16:34:33 <bmotik> Zakim, this will be owl
Boris Motik: Zakim, this will be owl ←
16:34:33 <Zakim> ok, bmotik; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 26 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, bmotik; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 26 minutes ←
16:53:27 <Rinke> scribenick: Rinke
(No events recorded for 18 minutes)
(Scribe set to Rinke Hoekstra)
16:54:10 <Rinke> zakim, this will be owl
zakim, this will be owl ←
16:54:10 <Zakim> ok, Rinke; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Rinke; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 6 minutes ←
16:55:08 <bijan> bijan has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.05.27/Agenda
Bijan Parsia: bijan has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.05.27/Agenda ←
16:55:50 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started ←
16:55:57 <Zakim> +??P14
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14 ←
16:56:08 <bijan> zakim, ??p14 is me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, ??p14 is me ←
16:56:08 <Zakim> +bijan; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bijan; got it ←
16:56:20 <Zakim> +??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15 ←
16:56:28 <Rinke> zakim, ??P15 is me
zakim, ??P15 is me ←
16:56:28 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
16:56:54 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
zakim, mute me ←
16:56:57 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
16:57:05 <Zakim> +??P9
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9 ←
16:57:14 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P9 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P9 is me ←
16:57:14 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
16:57:30 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
16:57:38 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
16:57:38 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
16:57:40 <Zakim> +IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH ←
16:57:51 <Zakim> +Peter_Patel-michael_schneiderer
Zakim IRC Bot: +Peter_Patel-michael_schneiderer ←
16:58:22 <IanH> zakim, Peter_Patel-michael_schneiderer is pfps
Ian Horrocks: zakim, Peter_Patel-michael_schneiderer is pfps ←
16:58:22 <Zakim> +pfps; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pfps; got it ←
16:58:50 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
16:58:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, pfps
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, pfps ←
16:58:52 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot ←
16:59:31 <IanH> IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.05.27/Agenda
Ian Horrocks: IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.05.27/Agenda ←
16:59:47 <IanH> RRSAgent, make records public
Ian Horrocks: RRSAgent, make records public ←
16:59:47 <Zakim> +alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: +alanr ←
17:00:08 <IanH> ScribeNick: Rinke
17:00:09 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:00:09 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, pfps, alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, pfps, alanr ←
17:00:11 <Zakim> On IRC I see alanr, michael_schneider, IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see alanr, michael_schneider, IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot ←
17:00:39 <Zakim> +zimmer
Zakim IRC Bot: +zimmer ←
17:00:41 <IanH> zakim, mute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, mute me ←
17:00:41 <Zakim> IanH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should now be muted ←
17:01:06 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:01:12 <michael_schneider> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
17:01:12 <Zakim> +michael_schneider; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +michael_schneider; got it ←
17:01:16 <michael_schneider> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:01:16 <Zakim> michael_schneider should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should now be muted ←
17:01:28 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau ←
17:01:29 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau ←
17:01:34 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:01:41 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
17:01:41 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
17:01:42 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
17:01:53 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:01:53 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:02:12 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
17:02:13 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:02:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH (muted), pfps, alanr, zimmer, michael_schneider (muted), bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH (muted), pfps, alanr, zimmer, michael_schneider (muted), bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, Ivan ←
17:02:16 <Zakim> On IRC I see hendler, MarkusK_, uli, bcuencagrau, ivan, alanr, michael_schneider, IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see hendler, MarkusK_, uli, bcuencagrau, ivan, alanr, michael_schneider, IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot ←
17:02:27 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aaaa ←
17:03:03 <hendler> zakim, aaaa is hendler
James Hendler: zakim, aaaa is hendler ←
17:03:03 <Zakim> +hendler; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +hendler; got it ←
17:03:05 <Zakim> +??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←
17:03:12 <Rinke> topic: Admin
17:03:18 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:03:18 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:03:19 <uli> zakim, ??P3 is me
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P3 is me ←
17:03:19 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:03:19 <Zakim> +uli; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +uli; got it ←
17:03:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH (muted), pfps, alanr, zimmer, michael_schneider (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), MarkusK_, Ivan, hendler, uli
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan, Rinke (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH (muted), pfps, alanr, zimmer, michael_schneider (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), MarkusK_, Ivan, hendler, uli ←
17:03:24 <Zakim> On IRC I see ewallace, hendler, MarkusK_, uli, bcuencagrau, ivan, alanr, michael_schneider, IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ewallace, hendler, MarkusK_, uli, bcuencagrau, ivan, alanr, michael_schneider, IanH, zimmer, Rinke, bmotik, bijan, pfps, RRSAgent, Zakim, sandro, trackbot ←
17:03:26 <bcuencagrau> how about now?
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: how about now? ←
17:03:27 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
17:03:30 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:03:30 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:03:37 <Rinke> subtopic: agenda amendments?
17:03:46 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
17:03:48 <alanr> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009May/0329.html
Alan Ruttenberg: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009May/0329.html ←
17:03:53 <alanr> Agenda amendment
Alan Ruttenberg: Agenda amendment ←
17:03:59 <Rinke> alanr: had a question out this morning... see if we have time for it
Alan Ruttenberg: had a question out this morning... see if we have time for it ←
17:04:09 <Rinke> alanr: no actions due
Alan Ruttenberg: no actions due ←
17:04:19 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau ←
17:04:22 <Rinke> subtopic: previous minutes
17:04:28 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mut me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mut me ←
17:04:28 <Zakim> I don't understand 'mut me', bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'mut me', bcuencagrau ←
17:04:29 <michael_schneider> alan, this is pretty technical, can we avoid have this on *this* telco?
Michael Schneider: alan, this is pretty technical, can we avoid have this on *this* telco? ←
17:04:30 <IanH> look OK to me
Ian Horrocks: look OK to me ←
17:04:35 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:04:35 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:04:41 <pfps> acceptable minutes
Peter Patel-Schneider: acceptable minutes ←
17:04:42 <Rinke> PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (20 May)
PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (20 May) ←
17:04:51 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:05:01 <Zakim> + +1.202.408.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.202.408.aabb ←
17:05:07 <Rinke> RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (20 May)
RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (20 May) ←
17:05:24 <Rinke> topic: last call and CR
17:05:28 <Rinke> subtopic: rdf:text
17:05:37 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
17:05:41 <alanr> a lot of static
Alan Ruttenberg: a lot of static ←
17:06:04 <zimmer> yes
Antoine Zimmermann: yes ←
17:06:06 <bcuencagrau> I am
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: I am ←
17:06:09 <sandro> zakim, who is talking?
Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is talking? ←
17:06:15 <pfps> sandro: the meeting was rather productive
Sandro Hawke: the meeting was rather productive [ Scribe Assist by Peter Patel-Schneider ] ←
17:06:20 <Zakim> sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: hendler (44%), zimmer (64%), alanr (52%), Sandro (1%), msmith (77%)
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: hendler (44%), zimmer (64%), alanr (52%), Sandro (1%), msmith (77%) ←
17:06:25 <Zakim> +??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15 ←
17:06:31 <Rinke> zakim, ??P15 is me
zakim, ??P15 is me ←
17:06:31 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
17:06:32 <pfps> sandro: there was agreement on the general outlines of a proposal
Sandro Hawke: there was agreement on the general outlines of a proposal [ Scribe Assist by Peter Patel-Schneider ] ←
17:06:33 <alanr> PROPOSED: the name of the rdf:text datatype be changed to rdf:PlainLiteral
PROPOSED: the name of the rdf:text datatype be changed to rdf:PlainLiteral ←
17:06:33 <sandro> msmith, that did it.
Sandro Hawke: msmith, that did it. ←
17:06:33 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
zakim, mute me ←
17:06:33 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
17:06:54 <Zakim> +Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe ←
17:06:56 <Zhe> zakim, mute me
17:06:56 <Zakim> Zhe should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should now be muted ←
17:07:03 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:07:04 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:07:04 <zimmer> zakim, mute me
Antoine Zimmermann: zakim, mute me ←
17:07:04 <Zakim> zimmer should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: zimmer should now be muted ←
17:07:05 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:07:06 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
17:07:09 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
17:07:11 <msmith> +1
Mike Smith: +1 ←
17:07:12 <MarkusK_> +1 FZI
Markus Krötzsch: +1 FZI ←
17:07:14 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
17:07:14 <zimmer> +1 (DERI)
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 (DERI) ←
17:07:14 <Rinke> Rinke: +1 Amsterdam
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 Amsterdam ←
17:07:15 <Zhe> sorry what is the vote for?
