not just as diagrams ←

16:38:14 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:38:31 <bparsia> That's my understanding

Bijan Parsia: That's my understanding ←

16:38:40 <uli> zakim, ack me

Uli Sattler: zakim, ack me ←

16:38:40 <Zakim> unmuting uli

Zakim IRC Bot: unmuting uli ←

16:38:42 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue

Zakim IRC Bot: I see no one on the speaker queue ←

16:38:48 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:38:51 <bparsia> Not "automatically", but Matthew has much praised the diagrams

Bijan Parsia: Not "automatically", but Matthew has much praised the diagrams ←

16:38:59 <alanr> I am so on your side!

Alan Ruttenberg: I am so on your side! ←

16:39:03 <alanr> I want them to be normative

Alan Ruttenberg: I want them to be normative ←

16:39:05 <Elisa> one can actually generate the api automatically from the MOF model, in fact

Elisa Kendall: one can actually generate the api automatically from the MOF model, in fact ←

16:39:15 <ekw> So there is a benefit to goal with the burden

Evan Wallace: So there is a benefit to goal with the burden ←

16:39:26 <msmith> uli: many people have found MOF to be very useful

Uli Sattler: many people have found MOF to be very useful ←

16:39:37 <msmith> alanr: I agree with Uli

Alan Ruttenberg: I agree with Uli ←

16:39:44 <msmith> ianh: what about normativity?

Ian Horrocks: what about normativity? ←

16:39:46 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:39:55 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←

16:39:55 <Zakim> uli should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←

16:40:16 <Elisa> in order to standardize the mof metamodel, there is actually more work that would need to be done to document the contents properly, validate it, etc., fyi

Elisa Kendall: in order to standardize the mof metamodel, there is actually more work that would need to be done to document the contents properly, validate it, etc., fyi ←

16:40:28 <msmith> bmotik: I would like spec to say something like structure is described in these diagrams, which matches this MOF, plus some additional constraints

Boris Motik: I would like spec to say something like structure is described in these diagrams, which matches this MOF, plus some additional constraints ←

16:40:34 <msmith> ... that's the normative part

... that's the normative part ←

16:40:56 <msmith> ... the structural syntax would have a translation from the MOF

... the structural syntax would have a translation from the MOF ←

16:40:59 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:41:15 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

16:41:18 <msmith> ... and if necessary, the structural syntax would be subordinate

... and if necessary, the structural syntax would be subordinate ←

16:41:27 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:41:33 <bparsia> ack me

Bijan Parsia: ack me ←

16:41:51 <msmith> alanr: I would say document is normative

Alan Ruttenberg: I would say document is normative ←

16:42:07 <Elisa> there are conventions at OMG for documenting these things, including the model files as part of the normative specification, and so forth, which you would want to provide if you were to go this route...

Elisa Kendall: there are conventions at OMG for documenting these things, including the model files as part of the normative specification, and so forth, which you would want to provide if you were to go this route... ←

16:42:41 <msmith> alanr: the normative description would be XML description of MOF metamodel plus additional restrictions that can't be expressed in that model, then provide a syntax for providing text from the model

Alan Ruttenberg: the normative description would be XML description of MOF metamodel plus additional restrictions that can't be expressed in that model, then provide a syntax for providing text from the model ←

16:42:44 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:42:57 <Elisa> we could entertain working together with the OMG ontology PSIG, since Evan and I co-chair that group, to support this, but I'm not sure we can support the publication timeline

Elisa Kendall: we could entertain working together with the OMG ontology PSIG, since Evan and I co-chair that group, to support this, but I'm not sure we can support the publication timeline ←

16:43:05 <msmith> bmotik: you can make diagrams normative, because MOF has a standard visual syntax

Boris Motik: you can make diagrams normative, because MOF has a standard visual syntax ←

16:43:21 <alanr> diagrams *could* be normative. I just don't want them to be.

Alan Ruttenberg: diagrams *could* be normative. I just don't want them to be. ←

16:43:40 <msmith> bmotik: regarding generation, I don't think you can generate the functional syntax because it is slightly different (e.g., not fully typed)

Boris Motik: regarding generation, I don't think you can generate the functional syntax because it is slightly different (e.g., not fully typed) ←

16:43:55 <msmith> ... normative part is translation

... normative part is translation ←

16:44:35 <msmith> ... say something like and ontology can be serialized in functional syntax and back to structural form without and structural changes

... say something like and ontology can be serialized in functional syntax and back to structural form without and structural changes ←

16:43:50 <bparsia> How about replacing the functional syntax with xml syntax?

Bijan Parsia: How about replacing the functional syntax with xml syntax? ←

16:44:04 <bparsia> One fewer syntax, closer alignment, more W3Cy

Bijan Parsia: One fewer syntax, closer alignment, more W3Cy ←

16:44:17 <Elisa> the XMI may be more verbose than you would want ...

Elisa Kendall: the XMI may be more verbose than you would want ... ←

16:44:30 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:45:04 <msmith> alanr: we agree on utility, we need to think about presentation to users

Alan Ruttenberg: we agree on utility, we need to think about presentation to users ←

16:45:24 <alanr> is there a way to annotate these models?

Alan Ruttenberg: is there a way to annotate these models? ←

16:45:46 <msmith> elisa: there is more documentation that goes with metamodel and needs to be very precise

Elisa Kendall: there is more documentation that goes with metamodel and needs to be very precise ←

16:45:46 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:45:55 <msmith> ... text has very specific form and is normative

... text has very specific form and is normative ←

16:45:55 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←

16:45:55 <Zakim> uli was already muted, uli

Zakim IRC Bot: uli was already muted, uli ←

16:46:07 <msmith> ... in addition to XMI, etc.

... in addition to XMI, etc. ←

16:46:52 <msmith> ... what Elisa, Evan have suggested to pha is that much of this additional work happen at OMG, so that it doesn't need to fit in W3 timeline

... what Elisa, Evan have suggested to pha is that much of this additional work happen at OMG, so that it doesn't need to fit in W3 timeline ←

16:48:07 <msmith> ... synchronization not an issue.  I caution that there is much additional work that needs to be done to make it as useful as we'd like

... synchronization not an issue. I caution that there is much additional work that needs to be done to make it as useful as we'd like ←

16:48:07 <msmith> omit: ... synchronization not an issue.  I caution that there is much additional work that needs to be done to make it as useful as you'd like

16:46:20 <alanr> would seem that the MOF specification + MOF Metamodel would be sufficient for us

Alan Ruttenberg: would seem that the MOF specification + MOF Metamodel would be sufficient for us ←

16:47:09 <alanr> but there should be a clear advantage to having the work be part of our WG

Alan Ruttenberg: but there should be a clear advantage to having the work be part of our WG ←

16:47:14 <alanr> versus OMG work

Alan Ruttenberg: versus OMG work ←

16:47:40 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:48:14 <msmith> omit: s/you'd/we'd/

16:48:18 <msmith> pfps: what work

Peter Patel-Schneider: what work ←

16:48:31 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:48:47 <msmith> elisa: documentation, naming, validity, etc.

Elisa Kendall: documentation, naming, validity, etc. ←

16:49:07 <msmith> pfps: that's not work for us, that's work for OMG

Peter Patel-Schneider: that's not work for us, that's work for OMG ←

16:49:24 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:49:36 <msmith> ... if you want to add a bunch of additional information we don't need, that's something different

... if you want to add a bunch of additional information we don't need, that's something different ←

16:50:09 <msmith> alanr: everyone sleep on this issue

Alan Ruttenberg: everyone sleep on this issue ←

16:50:16 <msmith> ... we will revisit it

... we will revisit it ←

16:50:41 <msmith> topic: Structural Equivalence of Literals

7. Structural Equivalence of Literals

16:50:47 <msmith> omit: s/literal/literals/

16:51:36 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:51:44 <msmith> bmotik: suggestion is to keep it as with rest of language.  structurally equivalent if parts are equivalent.  in this case parts are lexical form and datatype

Boris Motik: suggestion is to keep it as with rest of language. structurally equivalent if parts are equivalent. in this case parts are lexical form and datatype ←

16:52:19 <msmith> ... e.g., if you 2.0^^xsd:float you shouldn't change it to 2^^xsd:integer

... e.g., if you 2.0^^xsd:float you shouldn't change it to 2^^xsd:integer ←

16:52:29 <msmith> alanr: I don't want anything to change what I give it

Alan Ruttenberg: I don't want anything to change what I give it ←

16:52:36 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:53:04 <ekw> Process check: what is the new agenda?

Evan Wallace: Process check: what is the new agenda? ←

16:53:12 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:53:52 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:54:08 <msmith> bmotik: a tool may choose to replace a constant with an alternative constant for the same interpretation

Boris Motik: a tool may choose to replace a constant with an alternative constant for the same interpretation ←

16:54:15 <msmith> ianh: this surprises me

Ian Horrocks: this surprises me ←

16:54:21 <bparsia> RDF doesn't require this

Bijan Parsia: RDF doesn't require this ←

16:54:54 <msmith> msmith: example of structural changes allowed by current spec

Mike Smith: example of structural changes allowed by current spec ←

16:54:55 <bparsia> Indeed, having some normalization permitted is generally cited as desirable

Bijan Parsia: Indeed, having some normalization permitted is generally cited as desirable ←

16:55:47 <msmith> bmotik: this is to address whether it is a rqmt that tools don't change e.g., 2.3100 to 2.31

Boris Motik: this is to address whether it is a rqmt that tools don't change e.g., 2.3100 to 2.31 ←

16:55:54 <msmith> alanr: That should be a rqmt

Alan Ruttenberg: That should be a rqmt ←

16:56:00 <bparsia> I oppose this requriement

Bijan Parsia: I oppose this requriement ←

16:56:25 <msmith> bmotik: structural equivalence should be based on text and datatype

Boris Motik: structural equivalence should be based on text and datatype ←

16:56:36 <msmith> .... e.g., 2.0 is different from 2

.... e.g., 2.0 is different from 2 ←

16:56:28 <alanr> then say what structure equivalent is and handle all the cases.

Alan Ruttenberg: then say what structure equivalent is and handle all the cases. ←

16:57:00 <bparsia> The requirement to preserve lexical forms is very tool, audience, and circumstance dependant

Bijan Parsia: The requirement to preserve lexical forms is very tool, audience, and circumstance dependant ←

16:57:17 <bparsia> (I often like it, but it's really not universal.)

Bijan Parsia: (I often like it, but it's really not universal.) ←

16:57:31 <msmith> alanr: we define structural equivalence and that is all.  we have no change.  so recorded

Alan Ruttenberg: we define structural equivalence and that is all. we have no change. so recorded ←

16:57:34 <dlm> \so on logistics, what time should we call back in?

Deborah McGuinness: \so on logistics, what time should we call back in? ←

16:57:34 <uli> ...and I wouldn't be able to draw a line between 'structural equivalence' and 'semantics equivalence'

Uli Sattler: ...and I wouldn't be able to draw a line between 'structural equivalence' and 'semantics equivalence' ←

16:57:43 <msmith> break for lunch now

break for lunch now ←

16:57:52 <sandro> Topic: Lunch

8. Lunch

16:58:00 <uli> bye for now

Uli Sattler: bye for now ←

16:58:10 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

16:58:10 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

16:58:11 <Zakim> -uli

Zakim IRC Bot: -uli ←

16:59:21 <ekw> we will re-convene in an hour, 1st topic will be Quickstart

Evan Wallace: we will re-convene in an hour, 1st topic will be Quickstart ←

16:59:43 <Zakim> -Elisa_Kendall

Zakim IRC Bot: -Elisa_Kendall ←

17:01:26 <Zakim> -dlm

Zakim IRC Bot: -dlm ←

17:09:53 <Zakim> -bparsia

(No events recorded for 8 minutes)

Zakim IRC Bot: -bparsia ←

17:47:55 <bparsia>  13:00 - 14:00 Lunch

(No events recorded for 38 minutes)

Bijan Parsia: 13:00 - 14:00 Lunch ←

17:47:56 <bparsia>  14:50 - 15:45

Bijan Parsia: 14:50 - 15:45 ←

17:57:58 <Zakim> +Elisa_Kendall

(No events recorded for 10 minutes)

Zakim IRC Bot: +Elisa_Kendall ←

17:58:54 <Zakim> +dlm

Zakim IRC Bot: +dlm ←

18:00:10 <Zakim> +??P3

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←

18:00:18 <bparsia> zakim, ??p3 is me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, ??p3 is me ←

18:00:18 <Zakim> +bparsia; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +bparsia; got it ←

18:01:27 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

18:01:27 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

18:03:54 <IanH> ack bparsia

Ian Horrocks: ack bparsia ←

18:03:54 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←

18:03:54 <alanr> bijan?

Alan Ruttenberg: bijan? ←

18:03:57 <Zakim> bparsia was not muted, bparsia

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia was not muted, bparsia ←

18:04:24 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

18:04:24 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

18:04:32 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←

18:04:32 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←

18:04:36 <IanH> scribenick: pha

(Scribe set to Peter Haase)

18:04:59 <pha> topic: quick reference

9. quick reference

18:05:19 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

18:05:19 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

18:05:24 <IanH> ScribeNick: pha

18:05:50 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←

18:05:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room, Elisa_Kendall, dlm, bparsia (muted)

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room, Elisa_Kendall, dlm, bparsia (muted) ←

18:05:51 <Zakim> On IRC I see ekw, m_schnei, jar, Zhe, bmotik, Elisa, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro,

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ekw, m_schnei, jar, Zhe, bmotik, Elisa, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, ←

18:05:54 <Zakim> ... trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: ... trackbot ←

18:06:19 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Quick_Reference_Guide

Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Quick_Reference_Guide ←

18:07:03 <pha> elisa: snapshot to show where are headed

Elisa Kendall: snapshot to show where are headed ←

18:07:48 <bparsia> Syntax is the right place to link

Bijan Parsia: Syntax is the right place to link ←

18:07:48 <pha> ... section 3: 4 column approach, additional column with example

... section 3: 4 column approach, additional column with example ←

18:08:08 <pha> ... trying to get a sense whether this is the right approach

... trying to get a sense whether this is the right approach ←

18:08:51 <dlm> the plan is also to have a printable version somewhat along the lines of  http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/_file_directory_/resources/94.pdf

Deborah McGuinness: the plan is also to have a printable version somewhat along the lines of http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/_file_directory_/resources/94.pdf ←

18:09:29 <pha> ... will need to point/link to the other documents, need tags in those

... will need to point/link to the other documents, need tags in those ←

18:09:53 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:10:33 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

18:11:05 <dlm> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s2

Deborah McGuinness: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s2 ←

18:11:32 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←

18:11:32 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←

18:11:36 <alanr> ack bparsia

Alan Ruttenberg: ack bparsia ←

18:11:55 <pha> bijan: fewer headers, more compact

Bijan Parsia: fewer headers, more compact ←

18:12:35 <pha> ... link to structural specification for examples

... link to structural specification for examples ←

18:12:45 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

18:12:45 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

18:13:04 <pha> pfps: seems to be very extensive, not compact

Peter Patel-Schneider: seems to be very extensive, not compact ←

18:13:17 <bparsia> My understanding is that it *is* something like this: http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/_file_directory_/resources/94.pdf

Bijan Parsia: My understanding is that it *is* something like this: http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/_file_directory_/resources/94.pdf ←

18:13:34 <bparsia> +1 to peter and alan

Bijan Parsia: +1 to peter and alan ←

18:13:38 <pha> alan: ultimate format is reference card, pay attention to that

Alan Ruttenberg: ultimate format is reference card, pay attention to that ←

18:13:38 <bparsia> CSS could do it

Bijan Parsia: CSS could do it ←

18:14:14 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

18:14:21 <pha> elisa: a lot of work, this approach is easier to start

Elisa Kendall: a lot of work, this approach is easier to start ←

18:14:28 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:14:30 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

18:15:06 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←

18:15:06 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←

18:15:11 <alanr> ack bparsia

Alan Ruttenberg: ack bparsia ←

18:15:45 <pha> bijan: there is not a lot of room on quick reference card, should not be lighter version of struct. spec

Bijan Parsia: there is not a lot of room on quick reference card, should not be lighter version of struct. spec ←

18:15:46 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:15:52 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:16:20 <pha> elisa: some of it due to lack of wiki knowledge

Elisa Kendall: some of it due to lack of wiki knowledge ←

18:16:41 <pha> ... thought should be similar to overview document

... thought should be similar to overview document ←

18:17:07 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

18:17:07 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

18:17:49 <pha> pfps: if it is not a reference card, you failed

Peter Patel-Schneider: if it is not a reference card, you failed ←

18:19:02 <pha> alan: stay away from wiki, use whatever and write it there, with the ultimate format in mind

Alan Ruttenberg: stay away from wiki, use whatever and write it there, with the ultimate format in mind ←

18:20:22 <pha> alan: when could you have pdf file?

Alan Ruttenberg: when could you have pdf file? ←

18:20:22 <Zakim> +??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4 ←

18:21:10 <pha> ... do we need all three syntaxes?

... do we need all three syntaxes? ←

18:21:41 <pha> elisa: does not work for me, can try to find somebody

Elisa Kendall: does not work for me, can try to find somebody ←

18:21:58 <pha> ... end of august more realistic

... end of august more realistic ←

18:22:55 <pha> elisa: september 3rd earliest to produce pdf

Elisa Kendall: september 3rd earliest to produce pdf ←

18:23:05 <pha> dlm: ok, realistic

Deborah McGuinness: ok, realistic ←

18:23:55 <pha> alan: get it out in first week of september, then review, working draft second week of september

Alan Ruttenberg: get it out in first week of september, then review, working draft second week of september ←

18:24:32 <bparsia> We can move it to owled

Bijan Parsia: We can move it to owled ←

18:24:37 <bparsia> or otherwise capture it

Bijan Parsia: or otherwise capture it ←

18:25:03 <pha> evan: make it not rec track?