Zhe Wu: sorry what is the vote for? ←
17:07:17 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
17:07:21 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
17:07:22 <alanr> PROPOSED: the name of the rdf:text datatype be changed to rdf:PlainLiteral
PROPOSED: the name of the rdf:text datatype be changed to rdf:PlainLiteral ←
17:07:30 <hendler> +1 RPI
James Hendler: +1 RPI ←
17:07:34 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is me
Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is me ←
17:07:34 <Zakim> +Achille; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it ←
17:07:39 <IanH> +1 (Oxford)
Ian Horrocks: +1 (Oxford) ←
17:07:46 <Zhe> 0
17:07:53 <Rinke> RESOLVED: the name of the rdf:text datatype be changed to rdf:PlainLiteral
RESOLVED: the name of the rdf:text datatype be changed to rdf:PlainLiteral ←
17:08:03 <hendler> oops - RPI should be 0 on that
James Hendler: oops - RPI should be 0 on that ←
17:08:06 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
17:08:07 <pfps> We could vote, but lot's of would have to vote -1
Peter Patel-Schneider: We could vote, but lot's of would have to vote -1 ←
17:08:22 <Rinke> alanr: not voting on accepting rdf:text/rdf:plainliteral as CR
Alan Ruttenberg: not voting on accepting rdf:text/rdf:plainliteral as CR ←
17:08:29 <Rinke> subtopic: CR exit criteria
17:08:30 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria ←
17:08:46 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:08:51 <Rinke> alanr: if jim could put in the wording changes that he is proposing
Alan Ruttenberg: if jim could put in the wording changes that he is proposing ←
17:08:51 <pfps> Zhe had a truncated message on this, is Jim going to provide the pointer?
Peter Patel-Schneider: Zhe had a truncated message on this, is Jim going to provide the pointer? ←
17:08:53 <MarkusK_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009May/0319.html
Markus Krötzsch: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009May/0319.html ←
17:08:55 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:08:55 <IanH> ack ianh
Ian Horrocks: ack ianh ←
17:09:21 <Zhe> me?
17:09:22 <Zakim> +msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: +msmith ←
17:09:23 <IanH> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria
Ian Horrocks: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria ←
17:09:30 <Rinke> IanH: there have been ongoing changes.. the wording on the webpage has changed several times (in small ways). People should look there now, and not assume they know what it says
Ian Horrocks: there have been ongoing changes.. the wording on the webpage has changed several times (in small ways). People should look there now, and not assume they know what it says ←
17:09:33 <Zakim> -michael_schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -michael_schneider ←
17:09:35 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:09:40 <hendler> q+
James Hendler: q+ ←
17:09:42 <pfps> q+
17:09:42 <Zhe> pfps, I don't understand
Zhe Wu: pfps, I don't understand ←
17:10:03 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:10:03 <MarkusK_> pfps, Jie sent another mail that is complete
Markus Krötzsch: pfps, Jie sent another mail that is complete ←
17:10:25 <pfps> q+
17:10:31 <Rinke> hendler: I like what IanH did on the profiles. I don't see that it has to be one of those that illustrates. each of the implementable benefits needs to be demonstrated, and we need to show implementations
James Hendler: I like what IanH did on the profiles. I don't see that it has to be one of those that illustrates. each of the implementable benefits needs to be demonstrated, and we need to show implementations ←
17:10:53 <Rinke> hendler: if you just drop the 'of'...
James Hendler: if you just drop the 'of'... ←
17:10:57 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:11:13 <Rinke> pfps: I am opposed to requiring that each of the benefits need to be demonstrated in a current implementation
Peter Patel-Schneider: I am opposed to requiring that each of the benefits need to be demonstrated in a current implementation ←
17:11:32 <Rinke> pfps: if we provide 10 implementable benefits, we have demonstrated the utility of the profile
Peter Patel-Schneider: if we provide 10 implementable benefits, we have demonstrated the utility of the profile ←
17:11:35 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:11:44 <hendler> q+
James Hendler: q+ ←
17:11:47 <bijan> Objective vs. goal?
Bijan Parsia: Objective vs. goal? ←
17:11:50 <alanr> ack hendler
Alan Ruttenberg: ack hendler ←
17:11:52 <sandro> yeah, existance seems good enough to me....
Sandro Hawke: yeah, existance seems good enough to me.... ←
17:11:53 <Rinke> pfps: if we provide two implementable benefits, we have succeeded (as we only have a few real benefits)
Peter Patel-Schneider: if we provide two implementable benefits, we have succeeded (as we only have a few real benefits) ←
17:12:07 <pfps> q+
17:12:17 <alanr> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
17:12:32 <Rinke> hendler: don't agree with you on that one peter. We need to prove that the benefits really exist
James Hendler: don't agree with you on that one peter. We need to prove that the benefits really exist ←
17:12:36 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:12:45 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:13:07 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
17:13:10 <alanr> ack alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: ack alanr ←
17:13:15 <michael_schneider> zakim, ??P2 is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, ??P2 is me ←
17:13:15 <Zakim> +michael_schneider; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +michael_schneider; got it ←
17:13:17 <alanr> EL = Can deal with large numbers of classes; polynomial time reasoning;
Alan Ruttenberg: EL = Can deal with large numbers of classes; polynomial time reasoning; ←
17:13:18 <alanr> QL = LOGSPACE data complexity for query answering; implementable via query rewriting;
Alan Ruttenberg: QL = LOGSPACE data complexity for query answering; implementable via query rewriting; ←
17:13:18 <alanr> RL = implementation using rule-based technologies; sound and complete for certain kinds of query.
Alan Ruttenberg: RL = implementation using rule-based technologies; sound and complete for certain kinds of query. ←
17:13:18 <michael_schneider> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:13:18 <Zakim> michael_schneider should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should now be muted ←
17:13:32 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:13:36 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:13:37 <Rinke> pfps: I completely disagree. If we have features that we don't have implementations of, then YES. The beauty of some of the benefits is intrinsic, and independent of implementation.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I completely disagree. If we have features that we don't have implementations of, then YES. The beauty of some of the benefits is intrinsic, and independent of implementation. ←
17:14:04 <pfps> q+
17:14:09 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:14:12 <Rinke> IanH: maybe, making it less abstract makes some of peter's concerns go away. Sympathise with him, but we can actually satisfy exit criteria with respect to what's there
Ian Horrocks: maybe, making it less abstract makes some of peter's concerns go away. Sympathise with him, but we can actually satisfy exit criteria with respect to what's there ←
17:14:18 <hendler> q+
James Hendler: q+ ←
17:14:56 <Rinke> pfps: for EL if you meet the second one, you can meet the others easily. Only matters for EL. The first is squishy, the second (polinomial time reasoning) is non-squishy
Peter Patel-Schneider: for EL if you meet the second one, you can meet the others easily. Only matters for EL. The first is squishy, the second (polinomial time reasoning) is non-squishy ←
17:15:05 <sandro> +1 put the one we're gunna go for.
Sandro Hawke: +1 put the one we're gunna go for. ←
17:15:06 <Rinke> pfps: why not push the one we want to go for then?
Peter Patel-Schneider: why not push the one we want to go for then? ←
17:15:24 <Rinke> alanr: EL polinomial, QL rewritable to SQL... for RL...?
Alan Ruttenberg: EL polinomial, QL rewritable to SQL... for RL...? ←
17:15:33 <alanr> ack hendler
Alan Ruttenberg: ack hendler ←
17:15:33 <Rinke> hendler: implementable using rule-based technologies
James Hendler: implementable using rule-based technologies ←
17:15:36 <sandro> +1 implementable using rule-based technologies.
Sandro Hawke: +1 implementable using rule-based technologies. ←
17:15:56 <Rinke> hendler: ok with that for QL and RL. EL is different, there is no way to prove via implementation that something is polinomial
James Hendler: ok with that for QL and RL. EL is different, there is no way to prove via implementation that something is polinomial ←
17:16:17 <Rinke> hendler: in the documents we say 'EL is the right expressivity for several ontologies'... make that one the claim. Much stronger argument for EL
James Hendler: in the documents we say 'EL is the right expressivity for several ontologies'... make that one the claim. Much stronger argument for EL ←
17:16:24 <pfps> I'm fine with an expressivity argument for EL
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm fine with an expressivity argument for EL ←
17:16:32 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:16:39 <Rinke> hendler: implementers will be more impressed with that than 'there exists some algorithm'
James Hendler: implementers will be more impressed with that than 'there exists some algorithm' ←
17:16:55 <Rinke> hendler: CR is all about implementation... sound and complete is not an implementable thing etc etc
James Hendler: CR is all about implementation... sound and complete is not an implementable thing etc etc ←
17:18:07 <Rinke> hendler: for EL in profiles rather theoretical, but in NF&R more practical. 'Can deal with large numbers of classes, as
James Hendler: for EL in profiles rather theoretical, but in NF&R more practical. 'Can deal with large numbers of classes, as ←
17:18:27 <hendler> Let me take a stab
James Hendler: Let me take a stab ←
17:19:02 <Rinke> alanr: EL application to one of these large ontologies, QL rewriting, and RL implementation using rules
Alan Ruttenberg: EL application to one of these large ontologies, QL rewriting, and RL implementation using rules ←
17:19:08 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:19:13 <hendler> EL two different implementations ... and one which demonstrates that EL can process a large ontology with many classes (eg Snomed)
James Hendler: EL two different implementations ... and one which demonstrates that EL can process a large ontology with many classes (eg Snomed) ←
17:19:22 <pfps> fine by me
Peter Patel-Schneider: fine by me ←
17:19:33 <Rinke> alanr: proposal on the table
Alan Ruttenberg: proposal on the table ←
17:19:39 <Rinke> alanr: ok with you, IanH ?