Evan Wallace: make it not rec track? ←

18:25:18 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

18:25:22 <pha> alan: has not been decided yet

Alan Ruttenberg: has not been decided yet ←

18:25:22 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←

18:25:22 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←

18:26:13 <pha> ian: probably not in the set of documents for last call at next F2F

Ian Horrocks: probably not in the set of documents for last call at next F2F ←

18:26:38 <dlm> potential cut - annotation properties (suggestion from alan)

Deborah McGuinness: potential cut - annotation properties (suggestion from alan) ←

18:26:42 <dlm> +q

Deborah McGuinness: +q ←

18:26:43 <pfps> I've been viewing the document and one problem that I see is that the formatting is very bad - it changes significantly as the width of the display changes.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I've been viewing the document and one problem that I see is that the formatting is very bad - it changes significantly as the width of the display changes. ←

18:27:06 <bparsia> q-

Bijan Parsia: q- ←

18:27:25 <pha> alan: if all the content would be in pdf in beginning of september, reviews positive, then it might fit

Alan Ruttenberg: if all the content would be in pdf in beginning of september, reviews positive, then it might fit ←

18:27:38 <alanr> ack dlm

Alan Ruttenberg: ack dlm ←

18:28:20 <pha> dlm: if we cut the content, then time is less an issue

Deborah McGuinness: if we cut the content, then time is less an issue ←

18:28:27 <pha> ... might be realistic

... might be realistic ←

18:28:51 <pha> alan: will try to get it into working draft quickly

Alan Ruttenberg: will try to get it into working draft quickly ←

18:29:30 <sandro> Alan: We're expecting a reasonably complete PDF in the first week of September.

Alan Ruttenberg: We're expecting a reasonably complete PDF in the first week of September. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

18:30:06 <pha> action:  elisa  to produce pdf document first week of september

ACTION: elisa to produce pdf document first week of september ←

18:30:06 <trackbot> Created ACTION-182 -  to produce pdf document first week of september [on Elisa Kendall - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-182 - to produce pdf document first week of september [on Elisa Kendall - due 2008-08-05]. ←

18:30:13 <pha> action:  dlm to produce pdf document first week of september

ACTION: dlm to produce pdf document first week of september ←

18:30:13 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - dlm

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

18:30:14 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←

18:30:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room, Elisa_Kendall, dlm, bparsia, ??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room, Elisa_Kendall, dlm, bparsia, ??P4 ←

18:30:15 <Zakim> On IRC I see cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, Elisa, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro,

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, Elisa, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, ←

18:30:18 <Zakim> ... trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: ... trackbot ←

18:30:35 <IanH> zakim, ??P4 is cgolbrei

Ian Horrocks: zakim, ??P4 is cgolbrei ←

18:30:35 <Zakim> +cgolbrei; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +cgolbrei; got it ←

18:30:46 <Zakim> -Elisa_Kendall

Zakim IRC Bot: -Elisa_Kendall ←

18:31:08 <pha> action:  deborah to produce pdf document first week of september

ACTION: deborah to produce pdf document first week of september ←

18:31:08 <trackbot> Created ACTION-183 - Produce pdf document first week of september [on Deborah McGuinness - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-183 - Produce pdf document first week of september [on Deborah McGuinness - due 2008-08-05]. ←

18:31:18 <Zakim> -cgolbrei

Zakim IRC Bot: -cgolbrei ←

18:31:41 <ekw> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl2-requirements-20080722/

Evan Wallace: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl2-requirements-20080722/ ←

18:31:55 <Zakim> +??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←

18:32:01 <pha> Topic:  requirements

10. requirements

18:32:23 <IanH> zakim, ??P1 is cgolbrei

Ian Horrocks: zakim, ??P1 is cgolbrei ←

18:32:23 <Zakim> +cgolbrei; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +cgolbrei; got it ←

18:33:51 <pha> alan: there are two versions, frozen and subsequent

Alan Ruttenberg: there are two versions, frozen and subsequent ←

18:34:35 <pha> evan: this is an evolved version

Evan Wallace: this is an evolved version ←

18:35:27 <pha> ... which way to organize requirements? use case? language feature?

... which way to organize requirements? use case? language feature? ←

18:35:37 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:36:18 <pha> vipul: there does not need to be a choice

Vipul Kashyap: there does not need to be a choice ←

18:36:18 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

18:36:22 <Zakim> -dlm

Zakim IRC Bot: -dlm ←

18:36:50 <pha> ... goal is to provide a motivation

... goal is to provide a motivation ←

18:37:06 <Zakim> + +1.518.608.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.608.aabb ←

18:37:12 <baojie> q+

Jie Bao: q+ ←

18:37:22 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

18:37:26 <pha> ... What applications is OWL useful for?

... What applications is OWL useful for? ←

18:37:43 <dlm> +1518608aabb is dlm

Deborah McGuinness: +1518608aabb is dlm ←

18:37:47 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←

18:37:47 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room, bparsia, cgolbrei, +1.518.608.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room, bparsia, cgolbrei, +1.518.608.aabb ←

18:37:48 <Zakim> On IRC I see cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot ←

18:38:00 <pha> evan: new section 2 would be domain, applications, stake holders

Evan Wallace: new section 2 would be domain, applications, stake holders ←

18:38:07 <IanH> Who is calling in from 518.608?

Ian Horrocks: Who is calling in from 518.608? ←

18:38:19 <pha> ... then use cases, requirements, features

... then use cases, requirements, features ←

18:38:22 <bparsia> ack me

Bijan Parsia: ack me ←

18:38:24 <alanr> ack bijan

Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←

18:38:56 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←

18:38:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room, bparsia, cgolbrei, +1.518.608.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room, bparsia, cgolbrei, +1.518.608.aabb ←

18:38:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, vipul, baojie, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot ←

18:39:08 <pha> bijan: getting large and complicated, hoping for something closer to OWL 1 overview

Bijan Parsia: getting large and complicated, hoping for something closer to OWL 1 overview ←

18:39:11 <IanH> zakim, aabb is dlm

Ian Horrocks: zakim, aabb is dlm ←

18:39:11 <Zakim> +dlm; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +dlm; got it ←

18:39:14 <cgolbrei> +q

Christine Golbreich: +q ←

18:39:30 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←

18:39:41 <pha> ... not sure how helpful it is to have all these details

... not sure how helpful it is to have all these details ←

18:39:43 <vipul> q+

Vipul Kashyap: q+ ←

18:39:46 <alanr> ack baojie

Alan Ruttenberg: ack baojie ←

18:40:03 <bparsia> It's 33 pages by my printer :(

Bijan Parsia: It's 33 pages by my printer :( ←

18:40:18 <pha> jie: is there usecase for scalability?

Jie Bao: is there usecase for scalability? ←

18:40:19 <cgolbrei> version 2 shorter

Christine Golbreich: version 2 shorter ←

18:40:45 <bparsia> What?

Bijan Parsia: What? ←

18:40:52 <pha> evan: hoping to get input for usecases

Evan Wallace: hoping to get input for usecases ←

18:40:57 <bparsia> Usecase for all the profiles?

Bijan Parsia: Usecase for all the profiles? ←

18:41:09 <pha> ... in particular for OWL R, DL Lite

... in particular for OWL R, DL Lite ←

18:41:21 <bparsia> -1 to the web applications point

Bijan Parsia: -1 to the web applications point ←

18:41:32 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

18:41:33 <vipul> Agree with shortening Version 2 by moving use cases to Section 3

Vipul Kashyap: Agree with shortening Version 2 by moving use cases to Section 3 ←

18:41:35 <pha> alan: jie should be on requirements WG

Alan Ruttenberg: jie should be on requirements WG ←

18:41:41 <bparsia> q-

Bijan Parsia: q- ←

18:41:43 <cgolbrei> +q

Christine Golbreich: +q ←

18:41:59 <pha> alan: charter talks about requirements

Alan Ruttenberg: charter talks about requirements ←

18:42:09 <bparsia> q+ to dig in his heels against the blow up of scope of this document

Bijan Parsia: q+ to dig in his heels against the blow up of scope of this document ←

18:42:12 <pha> evan: no, requirements and use cases

Evan Wallace: no, requirements and use cases ←

18:42:24 <bparsia> Link for version 2?

Bijan Parsia: Link for version 2? ←

18:42:59 <alanr>  Requirements:

Alan Ruttenberg: Requirements: ←

18:42:59 <alanr> A description of the goals and requirements that have motivated the design of OWL 1.1.

Alan Ruttenberg: A description of the goals and requirements that have motivated the design of OWL 1.1. ←

18:43:00 <bparsia>  Charter:

Bijan Parsia: Charter: ←

18:43:01 <bparsia>  Requirements:

Bijan Parsia: Requirements: ←

18:43:01 <bparsia> A description of the goals and requirements that have motivated the design of OWL 1.1.

Bijan Parsia: A description of the goals and requirements that have motivated the design of OWL 1.1. ←

18:43:03 <vipul> I meant Section 2

Vipul Kashyap: I meant Section 2 ←

18:43:07 <alanr> jinx

Alan Ruttenberg: jinx ←

18:43:09 <alanr> :)

Alan Ruttenberg: :) ←

18:43:27 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:43:37 <sandro> ack cgolbrei

Sandro Hawke: ack cgolbrei ←

18:43:40 <sandro> ack alanr

Sandro Hawke: ack alanr ←

18:44:15 <pha> alan: more historical perspective: why did we introduce new features

Alan Ruttenberg: more historical perspective: why did we introduce new features ←

18:45:26 <cgolbrei> history not very helpful for user

Christine Golbreich: history not very helpful for user ←

18:45:26 <baojie> Summarize my question, more use cases for 1) web applications 2) scalability

Jie Bao: Summarize my question, more use cases for 1) web applications 2) scalability ←

18:45:51 <alanr> christine, but our charter says what we wanted to accomplish

Alan Ruttenberg: christine, but our charter says what we wanted to accomplish ←

18:45:58 <pha> vipul: secton 2 can be shortened, use case moved to section 3

Vipul Kashyap: secton 2 can be shortened, use case moved to section 3 ←

18:46:04 <alanr> it should do at least that

Alan Ruttenberg: it should do at least that ←

18:46:11 <pha> ... need to talk about applications, stake holders

... need to talk about applications, stake holders ←

18:46:37 <cgolbrei> better understand motivations + UCs = kind of example/guidelines for use

Christine Golbreich: better understand motivations + UCs = kind of example/guidelines for use ←

18:46:53 <pha> ... missing things like semantic email

... missing things like semantic email ←

18:47:22 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:47:28 <alanr> ack vipul

Alan Ruttenberg: ack vipul ←

18:47:29 <pha> ... applications that already use OWL 2 should be in scope

... applications that already use OWL 2 should be in scope ←

18:47:52 <alanr> back bparsia

Alan Ruttenberg: back bparsia ←

18:47:52 <bparsia> ack me

Bijan Parsia: ack me ←

18:47:52 <Zakim> bparsia, you wanted to dig in his heels against the blow up of scope of this document

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia, you wanted to dig in his heels against the blow up of scope of this document ←

18:48:10 <pha> bijan: should be at most 5 pages

Bijan Parsia: should be at most 5 pages ←

18:48:38 <vipul> q+

Vipul Kashyap: q+ ←

18:48:44 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

18:49:10 <alanr> not sure I see overlap

Alan Ruttenberg: not sure I see overlap ←

18:49:16 <alanr> mostly because primer is tight

Alan Ruttenberg: mostly because primer is tight ←

18:49:16 <cgolbrei> +q

Christine Golbreich: +q ←

18:49:19 <pha> ... overlap in documents (e.g. primer) should be minimized

... overlap in documents (e.g. primer) should be minimized ←

18:50:06 <Zhe> ...

Zhe Wu: ... ←

18:50:08 <pha> alan: if we increase scope, it should be done deliberately

Alan Ruttenberg: if we increase scope, it should be done deliberately ←

18:50:08 <cgolbrei> primer is general not OWL2 specific features

Christine Golbreich: primer is general not OWL2 specific features ←

18:50:22 <IanH> From charter: A description of the goals and requirements that have motivated the design of OWL 1.1.

Ian Horrocks: From charter: A description of the goals and requirements that have motivated the design of OWL 1.1. ←

18:50:53 <pha> evan: do not have a shared vision

Evan Wallace: do not have a shared vision ←

18:51:19 <bparsia> What document are we discussing?

Bijan Parsia: What document are we discussing? ←

18:52:05 <bparsia> Where was evan reading from?

Bijan Parsia: Where was evan reading from? ←

18:52:14 <pha> ian: current overview sounds right

Ian Horrocks: current overview sounds right ←

18:52:16 <pha> alan: agree

Alan Ruttenberg: agree ←

18:52:25 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl2-requirements-20080722/

Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl2-requirements-20080722/ ←

18:52:27 <msmith> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl2-requirements-20080722/#Overview

Mike Smith: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl2-requirements-20080722/#Overview ←

18:53:18 <bparsia> So 5 pages is doable?

Bijan Parsia: So 5 pages is doable? ←

18:53:20 <bparsia> Seems like

Bijan Parsia: Seems like ←

18:53:33 <pha> alan: rationales only for new features

Alan Ruttenberg: rationales only for new features ←

18:53:57 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:54:03 <cgolbrei> UCs + rationlae + new fetures will become more !

Christine Golbreich: UCs + rationlae + new fetures will become more ! ←

18:54:23 <alanr> ack vipul

Alan Ruttenberg: ack vipul ←

18:54:25 <bparsia> I'm not worried about repetition but, e.g., section 2

Bijan Parsia: I'm not worried about repetition but, e.g., section 2 ←

18:54:35 <alanr> ack cgolbrei

Alan Ruttenberg: ack cgolbrei ←

18:54:54 <vipul> q+

Vipul Kashyap: q+ ←

18:54:58 <pha> christine: cannot make it 5 pager

Christine Golbreich: cannot make it 5 pager ←

18:55:37 <bparsia> Section 5 would be ok

Bijan Parsia: Section 5 would be ok ←

18:55:41 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+ ←

18:56:12 <pha> ian: do we need all the use cases for the features?

Ian Horrocks: do we need all the use cases for the features? ←

18:56:29 <pha> ... can we skim down to most important ones?

... can we skim down to most important ones? ←

18:57:15 <cgolbrei> yes

Christine Golbreich: yes ←

18:57:27 <pha> alan: some use cases not specific enough

Alan Ruttenberg: some use cases not specific enough ←

18:57:36 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←

18:57:39 <alanr> ack vipul

Alan Ruttenberg: ack vipul ←

18:58:09 <pha> vipul: useful to have use cases across domains

Vipul Kashyap: useful to have use cases across domains ←

18:58:15 <cgolbrei> +q

Christine Golbreich: +q ←

18:59:04 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←

18:59:04 <Zakim> bparsia was not muted, bparsia

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia was not muted, bparsia ←

18:59:19 <pha> ... have to identify use cases and stakeholders

... have to identify use cases and stakeholders ←

18:59:50 <alanr> ack bparsia

Alan Ruttenberg: ack bparsia ←

19:00:02 <vipul> q+

Vipul Kashyap: q+ ←

19:00:26 <pha> bijan: give some understanding of the kind of motivations for features, not so specific to domains

Bijan Parsia: give some understanding of the kind of motivations for features, not so specific to domains ←

19:00:35 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

19:00:41 <alanr> ack cgolbrei

Alan Ruttenberg: ack cgolbrei ←

19:00:42 <bparsia> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←

19:00:43 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←

19:02:49 <alanr> annotations!

Alan Ruttenberg: annotations! ←

19:02:53 <alanr> :(

Alan Ruttenberg: :( ←

19:02:54 <pha> evan: understand the feedback that we need to make document smaller, have an idea of where to do that

Evan Wallace: understand the feedback that we need to make document smaller, have an idea of where to do that ←

19:02:57 <bparsia> Sorry I can't

Bijan Parsia: Sorry I can't ←

19:02:59 <alanr> k

Alan Ruttenberg: k ←

19:03:00 <alanr> bye

Alan Ruttenberg: bye ←

19:03:02 <bparsia> I'm already a bit late (

Bijan Parsia: I'm already a bit late ( ←

19:03:07 <Zakim> -bparsia

Zakim IRC Bot: -bparsia ←

19:03:35 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←

19:03:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room, cgolbrei, dlm

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room, cgolbrei, dlm ←

19:03:36 <Zakim> On IRC I see baojie, cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, vipul, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see baojie, cgolbrei, ekw, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, vipul, Achille, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, pha, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, bparsia, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot ←

19:03:58 <pha> vipul: still disagreement - are use cases in scope or not?