Alan Ruttenberg: ok with you, IanH ? ←
17:19:42 <hendler> QL 2 imps ... and one which demonstrates that QL can ... query rewriting to SQL
James Hendler: QL 2 imps ... and one which demonstrates that QL can ... query rewriting to SQL ←
17:19:46 <Rinke> IanH: yes
Ian Horrocks: yes ←
17:20:00 <Rinke> alanr: can you have a quick shot at this, ian?
Alan Ruttenberg: can you have a quick shot at this, ian? ←
17:20:05 <Rinke> IanH: doing it now
Ian Horrocks: doing it now ←
17:20:19 <hendler> RL ... and one which is implementable via rules
James Hendler: RL ... and one which is implementable via rules ←
17:20:19 <Rinke> subtopic: status report on LC comments
17:20:26 <Rinke> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Responses_to_Last_Call_Comments#Comments_requiring_responses
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Responses_to_Last_Call_Comments#Comments_requiring_responses ←
17:20:35 <bijan> A bunch of "oh wells" from JC at the last minute...hurrah!
Bijan Parsia: A bunch of "oh wells" from JC at the last minute...hurrah! ←
17:20:51 <bijan> Seems like TQ is just going to go with teh WebSHROIQ thing
Bijan Parsia: Seems like TQ is just going to go with teh WebSHROIQ thing ←
17:20:56 <Rinke> alanr: not hearing anything
Alan Ruttenberg: not hearing anything ←
17:21:13 <Rinke> bijan: jeremy sent some replies today, 'we disagree but won't fuss'
Bijan Parsia: jeremy sent some replies today, 'we disagree but won't fuss' ←
17:21:26 <pfps> and Ian has already put this into the Summary
Peter Patel-Schneider: and Ian has already put this into the Summary ←
17:21:33 <Rinke> bijan: curious to go with the WebSHROIQ thing
Bijan Parsia: curious to go with the WebSHROIQ thing ←
17:21:36 <IanH> I updated the LC comments page according to JC's recent responses
Ian Horrocks: I updated the LC comments page according to JC's recent responses ←
17:21:57 <bijan> s/curious to go/it's curious, but they seem to want to go/
Bijan Parsia: s/curious to go/it's curious, but they seem to want to go/ ←
17:21:58 <hendler> q+
James Hendler: q+ ←
17:22:01 <Rinke> alanr: the only thing we need to sign of on is that folks are comfortable with where we stand on that, and that our technical summary is of the right form (sandro?)
Alan Ruttenberg: the only thing we need to sign of on is that folks are comfortable with where we stand on that, and that our technical summary is of the right form (sandro?) ←
17:22:04 <alanr> ack hendler
Alan Ruttenberg: ack hendler ←
17:22:25 <Rinke> hendler: I'm catching up on all this... (informational question). I see that one of them has an ACK NOT OK.
James Hendler: I'm catching up on all this... (informational question). I see that one of them has an ACK NOT OK. ←
17:22:33 <Rinke> bijan: we'll be going over that objection
Bijan Parsia: we'll be going over that objection ←
17:22:39 <Rinke> bijan: only one instead of seven
Bijan Parsia: only one instead of seven ←
17:22:46 <Rinke> hendler: no problem, just to make sure I understood
James Hendler: no problem, just to make sure I understood ←
17:22:57 <Rinke> alanr: not hearing a lot of commenting, think we're in good shape
Alan Ruttenberg: not hearing a lot of commenting, think we're in good shape ←
17:23:02 <pfps> I think that this is all in at least "fair" shape
Peter Patel-Schneider: I think that this is all in at least "fair" shape ←
17:23:03 <Rinke> alanr: ready for us to look at the page yet?
Alan Ruttenberg: ready for us to look at the page yet? ←
17:23:07 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria ←
17:23:19 <Rinke> alanr: people have a look at the page
Alan Ruttenberg: people have a look at the page ←
17:23:44 <Rinke> hendler: small change, if you made for each of the profiles put the two in parallel... right now you're requiring three implementation
James Hendler: small change, if you made for each of the profiles put the two in parallel... right now you're requiring three implementation ←
17:23:56 <Rinke> hendler: trying to make room for two or three implementations
James Hendler: trying to make room for two or three implementations ←
17:24:06 <Rinke> IanH: don't understand why 'one of which' doesn't solve the problem
Ian Horrocks: don't understand why 'one of which' doesn't solve the problem ←
17:24:09 <msmith> +1 to ianh
Mike Smith: +1 to ianh ←
17:24:15 <sandro> Ian's right. :-) "one of which" is better.
Sandro Hawke: Ian's right. :-) "one of which" is better. ←
17:24:15 <uli> +1 to leave "one of which" in
Uli Sattler: +1 to leave "one of which" in ←
17:24:17 <Rinke> hendler: can live with these
James Hendler: can live with these ←
17:24:23 <bijan> I'm happy with this. I'm happy either way.
Bijan Parsia: I'm happy with this. I'm happy either way. ←
17:24:27 <msmith> +1 to one of which
Mike Smith: +1 to one of which ←
17:24:43 <msmith> then you're good!
Mike Smith: then you're good! ←
17:24:48 <Rinke> hendler: supposing I had an RL entailment tracker that was not rule-based but complete. and another one which is rule-based but missing a bit
James Hendler: supposing I had an RL entailment tracker that was not rule-based but complete. and another one which is rule-based but missing a bit ←
17:25:02 <Rinke> hendler: just being pedantic... just thought that this one is less restrictive than the other
James Hendler: just being pedantic... just thought that this one is less restrictive than the other ←
17:25:12 <Rinke> IanH: changing it back to 'one of which'
Ian Horrocks: changing it back to 'one of which' ←
17:25:27 <Rinke> hendler: assuming we'll be getting more than three
James Hendler: assuming we'll be getting more than three ←
17:25:32 <pfps> q+
17:25:35 <Rinke> alanr: ready to vote?
Alan Ruttenberg: ready to vote? ←
17:25:40 <msmith> q+ to suggest removing (e.g., SNOMED)
Mike Smith: q+ to suggest removing (e.g., SNOMED) ←
17:25:50 <alanr> ack msmith
Alan Ruttenberg: ack msmith ←
17:25:51 <Zakim> msmith, you wanted to suggest removing (e.g., SNOMED)
Zakim IRC Bot: msmith, you wanted to suggest removing (e.g., SNOMED) ←
17:25:52 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:25:52 <msmith> zakim, unmute me
Mike Smith: zakim, unmute me ←
17:25:54 <Zakim> msmith was not muted, msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: msmith was not muted, msmith ←
17:26:19 <Rinke> msmith: we remove the e.g. SNOMED, and just mention a very large ontology.... because if it's not SNOMED....
Mike Smith: we remove the e.g. SNOMED, and just mention a very large ontology.... because if it's not SNOMED.... ←
17:26:21 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:26:26 <Rinke> bijan: SNOMED not publicly available
Bijan Parsia: SNOMED not publicly available ←
17:26:30 <Rinke> IanH: ok... I'll remove it
Ian Horrocks: ok... I'll remove it ←
17:26:34 <IanH> I removed (e.g., SNOMED)
Ian Horrocks: I removed (e.g., SNOMED) ←
17:27:01 <Rinke> alanr: the vote on the CR should say that the at risk is at risk (suggested by pfps )
Alan Ruttenberg: the vote on the CR should say that the at risk is at risk (suggested by pfps ) ←
17:27:02 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:27:07 <alanr> ack ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ivan ←
17:27:25 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:27:30 <Rinke> ivan: just for verification. What does the very first sentence mean? 'resolving the dependencies'
Ivan Herman: just for verification. What does the very first sentence mean? 'resolving the dependencies' ←
17:27:31 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:27:39 <sandro> we're now closing on the loop on the 'exit criteria' left open by the resolution in the last meeting, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2009-05-20#resolution_3
Sandro Hawke: we're now closing on the loop on the 'exit criteria' left open by the resolution in the last meeting, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2009-05-20#resolution_3 ←
17:27:50 <Rinke> IanH: I understood that it should be at least at CR when we are at REC
Ian Horrocks: I understood that it should be at least at CR when we are at REC ←
17:27:55 <Rinke> IanH: only one step behind
Ian Horrocks: only one step behind ←
17:28:06 <Rinke> pfps: against XML schema datatypes going backwards
Peter Patel-Schneider: against XML schema datatypes going backwards ←
17:28:10 <Rinke> ivan: I understand
Ivan Herman: I understand ←
17:28:20 <sandro> pfps: This is defense against XSD not being in the right process step for us to proceed.