Vipul Kashyap: still disagreement - are use cases in scope or not? ←

19:04:22 <cgolbrei> UCR doc usually does have at least some

Christine Golbreich: UCR doc usually does have at least some ←

19:05:14 <bparsia> Not quite gone but strongly against use cases....our charter don't require them and I don't think they are all that helpful for our requriemetns document except as illustrations

Bijan Parsia: Not quite gone but strongly against use cases....our charter don't require them and I don't think they are all that helpful for our requriemetns document except as illustrations ←

19:05:38 <pha> ian: use cases are in scope

Ian Horrocks: use cases are in scope ←

19:07:13 <pha> alan: you need to know who the users are, but not necessarily to document that

Alan Ruttenberg: you need to know who the users are, but not necessarily to document that ←

19:08:57 <cgolbrei> cannot listen

Christine Golbreich: cannot listen ←

19:10:06 <pha> alan: vipul, evan, christine and jie to update requirements document considering the discussed scope (shorter, tighter) within four weeks

Alan Ruttenberg: vipul, evan, christine and jie to update requirements document considering the discussed scope (shorter, tighter) within four weeks ←

19:11:01 <pha> alan: put placeholders for language profiles that do not yet have a name

Alan Ruttenberg: put placeholders for language profiles that do not yet have a name ←

19:12:06 <pha> Topic: Annotations

11. Annotations

19:12:35 <Zakim> -cgolbrei

Zakim IRC Bot: -cgolbrei ←

19:13:31 <pha> boris: annotations right now do not have semantics, but you do want to reason over them

Boris Motik: annotations right now do not have semantics, but you do want to reason over them ←

19:13:41 <pha> ... proposal is similar to that of alan

... proposal is similar to that of alan ←

19:14:26 <pha> ... have a transformation of the original ontology to a new ontology in which annotations become logical information

... have a transformation of the original ontology to a new ontology in which annotations become logical information ←

19:15:18 <pha> ... semantics of annotations described in separate ontology

... semantics of annotations described in separate ontology ←

19:22:11 <pha> ... conceptually the same as proposal in AAAI'08 paper on metalevel information

(No events recorded for 6 minutes)

... conceptually the same as proposal in AAAI'08 paper on metalevel information ←

19:23:42 <Zakim> -dlm

Zakim IRC Bot: -dlm ←

19:23:48 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

19:24:08 <IanH> ack vipul

Ian Horrocks: ack vipul ←

19:25:46 <pha> alan: how can one relate axioms in the two ontologies?

Alan Ruttenberg: how can one relate axioms in the two ontologies? ←

19:26:13 <pha> boris: leave it up to tools

Boris Motik: leave it up to tools ←

19:28:19 <dlm> \me sorry i am going to have to drop off but if i can leave the request for whatever proposal we go with to consider that at least applications need to annotate annotations - some of my science applications have observer logs that we need to encode and annotate

Deborah McGuinness: \me sorry i am going to have to drop off but if i can leave the request for whatever proposal we go with to consider that at least applications need to annotate annotations - some of my science applications have observer logs that we need to encode and annotate ←

19:29:03 <afokoue> Zakim, Achille is afokoue

Achille Fokoue: Zakim, Achille is afokoue ←

19:29:03 <Zakim> sorry, afokoue, I do not recognize a party named 'Achille'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, afokoue, I do not recognize a party named 'Achille' ←

19:29:26 <pha> zhe: like it better than two file approach

Zhe Wu: like it better than two file approach ←

19:29:32 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

19:31:22 <pha> zhe: transformation is additional burden on implementors

Zhe Wu: transformation is additional burden on implementors ←

19:31:48 <pha> zhe: prefer to not spec it at all

Zhe Wu: prefer to not spec it at all ←

19:32:21 <pha> ... ok if it does not affect conformance

... ok if it does not affect conformance ←

19:33:02 <afokoue> Zakim, rename Achille to afokoue

Achille Fokoue: Zakim, rename Achille to afokoue ←

19:33:02 <Zakim> I don't understand 'rename Achille to afokoue', afokoue

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'rename Achille to afokoue', afokoue ←

19:38:20 <pha> michael: how expressive is it?

(No events recorded for 5 minutes)

Michael Schneider: how expressive is it? ←

19:42:32 <ekw> Peter and Boris paper mentioned in this discussion

Evan Wallace: Peter and Boris paper mentioned in this discussion ←

19:42:45 <ekw> http://www.comlab.ox.ac.uk/people/boris.motik/pubs/dhmgh08-metalevel-information.pd

Evan Wallace: http://www.comlab.ox.ac.uk/people/boris.motik/pubs/dhmgh08-metalevel-information.pd ←

19:43:32 <pha> pha: in the original ontology you only have atomic annotations

Peter Haase: in the original ontology you only have atomic annotations ←

19:43:57 <pfps> http://www.comlab.ox.ac.uk/people/boris.motik/pubs/dhmgh08-metalevel-information.pdf

Peter Patel-Schneider: http://www.comlab.ox.ac.uk/people/boris.motik/pubs/dhmgh08-metalevel-information.pdf ←

19:44:14 <pha> boris: our proposal does not touch the syntax

Boris Motik: our proposal does not touch the syntax ←

20:08:51 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Test_Case_Format

(No events recorded for 24 minutes)

Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Test_Case_Format ←

20:18:45 <sandro> scribe: jie

(No events recorded for 9 minutes)

(Scribe set to Jie Bao)

<IanH> Topic: Publication Schedule

12. Publication Schedule

20:19:19 <IanH> o Current working drafts

Ian Horrocks: o Current working drafts ←

20:19:19 <IanH>       + Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax (First Public Working Draft published 11 April 2008)

Ian Horrocks: + Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax (First Public Working Draft published 11 April 2008) ←

20:19:20 <IanH> 	  REPUBLISH?

Ian Horrocks: REPUBLISH? ←

20:19:20 <IanH>       + Profiles (First Public Working Draft published 11 April 2008)

Ian Horrocks: + Profiles (First Public Working Draft published 11 April 2008) ←

20:19:20 <IanH> 	  NEEDS WORK TO MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE

Ian Horrocks: NEEDS WORK TO MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE ←

20:19:21 <IanH>       + Primer (First Public Working Draft published 11 April 2008)

Ian Horrocks: + Primer (First Public Working Draft published 11 April 2008) ←

20:19:22 <IanH> 	  NEEDS WORK / NEW BLOOD?

Ian Horrocks: NEEDS WORK / NEW BLOOD? ←

20:19:24 <IanH> o Yet to be published

Ian Horrocks: o Yet to be published ←

20:19:26 <IanH>       + Test Cases

Ian Horrocks: + Test Cases ←

20:19:28 <IanH> o Should we publish?

Ian Horrocks: o Should we publish? ←

20:19:30 <IanH>       + Manchester Syntax

Ian Horrocks: + Manchester Syntax ←

20:19:32 <IanH> 	  WHAT IF ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT? (NOTE?)

Ian Horrocks: WHAT IF ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT? (NOTE?) ←

20:19:34 <IanH> o Recap and further discussion of choices we need to make, actions, and schedule before Last Call

Ian Horrocks: o Recap and further discussion of choices we need to make, actions, and schedule before Last Call ←

20:19:36 <IanH>   ALL CLEAR?

Ian Horrocks: ALL CLEAR? ←

20:19:38 <IanH> PROFILE NAMES?

Ian Horrocks: PROFILE NAMES? ←

20:19:40 <IanH>  ISSUE-130: Conformance, warnings, errors

Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-130: Conformance, warnings, errors ←

20:19:40 <trackbot> ISSUE-130 ACCEPTED: Conformance, warnings, errors notes added

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-130 ACCEPTED: Conformance, warnings, errors notes added ←

20:19:42 <IanH> Entity annotations status

Ian Horrocks: Entity annotations status ←

20:19:44 <IanH>     * Other Outstanding Issues

Ian Horrocks: * Other Outstanding Issues ←

20:19:46 <IanH>           o Issue 104 OWL 1.1 DL does not have a disallowed vocabulary

Ian Horrocks: o ISSUE-104 OWL 1.1 DL does not have a disallowed vocabulary ←

20:19:48 <IanH>           o Issue 56 Specify standard "repairs" for moving select RDF documents to OWL?

Ian Horrocks: o ISSUE-56 Specify standard "repairs" for moving select RDF documents to OWL? ←

20:19:50 <IanH>           o Issue 129 Desirable to have rdf:list vocabulary available for use in modeling in OWL 2

Ian Horrocks: o ISSUE-129 Desirable to have rdf:list vocabulary available for use in modeling in OWL 2 ←

20:19:51 <baojie> Ian: starts the last session

Ian Horrocks: starts the last session ←

20:19:59 <baojie> ... agenda as per IRC

... agenda as per IRC ←

20:20:53 <baojie> ... whether to publish a new version of the structural spec?

... whether to publish a new version of the structural spec? ←

20:21:23 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

20:21:48 <baojie> ... or the mapping document

... or the mapping document ←

20:22:10 <baojie> Mschnei: may publish in a few weeks a new working draft

Michael Schneider: may publish in a few weeks a new working draft ←

20:22:44 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

20:23:48 <baojie> Ian: republish the structural spec in 3-4 weeks

Ian Horrocks: republish the structural spec in 3-4 weeks ←

20:24:30 <baojie> ... possibly with user facing documents

... possibly with user facing documents ←

20:24:45 <baojie> ... full semantics, mapping

... full semantics, mapping ←

20:25:23 <baojie> MSmith: XML Serialization is not ready, major changes

Mike Smith: XML Serialization is not ready, major changes ←

20:27:05 <baojie> ... (think again) may publish

... (think again) may publish ←

20:29:05 <msmith> msmith: (correction) xml serialization should be published again, because it has changed in a way that is relevant to users

Mike Smith: (correction) xml serialization should be published again, because it has changed in a way that is relevant to users [ Scribe Assist by Mike Smith ] ←

20:29:08 <baojie> Ian: Profiles?