Peter Patel-Schneider: This is defense against XSD not being in the right process step for us to proceed. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:28:29 <Rinke> pfps: they are already ok to go on the next step... they are ahead of us,
Peter Patel-Schneider: they are already ok to go on the next step... they are ahead of us, ←
17:28:34 <Rinke> ivan: but we may be quicker
Ivan Herman: but we may be quicker ←
17:28:36 <alanr> PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24192 other than that we may remove the at risk for rdf:PlainLiteral if appropriate, in the next week
PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24192 other than that we may remove the at risk for rdf:PlainLiteral if appropriate, in the next week ←
17:28:52 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:28:54 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:28:57 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:29:11 <hendler> do we need the "in the next week"?
James Hendler: do we need the "in the next week"? ←
17:29:18 <Rinke> IanH: I don't mind, but I'm not sure why we need to say anything about the at risk thing... that risk just goes away... seems fine
Ian Horrocks: I don't mind, but I'm not sure why we need to say anything about the at risk thing... that risk just goes away... seems fine ←
17:29:34 <alanr> PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24192
PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24192 ←
17:29:41 <Rinke> pfps: if rdf:Text gets fixed in the next week it just goes away
Peter Patel-Schneider: if rdf:Text gets fixed in the next week it just goes away ←
17:29:46 <hendler> q+
James Hendler: q+ ←
17:29:52 <alanr> ack hendler
Alan Ruttenberg: ack hendler ←
17:30:42 <Rinke> hendler: I think peter said somethign important. We don't need the at risk in the CR criteria. because to get to PR we have to demonstrate that... there is another mechanism that deals with the problem if there's a dependency that is not resolved
James Hendler: I think peter said somethign important. We don't need the at risk in the CR criteria. because to get to PR we have to demonstrate that... there is another mechanism that deals with the problem if there's a dependency that is not resolved ←
17:30:54 <Rinke> alanr: prevention... safer to leave it in as is
Alan Ruttenberg: prevention... safer to leave it in as is ←
17:31:02 <Zakim> -alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: -alanr ←
17:31:04 <Rinke> sandro: should be version 24913
Sandro Hawke: should be version 24913 ←
17:31:09 <alanr> back in a sec
Alan Ruttenberg: back in a sec ←
17:31:16 <sandro> PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24193
PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24193 ←
17:31:20 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:31:20 <Rinke> sandro: do this proposal while we wait on alan
Sandro Hawke: do this proposal while we wait on alan ←
17:31:26 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
17:31:26 <Zakim> +alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: +alanr ←
17:31:30 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:31:34 <Rinke> bijan: that's the current version?
Bijan Parsia: that's the current version? ←
17:31:34 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:31:35 <Rinke> sandro: yes
Sandro Hawke: yes ←
17:31:36 <alanr> +1 (Science Commons)
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 (Science Commons) ←
17:31:36 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
17:31:42 <zimmer> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
17:31:42 <hendler> friendly amendment - can we make it "We approve" instead of we are happy with?
James Hendler: friendly amendment - can we make it "We approve" instead of we are happy with? ←
17:31:43 <MarkusK_> +1 FZI
Markus Krötzsch: +1 FZI ←
17:31:43 <Zhe> +1 (ORACLE)
17:31:44 <Rinke> Rinke: +1 (Amsterdam)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (Amsterdam) ←
17:31:49 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
17:31:55 <bcuencagrau> +1
17:32:11 <msmith> +1
Mike Smith: +1 ←
17:32:18 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
17:32:19 <michael_schneider> -1, since I have to think about this
Michael Schneider: -1, since I have to think about this ←
17:32:32 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:32:45 <michael_schneider> if /formal vote/ than I'm off
Michael Schneider: if /formal vote/ than I'm off ←
17:32:49 <hendler> +1
James Hendler: +1 ←
17:32:57 <Rinke> alanr: I need to understand michael_schneider
Alan Ruttenberg: I need to understand michael_schneider ←
17:32:58 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:33:11 <michael_schneider> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:33:11 <Zakim> michael_schneider should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should no longer be muted ←
17:33:30 <Rinke> michael_schneider: I didn't know it would be a formal vote
Michael Schneider: I didn't know it would be a formal vote ←
17:33:58 <Rinke> michael_schneider: it is very important for the OWL full side ... have no clue what OWL entailment checker means
Michael Schneider: it is very important for the OWL full side ... have no clue what OWL entailment checker means ←
17:34:06 <MarkusK_> I already voted for FZI -- I am the primary representative for FZI. If we cannot agree, FZI will necessarily abstain.
Markus Krötzsch: I already voted for FZI -- I am the primary representative for FZI. If we cannot agree, FZI will necessarily abstain. ←
17:34:08 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:34:11 <Rinke> michael_schneider: really impossible to take this exit criterion when taken literally
Michael Schneider: really impossible to take this exit criterion when taken literally ←
17:34:25 <Rinke> alanr: we could postpone the discussion
Alan Ruttenberg: we could postpone the discussion ←
17:34:32 <Rinke> sandro: why not talk about the owl full thing
Sandro Hawke: why not talk about the owl full thing ←
17:34:35 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:34:36 <sandro> d'oh. Michael points out that "Two different implementations of an OWL 2 Full entailment checker." is pretty confusing.
Sandro Hawke: d'oh. Michael points out that "Two different implementations of an OWL 2 Full entailment checker." is pretty confusing. ←
17:35:28 <hendler> I thought the key here was "conformance" - which is defined in the conformance document
James Hendler: I thought the key here was "conformance" - which is defined in the conformance document ←
17:35:33 <Rinke> IanH: there used to be wording in there that said that 'someone implemented a useful subset'. The reason it was changed... not sure it's really such a problem, since the criteria in conformance say that it should be sound, and that you should give an answer (not a MUST). OWL Full implementations could actually be just sound
Ian Horrocks: there used to be wording in there that said that 'someone implemented a useful subset'. The reason it was changed... not sure it's really such a problem, since the criteria in conformance say that it should be sound, and that you should give an answer (not a MUST). OWL Full implementations could actually be just sound ←
17:35:39 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:35:43 <sandro> How about: "Two different implementations of an OWL 2 Full entailment checker. Note that these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete."
Sandro Hawke: How about: "Two different implementations of an OWL 2 Full entailment checker. Note that these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete." ←
17:35:45 <Rinke> IanH: and silent is ok... that's what happens in practice
Ian Horrocks: and silent is ok... that's what happens in practice ←
17:35:54 <Rinke> alanr: sandro is proposing...
Alan Ruttenberg: sandro is proposing... ←
17:36:05 <hendler> An OWL 2 Full entailment checker is an OWL 2 entailment checker that takes OWL 2 Full ontology documents as input. It MUST return True only when Ont(d1) entails Ont(d2), and it MUST return False only when Ont(d1) does not entail Ont(d2). It SHOULD NOT return Unknown.
James Hendler: An OWL 2 Full entailment checker is an OWL 2 entailment checker that takes OWL 2 Full ontology documents as input. It MUST return True only when Ont(d1) entails Ont(d2), and it MUST return False only when Ont(d1) does not entail Ont(d2). It SHOULD NOT return Unknown. ←
17:36:06 <uli> I'd prefer to leave it as it is
Uli Sattler: I'd prefer to leave it as it is ←
17:36:29 <Rinke> hendler: I'm confused... there's a conformance document which says (see above). Saying conformant is well defined in our document...
James Hendler: I'm confused... there's a conformance document which says (see above). Saying conformant is well defined in our document... ←
17:36:35 <MarkusK_> +1 to Jim
Markus Krötzsch: +1 to Jim ←
17:36:40 <Rinke> sandro: I'm suggesting adding a note... this is redundant
Sandro Hawke: I'm suggesting adding a note... this is redundant ←
17:36:58 <Rinke> sandro: michael might not be the only one who gets confused
Sandro Hawke: michael might not be the only one who gets confused ←
17:37:14 <uli> "entailment checker" is explained in the conformance document
Uli Sattler: "entailment checker" is explained in the conformance document ←
17:37:26 <sandro> version-3 = "Two different implementations of an OWL 2 Full entailment checker. Note that as per Conformance, these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete."
Sandro Hawke: version-3 = "Two different implementations of an OWL 2 Full entailment checker. Note that as per Conformance, these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete." ←
17:37:32 <uli> so we don't need to say no more in the exit criteria
Uli Sattler: so we don't need to say no more in the exit criteria ←
17:37:35 <Zhe> :_
17:37:49 <Rinke> alanr: two solutions... leave as is, add remark that it only needs to be sound
Alan Ruttenberg: two solutions... leave as is, add remark that it only needs to be sound ←
17:39:05 <Rinke> michael_schneider: problem is that for the moment...I will simply proceed and see what happens... two things can happen: OWL 2 full does not go through, or the whole WG cannot go further. But if everyone's happy in the end, there is no problem. But if someone outside the WG lifts his finger that OWL full did not meet the exit criteria...