Ian Horrocks: Profiles? ←

20:29:23 <baojie> ... depends on OWL-R unificiation

... depends on OWL-R unificiation ←

20:29:39 <baojie> ... which still has a lot of debate

... which still has a lot of debate ←

20:29:52 <baojie> ... not ready to publish

... not ready to publish ←

20:29:57 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

20:30:08 <msmith> ian, I think that the outstanding DL-Lite issue is also worth waiting on

Mike Smith: ian, I think that the outstanding DL-Lite issue is also worth waiting on ←

20:30:08 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←

20:30:08 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room ←

20:30:09 <Zakim> On IRC I see ekw, Achille, m_schnei, baojie, cgolbrei, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ekw, Achille, m_schnei, baojie, cgolbrei, jar, Zhe, bmotik, dlm, Mirek, pfps, alanr, msmith, IanH, RRSAgent, Zakim, ewallace, Carsten, sandro, trackbot ←

20:30:26 <m_schnei> m_schnei: if there is a change to the functional syntax, then there will also be changes in the DL semantics and the RDF mapping (and possibly also the OWL/XML syntax)

Michael Schneider: if there is a change to the functional syntax, then there will also be changes in the DL semantics and the RDF mapping (and possibly also the OWL/XML syntax) [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

20:31:38 <baojie> pfps: need to clear up question about namespace

Peter Patel-Schneider: need to clear up question about namespace ←

20:31:58 <baojie> ... whether to reuse owl namespace

... whether to reuse owl namespace ←

20:32:38 <baojie> Ian: Primer?

Ian Horrocks: Primer? ←

20:33:20 <baojie> .. not changed much

.. not changed much ←

20:33:45 <baojie> pfps: I will push Bijan

Peter Patel-Schneider: I will push Bijan ←

20:33:48 <m_schnei> pfps: Primer is probably out of date

Peter Patel-Schneider: Primer is probably out of date [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

20:34:05 <baojie> ... i will go over primer

... i will go over primer ←

20:34:18 <baojie> ... to make sure it reflects the state of the art

... to make sure it reflects the state of the art ←

20:35:36 <baojie> baojie: Turtle syntax may also need to be considered

Jie Bao: Turtle syntax may also need to be considered ←

20:36:23 <baojie> Ian: potential publication schedule

Ian Horrocks: potential publication schedule ←

20:36:39 <baojie> pfps: need Bijan to edit the Primer

Peter Patel-Schneider: need Bijan to edit the Primer ←

20:36:42 <m_schnei> ian: if rpi wants Turtle in the primer, than probably Jie can work on it?

Ian Horrocks: if rpi wants Turtle in the primer, than probably Jie can work on it? [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

20:37:23 <baojie> baojie: inline review comments need to be addressed

Jie Bao: inline review comments need to be addressed ←

20:39:48 <baojie> pfps: editors need to make it clear how their edits address the comments

Peter Patel-Schneider: editors need to make it clear how their edits address the comments ←

20:40:49 <baojie> Ian: Hope to publish all documents in 4 weeks

Ian Horrocks: Hope to publish all documents in 4 weeks ←

20:41:20 <baojie> ... review due in 3 weeks

... review due in 3 weeks ←

20:42:07 <baojie> ... Aug 22

... Aug 22 ←

20:43:37 <baojie> ... Date to publish RDF (semantics)?

... Date to publish RDF (semantics)? ←

20:43:56 <sandro> Sandro: If any of Michael's editor's comments rise to the level of Issue, then he should talk to Chairs to get them raised as real Issues.

Sandro Hawke: If any of Michael's editor's comments rise to the level of Issue, then he should talk to Chairs to get them raised as real Issues. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

20:44:01 <baojie> Alan: I have RDF mapping comments need to be addressed

Alan Ruttenberg: I have RDF mapping comments need to be addressed ←

20:44:21 <baojie> s/Alan/AlanR

s/Alan/AlanR ←

20:44:56 <baojie> Ian: OWL Full Semantics

Ian Horrocks: OWL Full Semantics ←

20:45:11 <baojie> ... actions on Zhe, Peter, Mschnei to review

... actions on Zhe, Peter, Mschnei to review ←

20:46:31 <m_schnei> m_schnei: Full: after review on 22th, Michael will address as much as possible of the reviewer's points over the weekend, and add editor's notes to these points, which are too hard in that short time

Michael Schneider: Full: after review on 22th, Michael will address as much as possible of the reviewer's points over the weekend, and add editor's notes to these points, which are too hard in that short time [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

20:46:32 <baojie> Ian: Structural Spec, Semantics, Mapping to RDF Graph

Ian Horrocks: Structural Spec, Semantics, Mapping to RDF Graph ←

20:46:40 <sandro> Ian: republish Syntax, Semantics, and Mapping-to-RDF-Grapsh, in time with RDF-Based Semantics

Ian Horrocks: republish Syntax, Semantics, and Mapping-to-RDF-Grapsh, in time with RDF-Based Semantics [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

20:47:57 <baojie> ... who is going review those documents?

... who is going review those documents? ←

20:48:35 <sandro> deadline for reviews -- Aug 19

Sandro Hawke: deadline for reviews -- Aug 19 ←

20:50:04 <baojie> mschnei: I volunteer for the DL semantics

Michael Schneider: I volunteer for the DL semantics ←

20:51:08 <baojie> Sandro: documents need to be aligned

Sandro Hawke: documents need to be aligned ←

20:51:24 <m_schnei> m_schnei: the OWL Full Semantics has three references: old OWL 1 Full, RDF Semantics, and a generic

Michael Schneider: the OWL Full Semantics has three references: old OWL 1 Full, RDF Semantics, and a generic [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

20:51:45 <m_schnei>  ... reference to the Semantics document, which doesn't (much) talk about content

Michael Schneider: ... reference to the Semantics document, which doesn't (much) talk about content ←

20:53:36 <baojie> AlanR: if we can publish on the 3rd week of august,

Alan Ruttenberg: if we can publish on the 3rd week of august, ←

20:54:04 <sandro> s/august/september/

Sandro Hawke: s/august/september/ ←

20:54:20 <baojie> ... Sept 15

... Sept 15 ←

20:55:04 <sandro> Alan: maybe publish the two Semantics documents in August, as previously discussed....

Alan Ruttenberg: maybe publish the two Semantics documents in August, as previously discussed.... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

20:55:58 <m_schnei> m_schnei: correction: actually, Full document will depend on DL document, because there will be a section about a strong semantic relationship between these two semantics --> needed to have synced publishing

Michael Schneider: correction: actually, Full document will depend on DL document, because there will be a section about a strong semantic relationship between these two semantics --> needed to have synced publishing [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

20:56:37 <baojie> Ian: how about get everything done on owl full semantics, and put it on the shelf for now

Ian Horrocks: how about get everything done on owl full semantics, and put it on the shelf for now ←

20:57:01 <baojie> ... stick to the schedule for OWL Full

... stick to the schedule for OWL Full ←

20:57:11 <sandro> Ian: Okay, let's finish the review process on RDF-Based Semantics, being done on Aug 25, but don't publish it until the others are also ready to publish.

Ian Horrocks: Okay, let's finish the review process on RDF-Based Semantics, being done on Aug 25, but don't publish it until the others are also ready to publish. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

20:57:19 <sandro> Ian: (hearing no objection)

Ian Horrocks: (hearing no objection) [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

20:57:35 <sandro> Ian: And then publish everything on 15 September.

Ian Horrocks: And then publish everything on 15 September. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

20:58:09 <baojie> ... structural spec: what work is needed?

... structural spec: what work is needed? ←

20:58:17 <baojie> Boris: not much

Boris Motik: not much ←

20:58:33 <baojie> Ian: Need reveiwers for various documents

Ian Horrocks: Need reveiwers for various documents ←

20:58:34 <baojie> Ian: Semantics?

Ian Horrocks: Semantics? ←

20:58:51 <baojie> MSchnei: me

Michael Schneider: me ←

20:59:11 <baojie> Ian: need to get reviews back by 8 sept

Ian Horrocks: need to get reviews back by 8 sept ←

20:59:53 <baojie> Ian: Syntax: action on msmith

Ian Horrocks: Syntax: action on msmith ←

20:59:58 <baojie> Ian: Profile: action on me

Ian Horrocks: Profile: action on me ←

21:00:13 <baojie> AlanR: RPI review?

Alan Ruttenberg: RPI review? ←

21:00:33 <baojie> baojie: RDF semantics: action on me

Jie Bao: RDF semantics: action on me ←

21:02:24 <baojie> ... and adding Turtle syntax to primer, which will make me busy

... and adding Turtle syntax to primer, which will make me busy ←

21:02:39 <baojie> ... I'm not sure if deb will be available

... I'm not sure if deb will be available ←

21:03:04 <baojie> AlanR: Mapping: action on me

Alan Ruttenberg: Mapping: action on me ←

21:04:30 <baojie> Ian: Jie, could you check if RPI can take another review (Profile, Structural Spec) ?

Ian Horrocks: Jie, could you check if RPI can take another review (Profile, Structural Spec) ? ←

21:04:49 <baojie> Pfps: only half of the WG is active

Peter Patel-Schneider: only half of the WG is active ←

21:05:24 <baojie> Ian: need to send to the whole WG ; if you care, better look now

Ian Horrocks: need to send to the whole WG ; if you care, better look now ←

21:05:49 <baojie> Sandro: we have about 30 actions open

Sandro Hawke: we have about 30 actions open ←

21:06:07 <baojie> s/actions/issues

s/actions/issues ←

21:07:03 <baojie> Ian: should avoid vague issues!

Ian Horrocks: should avoid vague issues! ←

21:08:03 <sandro> list of open issues: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/open

Sandro Hawke: list of open issues: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/open ←

21:08:07 <msmith> action msmith to review syntax document

Mike Smith: action msmith to review syntax document ←

21:08:07 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - msmith

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

21:08:20 <msmith> action michaelsm to review syntax document

Mike Smith: action michaelsm to review syntax document ←

21:08:20 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - michaelsm

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

21:08:32 <pfps> ACTION: pfps to review full semantics between 19 and 22 August

ACTION: pfps to review full semantics between 19 and 22 August ←

21:08:32 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - pfps

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

21:08:49 <msmith> ‬action michael to review syntax document

Mike Smith: ‬action michael to review syntax document ←

21:08:56 <pfps> ACTION: Patel-Schneider to review full semantics between 19 and 22 August

ACTION: Patel-Schneider to review full semantics between 19 and 22 August ←

21:08:56 <trackbot> Created ACTION-184 - Review full semantics between 19 and 22 August [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-184 - Review full semantics between 19 and 22 August [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-05]. ←

21:10:11 <msmith> action michael to review syntax document

Mike Smith: action michael to review syntax document ←

21:10:11 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - michael

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - michael ←

21:10:11 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. msmith9, mschneid, msintek)

Trackbot IRC Bot: Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. msmith9, mschneid, msintek) ←

21:10:13 <m_schnei> ACTION: m_schnei to review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August

ACTION: m_schnei to review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August ←

21:10:13 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - m_schnei

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

21:10:24 <m_schnei> ACTION: Michael Schneider to review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August

ACTION: Michael Schneider to review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August ←

21:10:24 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Michael

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Michael ←

21:10:24 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. msmith9, mschneid, msintek)

Trackbot IRC Bot: Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. msmith9, mschneid, msintek) ←

21:10:38 <msmith> action msmith9 to review syntax document

Mike Smith: action msmith9 to review syntax document ←

21:10:38 <trackbot> Created ACTION-185 - Review syntax document [on Michael Smith - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-185 - Review syntax document [on Michael Smith - due 2008-08-05]. ←

21:10:39 <m_schnei> ACTION: mschneid to review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August

ACTION: mschneid to review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August ←

21:10:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-186 - Review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August [on Michael Schneider - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-186 - Review DL semantics between 19 and 22 August [on Michael Schneider - due 2008-08-05]. ←

21:10:50 <baojie> ACTION: Jie to add turtle syntax to the Primer

ACTION: Jie to add turtle syntax to the Primer ←

21:10:50 <trackbot> Created ACTION-187 - Add turtle syntax to the Primer [on Jie Bao - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-187 - Add turtle syntax to the Primer [on Jie Bao - due 2008-08-05]. ←

21:11:38 <baojie> Action: Ian review Profiles

ACTION: Ian review Profiles ←

21:11:38 <trackbot> Created ACTION-188 - Review Profiles [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-188 - Review Profiles [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-08-05]. ←

21:12:11 <baojie> Action: Alan review RDF Mapping

ACTION: Alan review RDF Mapping ←

21:12:11 <trackbot> Created ACTION-189 - Review RDF Mapping [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-189 - Review RDF Mapping [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-08-05]. ←

<IanH> Topic: Test Cases

13. Test Cases

21:12:43 <baojie> Ian: move to test cases

Ian Horrocks: move to test cases ←

21:13:52 <msmith> Test document, as it now exists is at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test

Mike Smith: Test document, as it now exists is at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test ←

21:14:46 <baojie> Msmith: changes to test types described at end of doc

Mike Smith: changes to test types described at end of doc ←

21:15:35 <baojie> Sandro: have you considered importing

Sandro Hawke: have you considered importing ←

21:15:48 <baojie> Msmith: no

Mike Smith: no ←

21:15:57 <baojie> Msmith: changes

Mike Smith: changes ←

21:16:30 <sandro> Sandro: you're missing owl:ImportsTest, and it'll be hard to do with this approach of having the content in the wiki/test-file.

Sandro Hawke: you're missing owl:ImportsTest, and it'll be hard to do with this approach of having the content in the wiki/test-file. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

21:16:59 <baojie> ... http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test#Changes_From_WebOnt_Tests

... http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test#Changes_From_WebOnt_Tests ←

21:17:44 <baojie> AlanR: imports are important

Alan Ruttenberg: imports are important ←

21:18:31 <baojie> Msmith: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/GuideToTestTemplate

Mike Smith: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/GuideToTestTemplate ←

21:18:50 <baojie> ... this is a template to create test cases

... this is a template to create test cases ←

21:19:24 <baojie> ... can be in different syntaxes

... can be in different syntaxes ←

21:19:50 <baojie> ... there are examples

... there are examples ←

21:20:22 <baojie> ... e.g., http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/TestCase:Datatype-Primitive-Disjointness-001

... e.g., http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/TestCase:Datatype-Primitive-Disjointness-001 ←

21:21:04 <IanH> Action: Ian Send email to WG about review responsibilities for forthcoming working drafts

ACTION: Ian Send email to WG about review responsibilities for forthcoming working drafts ←

21:21:04 <baojie> ... each example has categories

... each example has categories ←

21:21:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-190 - Send email to WG about review responsibilities for forthcoming working drafts [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-190 - Send email to WG about review responsibilities for forthcoming working drafts [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-08-05]. ←

21:21:40 <baojie> ... will use a semantic wiki to edit

... will use a semantic wiki to edit ←

21:23:05 <baojie> ... need time to go over webont example to reflect OWL 2 changes

... need time to go over webont example to reflect OWL 2 changes ←

21:23:53 <IanH> Action: Jie to solicit RPI reviews of key documents

ACTION: Jie to solicit RPI reviews of key documents ←

21:23:53 <trackbot> Created ACTION-191 - Solicit RPI reviews of key documents [on Jie Bao - due 2008-08-05].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-191 - Solicit RPI reviews of key documents [on Jie Bao - due 2008-08-05]. ←

21:24:00 <baojie> Msmith: input one syntax, other syntaxes will be populated

Mike Smith: input one syntax, other syntaxes will be populated ←

21:24:48 <baojie> Alan: we need test case for RDF mapping

Alan Ruttenberg: we need test case for RDF mapping ←

21:26:13 <baojie> Alan: normative syntaxes will go to test

Alan Ruttenberg: normative syntaxes will go to test ←

21:27:28 <baojie> Mschnei: there are different test cases

Michael Schneider: there are different test cases ←

21:28:39 <m_schnei> m_schnei: I think AlanR has several kinds of tests in mind:

Michael Schneider: I think AlanR has several kinds of tests in mind: [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

21:29:17 <m_schnei> m_schnei: first, negative inverse-mapping tests, where certain RDF graphs are rejected, because they are not DL, or one of the fragments

Michael Schneider: first, negative inverse-mapping tests, where certain RDF graphs are rejected, because they are not DL, or one of the fragments [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

21:29:43 <m_schnei> m_schnei: second, if an RDF graph is accepted, then is the resulting FS is as expected

Michael Schneider: second, if an RDF graph is accepted, then is the resulting FS is as expected [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

21:30:08 <baojie> Sandro: it is not practical to check (all syntaxes correctness?)

Sandro Hawke: it is not practical to check (all syntaxes correctness?) ←

21:30:28 <m_schnei> m_schnei: concern: perhaps in some cases inverse mapping not completely derterministic (is this right for the reverse mapping?)