Michael Schneider: problem is that for the moment...I will simply proceed and see what happens... two things can happen: OWL 2 full does not go through, or the whole WG cannot go further. But if everyone's happy in the end, there is no problem. But if someone outside the WG lifts his finger that OWL full did not meet the exit criteria... ←
17:39:18 <Zhe> I like the note idea
Zhe Wu: I like the note idea ←
17:39:23 <hendler> q+
James Hendler: q+ ←
17:39:31 <alanr> ack hendler
Alan Ruttenberg: ack hendler ←
17:39:36 <uli> Sandro, we don't say anything about soundness for the others...
Uli Sattler: Sandro, we don't say anything about soundness for the others... ←
17:39:37 <Rinke> sandro: would be cheating to not make this note here... hiding it leads to too much ambiguity, people might feel tricked
Sandro Hawke: would be cheating to not make this note here... hiding it leads to too much ambiguity, people might feel tricked ←
17:39:38 <uli> yes
Uli Sattler: yes ←
17:39:46 <IanH> I don't see a harm in adding the note.
Ian Horrocks: I don't see a harm in adding the note. ←
17:39:56 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:40:12 <Rinke> bijan: making the world perfectly safe is not realistic... no evidence that anyone would actually do this
Bijan Parsia: making the world perfectly safe is not realistic... no evidence that anyone would actually do this ←
17:40:17 <Rinke> sandro: michael just did
Sandro Hawke: michael just did ←
17:40:24 <Zhe> syntatic sugar
17:40:34 <uli> asymmetry with others
Uli Sattler: asymmetry with others ←
17:40:35 <bijan> to sandro, michael is in our wg bubble
Bijan Parsia: to sandro, michael is in our wg bubble ←
17:40:35 <sandro> let's please add on Full, "Note that as per Conformance, these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete."
Sandro Hawke: let's please add on Full, "Note that as per Conformance, these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete." ←
17:40:37 <Rinke> alanr: could you articulate the reason against saying this...
Alan Ruttenberg: could you articulate the reason against saying this... ←
17:40:48 <Rinke> alanr: what is the actual harm?
Alan Ruttenberg: what is the actual harm? ←
17:41:43 <Rinke> hendler: one of the things I will bring up in one of the later docs. We should ..... (didn't get it)
James Hendler: one of the things I will bring up in one of the later docs. We should ..... (didn't get it) ←
17:41:58 <Rinke> alanr: quick strawpoll...
Alan Ruttenberg: quick strawpoll... ←
17:42:01 <sandro> strawpoll: add to Full, "Note that as per Conformance, these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete."
STRAWPOLL: add to Full, "Note that as per Conformance, these must be sound reasoners, but need not be complete." ←
17:42:05 <sandro> +0.95
Sandro Hawke: +0.95 ←
17:42:06 <hendler> we should make sure we don't disparage our own designs
James Hendler: we should make sure we don't disparage our own designs ←
17:42:06 <pfps> +0
17:42:10 <Zhe> +1
17:42:14 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
17:42:14 <alanr> +0
Alan Ruttenberg: +0 ←
17:42:15 <hendler> 0
James Hendler: 0 ←
17:42:17 <Achille> 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
17:42:18 <MarkusK_> 0
Markus Krötzsch: 0 ←
17:42:22 <bmotik> +0
Boris Motik: +0 ←
17:42:22 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
17:42:24 <ewallace> +0
Evan Wallace: +0 ←
17:42:25 <Rinke> Rinke: +0.5
Rinke Hoekstra: +0.5 ←
17:42:26 <zimmer> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
17:42:30 <michael_schneider> +0 (hard to tell at the moment)
Michael Schneider: +0 (hard to tell at the moment) ←
17:42:32 <msmith> +1
Mike Smith: +1 ←
17:42:33 <bcuencagrau> 0
17:42:44 <uli> 0
Uli Sattler: 0 ←
17:42:58 <Rinke> alanr: no objections... a few plusses.. justifies putting it in
Alan Ruttenberg: no objections... a few plusses.. justifies putting it in ←
17:43:05 <Rinke> IanH: I'll add it
Ian Horrocks: I'll add it ←
17:43:18 <hendler> q
James Hendler: q ←
17:43:25 <IanH> Done
Ian Horrocks: Done ←
17:43:45 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
17:43:52 <bijan> Pellet
Bijan Parsia: Pellet ←
17:44:11 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24194
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24194 ←
17:44:13 <Rinke> alanr: michael are you worried that there won't be sound implementations of OWL 2 Full... just any OWL 2 RL would be a sound implementation... this is not the problem. There will be a lot of sound implementations... Jena, OWLIM whatever... the real problem is that people will say 'hmm, this is just a fake'.
Alan Ruttenberg: michael are you worried that there won't be sound implementations of OWL 2 Full... just any OWL 2 RL would be a sound implementation... this is not the problem. There will be a lot of sound implementations... Jena, OWLIM whatever... the real problem is that people will say 'hmm, this is just a fake'. ←
17:44:22 <hendler> what is a sound implementation? what is a complete implementation? has someone proven the OS correct?? Soundness and completeess are not properties of implementations, they are properties of algorithms!!!
James Hendler: what is a sound implementation? what is a complete implementation? has someone proven the OS correct?? Soundness and completeess are not properties of implementations, they are properties of algorithms!!! ←
17:44:29 <pfps> The defense against Michael's worry is to point to the actual OWL 2 Full implementations.
Peter Patel-Schneider: The defense against Michael's worry is to point to the actual OWL 2 Full implementations. ←
17:44:40 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:44:43 <hendler> +1 to what Sandro says
James Hendler: +1 to what Sandro says ←
17:44:53 <bijan> +1 that's always the case
Bijan Parsia: +1 that's always the case ←
17:45:00 <Rinke> sandro: our implementation report at the end of CR will list some systems that claim to be OWL 2 Full entailment checkers. If there are credible things that make legitimate claims to be complete OWL 2 Full implementations... that should be ok
Sandro Hawke: our implementation report at the end of CR will list some systems that claim to be OWL 2 Full entailment checkers. If there are credible things that make legitimate claims to be complete OWL 2 Full implementations... that should be ok ←
17:45:05 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
17:45:15 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:45:59 <alanr> PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195
PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195 ←
17:46:07 <Rinke> IanH: I wanted to agreee with sandro... we're overbaking this a bit... in a way these exit criteria are only a small part of the story. IN the end we need to write a report on implementability... if we're really going to do ridiculous things then obviously thge director won't be happy
Ian Horrocks: I wanted to agreee with sandro... we're overbaking this a bit... in a way these exit criteria are only a small part of the story. IN the end we need to write a report on implementability... if we're really going to do ridiculous things then obviously thge director won't be happy ←
17:46:19 <hendler> PROPOSED: We approve of the CR Criterion noted in ...
PROPOSED: We approve of the CR Criterion noted in ... ←
17:46:22 <alanr> PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195
PROPOSED: We are happy with the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195 ←
17:46:24 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
17:46:24 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
17:46:26 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
17:46:38 <alanr> PROPOSED: We approve the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24193
PROPOSED: We approve the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24193 ←
17:46:42 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
17:46:52 <alanr> PROPOSED: We approve the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195
PROPOSED: We approve the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195 ←
17:46:54 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
17:46:57 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
17:46:59 <msmith> +1 (C&P)
Mike Smith: +1 (C&P) ←
17:47:00 <Rinke> Rinke: +1 (UvA)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (UvA) ←
17:47:02 <Zhe> +1 (ORACLE)
17:47:03 <hendler> +1 RPI (believe it or not :-))
James Hendler: +1 RPI (believe it or not :-)) ←
17:47:03 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
17:47:04 <alanr> +1 (Science Commons)
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 (Science Commons) ←
17:47:08 <uli> +1 (Manchester)
Uli Sattler: +1 (Manchester) ←
17:47:11 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
17:47:11 <zimmer> +1 (DERI)
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 (DERI) ←
17:47:16 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
17:47:20 <bmotik> +1 (Oxfird)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxfird) ←
17:47:20 <IanH> +1 (Oxford)
Ian Horrocks: +1 (Oxford) ←
17:48:13 <Rinke> alanr: good, we are resolved
Alan Ruttenberg: good, we are resolved ←
17:48:15 <alanr> RESOLVED: We approve the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195
RESOLVED: We approve the CR Criteria noted in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=CR_Exit_Criteria&oldid=24195 ←
17:48:37 <Rinke> subtopic: publication of documents as CR/LC
17:48:38 <alanr> PROPOSED: go ahead with publication of Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax, Mapping to RDF Graphs, Direct Semantics, RDF-Based Semantics, Conformance, Profiles and XML Serialization as Candidate Recommendations as per last week's resolution based on the CR exit criteria and with name change from rdf:text to rdf:PlainLiteral
PROPOSED: go ahead with publication of Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax, Mapping to RDF Graphs, Direct Semantics, RDF-Based Semantics, Conformance, Profiles and XML Serialization as Candidate Recommendations as per last week's resolution based on the CR exit criteria and with name change from rdf:text to rdf:PlainLiteral ←
17:48:42 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:48:46 <IanH> Hopefully this is easier to agree :-)
Ian Horrocks: Hopefully this is easier to agree :-) ←
17:48:50 <Rinke> alanr: any comments, suggestions?
Alan Ruttenberg: any comments, suggestions? ←
17:49:22 <pfps> q+
17:49:29 <pfps> q-
17:49:40 <Rinke> sandro: in my mind this is redundant
Sandro Hawke: in my mind this is redundant ←
17:49:41 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:49:51 <Rinke> alanr: we had this discussion with jim last week..
Alan Ruttenberg: we had this discussion with jim last week.. ←
17:50:14 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:50:14 <Rinke> hendler: I'm happy with it, however, as part of the document you send to the director you need a pointer to the actual vote. Safer to do it here
James Hendler: I'm happy with it, however, as part of the document you send to the director you need a pointer to the actual vote. Safer to do it here ←
17:50:15 <IanH> I don't believe we need this vote, we had it last week, it wasn't on the agenda for this week
Ian Horrocks: I don't believe we need this vote, we had it last week, it wasn't on the agenda for this week ←
17:50:20 <Rinke> sandro: sure whatever
Sandro Hawke: sure whatever ←
17:50:34 <alanr> PROPOSED: go ahead with publication of Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax, Mapping to RDF Graphs, Direct Semantics, RDF-Based Semantics, Conformance, Profiles and XML Serialization as Candidate Recommendations as per last week's resolution based on the CR exit criteria and with name change from rdf:text to rdf:PlainLiteral
PROPOSED: go ahead with publication of Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax, Mapping to RDF Graphs, Direct Semantics, RDF-Based Semantics, Conformance, Profiles and XML Serialization as Candidate Recommendations as per last week's resolution based on the CR exit criteria and with name change from rdf:text to rdf:PlainLiteral ←
17:50:37 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
17:50:38 <Rinke> sandro: I can point at it in two places.
Sandro Hawke: I can point at it in two places. ←
17:50:41 <Rinke> alanr: let's just do it
Alan Ruttenberg: let's just do it ←
17:50:41 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
17:50:43 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
17:50:43 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
17:50:47 <Rinke> Rinke: +1 (UvA)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (UvA) ←
17:50:48 <Zhe> +1 (ORACLE)
17:50:51 <IanH> +1 (Oxford)
Ian Horrocks: +1 (Oxford) ←
17:50:58 <zimmer> +1 DERI
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 DERI ←
17:51:05 <hendler> +1 (RPI)
James Hendler: +1 (RPI) ←
17:51:06 <alanr> +1 (Science Commons)
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 (Science Commons) ←
17:51:11 <msmith> +1 (C&P)
Mike Smith: +1 (C&P) ←
17:51:14 <bmotik> +1 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxford) ←
17:51:32 <IanH> vote early, vote often
Ian Horrocks: vote early, vote often ←
17:51:33 <uli> +1 (Manchester)
Uli Sattler: +1 (Manchester) ←
17:51:34 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
17:51:38 <alanr> RESOLVED: go ahead with publication of Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax, Mapping to RDF Graphs, Direct Semantics, RDF-Based Semantics, Conformance, Profiles and XML Serialization as Candidate Recommendations as per last week's resolution based on the CR exit criteria and with name change from rdf:text to rdf:PlainLiteral
RESOLVED: go ahead with publication of Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax, Mapping to RDF Graphs, Direct Semantics, RDF-Based Semantics, Conformance, Profiles and XML Serialization as Candidate Recommendations as per last week's resolution based on the CR exit criteria and with name change from rdf:text to rdf:PlainLiteral ←
17:52:01 <Rinke> subtopic: publish QRG as LC WD
17:52:10 <alanr> PROPOSED: Quick Reference Guide is ready for publication as a Last Call Working Draft
PROPOSED: Quick Reference Guide is ready for publication as a Last Call Working Draft ←
17:52:15 <sandro> :-P michael_schneider
Sandro Hawke: :-P michael_schneider ←
17:52:17 <IanH> YES
Ian Horrocks: YES ←
17:52:21 <pfps> YES
Peter Patel-Schneider: YES ←
17:52:22 <bijan> I'm ok with QRC going to LC
Bijan Parsia: I'm ok with QRC going to LC ←
17:52:24 <Rinke> alanr: got lost in the traffic on this... do we all agree on its' current form?
Alan Ruttenberg: got lost in the traffic on this... do we all agree on its' current form? ←
17:52:27 <uli> yes, it's done and dusted
Uli Sattler: yes, it's done and dusted ←
17:52:28 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:52:35 <alanr> ack ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ivan ←
17:52:55 <Rinke> alanr: jim, are you ready to vote on this?
Alan Ruttenberg: jim, are you ready to vote on this? ←
17:52:59 <hendler> +1 RPI
James Hendler: +1 RPI ←
17:53:13 <Rinke> Rinke: +1 (UvA)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (UvA) ←
17:53:17 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
17:53:18 <bmotik> +1 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxford) ←
17:53:18 <alanr> +1 (Science Commons)
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 (Science Commons) ←
17:53:18 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
17:53:18 <Zhe> +1 ORACLE
17:53:20 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
17:53:23 <zimmer> +1 DERI
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 DERI ←
17:53:27 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
17:53:29 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
17:53:35 <msmith> +1 (C&P)
Mike Smith: +1 (C&P) ←
17:53:43 <uli> +1 (Manchester)
Uli Sattler: +1 (Manchester) ←
17:53:54 <alanr> RESOLVED: Quick Reference Guide is ready for publication as a Last Call Working Draft
RESOLVED: Quick Reference Guide is ready for publication as a Last Call Working Draft ←
17:54:01 <Rinke> subtopic: status report on publication drafts (http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/owl2-overview/)
17:54:23 <Zakim> -hendler
Zakim IRC Bot: -hendler ←
17:54:23 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:54:28 <ewallace> Can you publish?
Evan Wallace: Can you publish? ←
17:54:30 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:54:32 <IanH> q-
Ian Horrocks: q- ←
17:54:35 <Rinke> sandro: the link confused me...
Sandro Hawke: the link confused me... ←
17:55:01 <pfps> q+
17:55:03 <Rinke> sandro: the last time I tried to turn the crank. I got stuck on XML errors, and a bunch of wkeryiw
Sandro Hawke: the last time I tried to turn the crank. I got stuck on XML errors, and a bunch of wkeryiw ←
17:55:10 <ewallace> What should we do about the glyphs?
Evan Wallace: What should we do about the glyphs? ←
17:55:12 <Rinke> sandro: the XML errors are sort-of fixed...
Sandro Hawke: the XML errors are sort-of fixed... ←
17:55:14 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:55:24 <pfps> q-
17:55:24 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:55:29 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:55:29 <Rinke> sandro: we came across the glyphs in the past... vaguely recall boris fixed it
Sandro Hawke: we came across the glyphs in the past... vaguely recall boris fixed it ←
17:55:59 <Rinke> IanH: I was going to say that as far as I know everyone checked the links... noone has any idea on how to check this listing
Ian Horrocks: I was going to say that as far as I know everyone checked the links... noone has any idea on how to check this listing ←
17:56:20 <Rinke> sandro: some obscure characters that XML doesn't know, or at least doesn't know how to put in PDF
Sandro Hawke: some obscure characters that XML doesn't know, or at least doesn't know how to put in PDF ←
17:56:40 <ewallace> Did Boris fix this for Syntax this time?
Evan Wallace: Did Boris fix this for Syntax this time? ←
17:56:48 <Rinke> sandro: alan, could you help me on this
Sandro Hawke: alan, could you help me on this ←
17:56:51 <Rinke> alanr: yes
Alan Ruttenberg: yes ←
17:57:02 <pfps> Pointer please?
Peter Patel-Schneider: Pointer please? ←
17:57:04 <Rinke> sandro: is everyone happy with ...
Sandro Hawke: is everyone happy with ... ←
17:57:06 <Rinke> alanr: chair stuff
Alan Ruttenberg: chair stuff ←
17:57:16 <IanH> I asked them; there were no complaints
Ian Horrocks: I asked them; there were no complaints ←
17:57:19 <Rinke> alanr: send a pointer out, and get comments on email
Alan Ruttenberg: send a pointer out, and get comments on email ←
17:57:25 <Rinke> topic: implementation and test cases
17:57:28 <michael_schneider> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:57:28 <Zakim> michael_schneider should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should now be muted ←
17:57:33 <sandro> Peter, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_7
Sandro Hawke: Peter, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_7 ←
17:58:13 <Rinke> IanH: we now voted to move all of the spec documents to CR, so shift in gear with respect to what we ought to be doing in the WG. WE need to make sure that we do what we need to do, and go to CR as planned
Ian Horrocks: we now voted to move all of the spec documents to CR, so shift in gear with respect to what we ought to be doing in the WG. WE need to make sure that we do what we need to do, and go to CR as planned ←
17:58:14 <pfps> "Tame" implementors should start their engines.