Michael Schneider: concern: perhaps in some cases inverse mapping not completely derterministic (is this right for the reverse mapping?) [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

21:31:23 <baojie> Alan: need a new category: syntax checking test

Alan Ruttenberg: need a new category: syntax checking test ←

21:31:32 <sandro> Sandro: Alan wants an owl:SyntaxConverstionTest

Sandro Hawke: Alan wants an owl:SyntaxConverstionTest [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

21:31:49 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

21:32:33 <baojie> Ian: if we need conformance test case?

Ian Horrocks: if we need conformance test case? ←

21:32:33 <msmith> Test cases can be created by creating a new wiki page, using the TestCase: prefix in the page name and copying and pasting from http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/GuideToTestTemplate

Mike Smith: Test cases can be created by creating a new wiki page, using the TestCase: prefix in the page name and copying and pasting from http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/GuideToTestTemplate ←

21:32:33 <msmith> For examples, see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/User:MikeSmith#Test_Cases

Mike Smith: For examples, see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/User:MikeSmith#Test_Cases ←

21:32:36 <msmith> bye

Mike Smith: bye ←

21:33:22 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#conformance

Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#conformance ←

21:34:22 <sandro> See also http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#Conformance_Clauses

Sandro Hawke: See also http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#Conformance_Clauses ←

21:35:08 <baojie> Mschnei: look at the old owl test case, there is OWL full test cases

Michael Schneider: look at the old owl test case, there is OWL full test cases ←

21:35:50 <baojie> Ian: do we have schedule for test case publication?

Ian Horrocks: do we have schedule for test case publication? ←

21:36:10 <sandro> m_schnei, there are 41 OWL Full Entailments tests and 7 OWL Full Inconsistency tests (and 2 import ones).

Sandro Hawke: m_schnei, there are 41 OWL Full Entailments tests and 7 OWL Full Inconsistency tests (and 2 import ones). ←

21:36:10 <baojie> Msmith: not now

Mike Smith: not now ←

21:36:37 <m_schnei> thanks, sandro, that's a lot... to review :-)

Michael Schneider: thanks, sandro, that's a lot... to review :-) ←

21:36:38 <sandro> m_schnei, see http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out for one easy view on them.

Sandro Hawke: m_schnei, see http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out for one easy view on them. ←

21:36:46 <baojie> ... once we have them in semantic wiki

... once we have them in semantic wiki ←

21:36:59 <baojie> .. in 2-3 weeks

.. in 2-3 weeks ←

21:37:13 <sandro> m_schnei, more specifically: http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out#table_1_Approved%20Full

Sandro Hawke: m_schnei, more specifically: http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out#table_1_Approved%20Full ←

21:37:23 <baojie> Ian: is it realistic to ask for review?

Ian Horrocks: is it realistic to ask for review? ←

21:37:30 <baojie> Msmith: no

Mike Smith: no ←

21:39:02 <baojie> Ian: what is left?

Ian Horrocks: what is left? ←

21:39:14 <baojie> ... 20 minutes more

... 20 minutes more ←

21:39:41 <baojie> ... brain storming

... brain storming ←

<IanH> Topic: Manchester Syntax

14. Manchester Syntax

21:40:03 <baojie> ... Manchester syntax

... Manchester syntax ←

21:40:29 <baojie> Alan: the part on instances is not ready

Alan Ruttenberg: the part on instances is not ready ←

21:40:42 <m_schnei> ian: idea is to publish Manchester Syntax as a Note, not a Rec

Ian Horrocks: idea is to publish Manchester Syntax as a Note, not a Rec [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

21:40:48 <IanH> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/ManchesterSyntax

Ian Horrocks: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/ManchesterSyntax ←

21:41:04 <baojie> zhe: who used Machester syntax

Zhe Wu: who used Machester syntax ←

21:41:15 <baojie> Alan: proetge, TComposer

Alan Ruttenberg: proetge, TComposer ←

21:41:22 <alanr> lsw

Alan Ruttenberg: lsw ←

21:41:38 <baojie> ...topbraid composer

...topbraid composer ←

21:42:59 <baojie> sandro: we can't decide to publish it to be note by us

Sandro Hawke: we can't decide to publish it to be note by us ←

21:43:03 <m_schnei> m_schnei: are we actually free to decide to *not* publish Manchester as a note, given the fact that we use it in a Rec track document (the primer)?

Michael Schneider: are we actually free to decide to *not* publish Manchester as a note, given the fact that we use it in a Rec track document (the primer)? [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

21:43:15 <baojie> ... first as working draft

... first as working draft ←

21:43:31 <m_schnei> pfps: we might decide to publish it elsewhere (not as a Note)

Peter Patel-Schneider: we might decide to publish it elsewhere (not as a Note) [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ] ←

21:44:10 <baojie> Zhe: we will not use Manchester syntax

Zhe Wu: we will not use Manchester syntax ←

21:44:54 <baojie> Ian: it is mainly about presentation, used in Primer

Ian Horrocks: it is mainly about presentation, used in Primer ←

21:45:21 <baojie> Jie: I'm neutral if it is a note

Jie Bao: I'm neutral if it is a note ←

21:47:27 <baojie> Alan: my concern is that not all of the Manchester syntax is tested

Alan Ruttenberg: my concern is that not all of the Manchester syntax is tested ←

21:47:29 <sandro> Alan: I'm concerned that not all of the Manchester Syntax is tested yet.   I'll see what I can do to help make sure it is tested soon.

Alan Ruttenberg: I'm concerned that not all of the Manchester Syntax is tested yet. I'll see what I can do to help make sure it is tested soon. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

21:48:06 <baojie> Ian: 15 minutes

Ian Horrocks: 15 minutes ←

21:48:47 <baojie> ... restaurant   :)

... restaurant :) ←

21:49:12 <m_schnei> Topic: Profile Names

15. Profile Names

21:49:59 <baojie> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profile_Names

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profile_Names ←

21:50:34 <baojie> Ian: naming is quite political

Ian Horrocks: naming is quite political ←

21:51:49 <baojie> Sandro: let go through proposals

Sandro Hawke: let go through proposals ←

21:52:38 <baojie> Ian: Zhe, if we use OWL-SQL, are you ok with it?

Ian Horrocks: Zhe, if we use OWL-SQL, are you ok with it? ←

21:52:44 <baojie> Zhe: may not

Zhe Wu: may not ←

21:52:49 <baojie> ... OWL-R is better

... OWL-R is better ←

21:53:21 <baojie> Sandro: OWL-Rule looks a rule language

Sandro Hawke: OWL-Rule looks a rule language ←

21:54:21 <baojie> Zhe: the 2-letter proposal looks ok

Zhe Wu: the 2-letter proposal looks ok ←

21:54:36 <baojie> Ian: looks not bad to me

Ian Horrocks: looks not bad to me ←

21:56:10 <alanr> s/ql/sql/

Alan Ruttenberg: s/ql/sql/ ←

21:56:31 <baojie> Ian: DL, EL, QL, RL, XL

Ian Horrocks: DL, EL, QL, RL, XL ←

21:57:17 <baojie> ... looks this proposal has some attraction

... looks this proposal has some attraction ←

21:58:41 <baojie> ... may send to the group to solve the naming issue

... may send to the group to solve the naming issue ←

<IanH> Subtopic: Strawpoll on two letter names

15.1. Strawpoll on two letter names

21:59:08 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: Use the "Two Letter" row on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profile_Names (OWL 2 DL, OWL 2 EL, OWL 2 QL, OWL 2 RL, OWL 2 XL)

STRAWPOLL: Use the "Two Letter" row on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profile_Names (OWL 2 DL, OWL 2 EL, OWL 2 QL, OWL 2 RL, OWL 2 XL) ←

21:59:09 <pfps> +0.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

Peter Patel-Schneider: +0.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 ←

21:59:23 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1 ←

21:59:26 <alanr> +1

Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←

21:59:28 <Zhe> +1

Zhe Wu: +1 ←

21:59:32 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1 ←

21:59:33 <sandro> achille +1

Sandro Hawke: achille +1 ←

21:59:34 <baojie> +3.1415926

+3.1415926 ←

21:59:36 <m_schnei> +1

Michael Schneider: +1 ←

22:00:29 <sandro> Ian: agreement here.    put on agenda for next week.

Ian Horrocks: agreement here. put on agenda for next week. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

22:00:55 <sandro> ADJOURN!

Sandro Hawke: ADJOURN! ←

This revision (#11) generated 2008-08-04 22:47:01 UTC by 'ihorrock2', comments: None

OWL Working Group

Minutes of 29 July 2008

1. datatype roundup

1.1. ISSUE-126 : list of normative datatype

1.2. Strawpoll on owl:dateTime -v- xsd:dateTime

2. N-ary datatype

2.1. Strawpoll on N-ary document outside main spec

3. Break

4. OWL-R ISSUE-116

5. OWL Full

6. MOF (ISSUE-134)

7. Structural Equivalence of Literals

8. Lunch

9. quick reference

10. requirements

11. Annotations

12. Publication Schedule

13. Test Cases

14. Manchester Syntax

15. Profile Names

15.1. Strawpoll on two letter names