Peter Patel-Schneider: "Tame" implementors should start their engines. ←
17:58:28 <ivan> 'beat the bushes'...
Ivan Herman: 'beat the bushes'... ←
17:58:46 <Rinke> IanH: we need to figure out what the implementations will be that satisfy the exit criteria, need to get the test cases in place etc.
Ian Horrocks: we need to figure out what the implementations will be that satisfy the exit criteria, need to get the test cases in place etc. ←
17:58:46 <msmith> Re cases, I've just updated the "test case summary" at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_Suite_Status#Test_Case_Summary
Mike Smith: Re cases, I've just updated the "test case summary" at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_Suite_Status#Test_Case_Summary ←
17:59:02 <Rinke> alanr: do we want anyone to go over the test cases and report back?
Alan Ruttenberg: do we want anyone to go over the test cases and report back? ←
17:59:33 <Rinke> alanr: the mechanism is for the most part in place, but coverage is (judgtment call), my feeling is that people are still looking over it and contributing tests
Alan Ruttenberg: the mechanism is for the most part in place, but coverage is (judgtment call), my feeling is that people are still looking over it and contributing tests ←
17:59:52 <msmith> q+ to respond ask about Extra-Credit
Mike Smith: q+ to respond ask about Extra-Credit ←
17:59:54 <Rinke> IanH: need at least one test that tests all significant features of the language. is that satisfied, mike?
Ian Horrocks: need at least one test that tests all significant features of the language. is that satisfied, mike? ←
17:59:58 <alanr> ack msmith
Alan Ruttenberg: ack msmith ←
17:59:58 <Zakim> msmith, you wanted to respond ask about Extra-Credit
Zakim IRC Bot: msmith, you wanted to respond ask about Extra-Credit ←
17:59:59 <Rinke> alanr: mike, are we there yet?
Alan Ruttenberg: mike, are we there yet? ←
18:00:18 <MarkusK_> Re coverage: http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/projects/owltests/index.php/Test_case_coverage_by_RDF/XML_syntax_feature
Markus Krötzsch: Re coverage: http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/projects/owltests/index.php/Test_case_coverage_by_RDF/XML_syntax_feature ←
18:00:19 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
18:00:21 <Rinke> msmith: we have the coverage for the RDF predicates of the language. The work that markus did in the wiki is pretty good
Mike Smith: we have the coverage for the RDF predicates of the language. The work that markus did in the wiki is pretty good ←
18:00:29 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
18:00:40 <Rinke> msmith: someone might want to pick on the individual cases... but we do have good coverage
Mike Smith: someone might want to pick on the individual cases... but we do have good coverage ←
18:00:54 <MarkusK_> The link I pasted shows the current coverage for RDF/XML language features
Markus Krötzsch: The link I pasted shows the current coverage for RDF/XML language features ←
18:01:02 <alanr> ack ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ivan ←
18:01:10 <Rinke> msmith: if that answer is acceptable, we had a specific point in the CR exit criteria on different types of test... when do we plan to do that?
Mike Smith: if that answer is acceptable, we had a specific point in the CR exit criteria on different types of test... when do we plan to do that? ←
18:01:26 <Rinke> ivan: I want to know the mechanism that we ask the implementers to follow
Ivan Herman: I want to know the mechanism that we ask the implementers to follow ←
18:01:51 <IanH> For what we did in OWL 1, see: http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out
Ian Horrocks: For what we did in OWL 1, see: http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out ←
18:01:53 <Rinke> ivan: I'm doing OWL 2 RL, not interested in non-RL tests... we need to tell the story for all the people we contact
Ivan Herman: I'm doing OWL 2 RL, not interested in non-RL tests... we need to tell the story for all the people we contact ←
18:02:25 <Rinke> ivan: another small thing, if I click on any of the links on the left-hand column in the test case overview. I get a non-wellformed XML parser error in Firefox
Ivan Herman: another small thing, if I click on any of the links on the left-hand column in the test case overview. I get a non-wellformed XML parser error in Firefox ←
18:02:42 <michael_schneider> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
18:02:51 <michael_schneider> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:02:51 <Zakim> michael_schneider should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should no longer be muted ←
18:02:54 <michael_schneider> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
18:02:57 <Rinke> ivan: what's the story we want to tell the implementers. contacted a few "we might be interested", "not now, maybe later"
Ivan Herman: what's the story we want to tell the implementers. contacted a few "we might be interested", "not now, maybe later" ←
18:03:02 <msmith> q+ to respond to ivan
Mike Smith: q+ to respond to ivan ←
18:03:03 <michael_schneider> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:03:03 <Zakim> michael_schneider should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should now be muted ←
18:03:04 <pfps> which page is giving errors - links on test suite status page work for me
Peter Patel-Schneider: which page is giving errors - links on test suite status page work for me ←
18:03:08 <msmith> q-
Mike Smith: q- ←
18:03:42 <alanr> ivan, are you asking about how they get the right tests?
Alan Ruttenberg: ivan, are you asking about how they get the right tests? ←
18:03:56 <Rinke> IanH: pasted a pointer to the result page that sandro coordinated in the OWL 1 case, and obviously it lists different sections for tests for DL and Full.. some reasoners would do tests in one section, some multiple, skip sections etc...
Ian Horrocks: pasted a pointer to the result page that sandro coordinated in the OWL 1 case, and obviously it lists different sections for tests for DL and Full.. some reasoners would do tests in one section, some multiple, skip sections etc... ←
18:04:01 <msmith> I'm producing the results summary now, based on input described in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_Result_Format
Mike Smith: I'm producing the results summary now, based on input described in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_Result_Format ←
18:04:08 <alanr> I'm using mediawiki bot (simple to implement) to gather the tests
Alan Ruttenberg: I'm using mediawiki bot (simple to implement) to gather the tests ←
18:04:14 <msmith> q+
Mike Smith: q+ ←
18:04:15 <Rinke> ivan: but in technical terms.. how does it go?
Ivan Herman: but in technical terms.. how does it go? ←
18:04:35 <Rinke> IanH: I don't know.. in the past people sent the results to the web in a prescribed form (help from sandro)
Ian Horrocks: I don't know.. in the past people sent the results to the web in a prescribed form (help from sandro) ←
18:04:55 <Rinke> msmith: I just put a link on the IRC to the format in which people can send in the result.
Mike Smith: I just put a link on the IRC to the format in which people can send in the result. ←
18:05:13 <Rinke> alanr: ivan can you review that, ...?
Alan Ruttenberg: ivan can you review that, ...? ←
18:05:13 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
18:05:25 <Rinke> ivan: I can look at that, need to understand the whole process from start to end
Ivan Herman: I can look at that, need to understand the whole process from start to end ←
18:05:46 <msmith> q+ to respond
Mike Smith: q+ to respond ←
18:05:48 <Rinke> alanr: to pick up the tests, you can download them all in OWL, or create a wiki-bot that crawls the wiki
Alan Ruttenberg: to pick up the tests, you can download them all in OWL, or create a wiki-bot that crawls the wiki ←
18:06:10 <msmith> http://wiki.webont.org/exports/
Mike Smith: http://wiki.webont.org/exports/ ←
18:06:34 <Rinke> msmith: we do have a wiki export page that outputs some particular subsets, we could have a breakdown by profile. Any implementation that has a bridge to java can use the test harness software
Mike Smith: we do have a wiki export page that outputs some particular subsets, we could have a breakdown by profile. Any implementation that has a bridge to java can use the test harness software ←
18:06:38 <MarkusK_> q+
Markus Krötzsch: q+ ←
18:06:51 <IanH> Perhaps we could have single-file downloads for each of the profiles?
Ian Horrocks: Perhaps we could have single-file downloads for each of the profiles? ←
18:07:03 <Rinke> msmith: implementers can use the test harness, if they can't then there are other options
Mike Smith: implementers can use the test harness, if they can't then there are other options ←
18:07:05 <msmith> the full export is http://wiki.webont.org/exports/
Mike Smith: the full export is http://wiki.webont.org/exports/ ←
18:07:16 <Rinke> ivan: it is important to have one page on the wiki that explains what implementers have to do.
Ivan Herman: it is important to have one page on the wiki that explains what implementers have to do. ←
18:07:31 <IanH> +1 to Ivan
Ian Horrocks: +1 to Ivan ←
18:07:43 <Rinke> alanr: is it important to have profile specific exports?
Alan Ruttenberg: is it important to have profile specific exports? ←
18:07:46 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
18:07:50 <msmith> OK, I will write this page by next week.
Mike Smith: OK, I will write this page by next week. ←
18:07:56 <Rinke> ivan: yes, for me it is...
Ivan Herman: yes, for me it is... ←
18:08:06 <IanH> We want as many people as possible to run tests *and* report results; we need to make it *real* easy.
Ian Horrocks: We want as many people as possible to run tests *and* report results; we need to make it *real* easy. ←
18:08:45 <msmith> ACTION msmith to write a wiki page providing directions for producing implementation results
Mike Smith: ACTION msmith to write a wiki page providing directions for producing implementation results ←
18:08:45 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - msmith
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - msmith ←
18:08:58 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
18:09:01 <Rinke> bijan: trying to remember. With respect to the coverage I would expect that we get more tests and feedback when we get to CR... so coverage of tests seems in pretty good shape
Bijan Parsia: trying to remember. With respect to the coverage I would expect that we get more tests and feedback when we get to CR... so coverage of tests seems in pretty good shape ←
18:09:02 <alanr> ack michael_schneider
Alan Ruttenberg: ack michael_schneider ←
18:09:03 <michael_schneider> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:09:04 <Zakim> michael_schneider was not muted, michael_schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider was not muted, michael_schneider ←
18:09:05 <msmith> q-
Mike Smith: q- ←
18:09:16 <Rinke> bijan: can handle anything that's not in good shape along the way... implementations more important
Bijan Parsia: can handle anything that's not in good shape along the way... implementations more important ←
18:09:28 <bijan> Why are we reopening the discussion the chair closed?
Bijan Parsia: Why are we reopening the discussion the chair closed? ←
18:09:34 <pfps> +1
18:09:42 <Rinke> michael_schneider: I think it is possible to select RL and RDF-Based semantics.
Michael Schneider: I think it is possible to select RL and RDF-Based semantics. ←
18:09:47 <msmith> yes, it is possible to make a test that is explicitly rl and rdf semantics.
Mike Smith: yes, it is possible to make a test that is explicitly rl and rdf semantics. ←
18:10:03 <bijan> Actually, I make this a point of order
Bijan Parsia: Actually, I make this a point of order ←
18:10:09 <pfps> Point of order!
Peter Patel-Schneider: Point of order! ←
18:10:23 <alanr> i will wait for him to finish
Alan Ruttenberg: i will wait for him to finish ←
18:10:30 <pfps> PLEASE!@
Peter Patel-Schneider: PLEASE!@ ←
18:10:36 <Rinke> michael_schneider: I can offer you something... just submitted for review my tests for OWL 2 Full ... I can add another mark for OWL 2 RL specific OWL 2 Full tests...
Michael Schneider: I can offer you something... just submitted for review my tests for OWL 2 Full ... I can add another mark for OWL 2 RL specific OWL 2 Full tests... ←
18:10:59 <michael_schneider> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:10:59 <Zakim> michael_schneider should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should now be muted ←
18:11:00 <trackbot> Created ACTION-338 - Write a wiki page providing directions for producing implementation results [on Michael Smith - due 2009-06-03].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-338 - Write a wiki page providing directions for producing implementation results [on Michael Smith - due 2009-06-03]. ←
18:11:03 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:11:10 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
18:12:08 <msmith> yes, the exit criteria say "For the purposes of these criteria, we will only consider "Approved" tests which are not "Extra-Credit", and which were approved before some cut-off date, to be determined later, some time during CR. "
Mike Smith: yes, the exit criteria say "For the purposes of these criteria, we will only consider "Approved" tests which are not "Extra-Credit", and which were approved before some cut-off date, to be determined later, some time during CR. " ←
18:12:11 <Rinke> IanH: one of the questions raised by mike, was about when the date might be that the test set was closed. in a perfect world, we just keep on adding tests. The way we set the exit criteria, we need to decide at one stage 'these are the tests that need to be passed'.
Ian Horrocks: one of the questions raised by mike, was about when the date might be that the test set was closed. in a perfect world, we just keep on adding tests. The way we set the exit criteria, we need to decide at one stage 'these are the tests that need to be passed'. ←
18:12:35 <Rinke> IanH: for DL we say that each test should be passed by at least one implementation
Ian Horrocks: for DL we say that each test should be passed by at least one implementation ←
18:12:36 <ivan> +1 to Ian
Ivan Herman: +1 to Ian ←
18:12:47 <alanr> ack MarkusK_
Alan Ruttenberg: ack MarkusK_ ←
18:12:58 <Rinke> MarkusK_: reply to ivan... i have added this export..
Markus Krötzsch: reply to ivan... i have added this export.. ←
18:13:10 <Rinke> MarkusK_: it is online now... we can add custom exports if people need it
Markus Krötzsch: it is online now... we can add custom exports if people need it ←
18:13:16 <michael_schneider> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
18:13:19 <Rinke> alanr: proposal for when this date should be?
Alan Ruttenberg: proposal for when this date should be? ←
18:13:22 <michael_schneider> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:13:22 <Zakim> michael_schneider should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should no longer be muted ←
18:13:25 <alanr> ack michael_schneider
Alan Ruttenberg: ack michael_schneider ←
18:13:26 <Rinke> alanr: think about it during the week?
Alan Ruttenberg: think about it during the week? ←
18:13:43 <Rinke> michael_schneider: if it is two weeks from now, it is easy for me...
Michael Schneider: if it is two weeks from now, it is easy for me... ←
18:13:55 <michael_schneider> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:13:55 <Zakim> michael_schneider should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: michael_schneider should now be muted ←
18:14:00 <Rinke> ivan: should be perfectly ok
Ivan Herman: should be perfectly ok ←
18:14:06 <msmith> I would prefer something further. E.g., July 1
Mike Smith: I would prefer something further. E.g., July 1 ←
18:14:21 <IanH> correct
Ian Horrocks: correct ←
18:14:22 <Rinke> alanr: relevant for just OWL 2 DL... no other dependencies for a specific set of tests
Alan Ruttenberg: relevant for just OWL 2 DL... no other dependencies for a specific set of tests ←
18:14:22 <michael_schneider> I was talking about OWL 2 /Full/ test cases
Michael Schneider: I was talking about OWL 2 /Full/ test cases ←
18:14:25 <msmith> q+
Mike Smith: q+ ←
18:14:30 <alanr> ack msmith
Alan Ruttenberg: ack msmith ←
18:14:47 <Rinke> msmith: july 1 would still be two weeks before implementers report
Mike Smith: july 1 would still be two weeks before implementers report ←
18:14:54 <Rinke> msmith: still enought time
Mike Smith: still enought time ←
18:14:56 <pfps> In general, running the test suite *again* should be extremely easy.
Peter Patel-Schneider: In general, running the test suite *again* should be extremely easy. ←
18:14:58 <Rinke> alanr: my sense as well
Alan Ruttenberg: my sense as well ←
18:15:12 <Rinke> alanr: any problem with july 1st? ivan, michael?
Alan Ruttenberg: any problem with july 1st? ivan, michael? ←
18:15:32 <Rinke> ivan: you want july 1st to be the date that implementers report?
Ivan Herman: you want july 1st to be the date that implementers report? ←
18:15:43 <michael_schneider> 1st of july is /too/ easy ;-)
Michael Schneider: 1st of july is /too/ easy ;-) ←
18:15:44 <Rinke> alanr: no, that's when adding tests is officially closed
Alan Ruttenberg: no, that's when adding tests is officially closed ←
18:15:57 <IanH> OK for me
Ian Horrocks: OK for me ←
18:16:01 <Rinke> alanr: good enough to have it in the notes, or vote?
Alan Ruttenberg: good enough to have it in the notes, or vote? ←
18:16:09 <Rinke> alanr: ok, just note
Alan Ruttenberg: ok, just note ←
18:16:20 <msmith> ACTIOn-338?
Mike Smith: ACTIOn-338? ←
18:16:21 <Rinke> ivan: trying to be difficult... do we have an action on the 'one page' thing?
Ivan Herman: trying to be difficult... do we have an action on the 'one page' thing? ←
18:16:24 <IanH> Mike took that action
Ian Horrocks: Mike took that action ←
18:16:37 <trackbot> ACTION-338 -- Michael Smith to write a wiki page providing directions for producing implementation results -- due 2009-06-03 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-338 -- Michael Smith to write a wiki page providing directions for producing implementation results -- due 2009-06-03 -- OPEN ←
18:16:37 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/338
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/338 ←
18:16:39 <IanH> Me?
Ian Horrocks: Me? ←
18:17:02 <msmith> eyball
Mike Smith: eyball ←
18:17:08 <Rinke> alanr: does anybody claim to have a species validator?
Alan Ruttenberg: does anybody claim to have a species validator? ←
18:17:23 <Rinke> alanr: there was a claim that jeff pan has something
Alan Ruttenberg: there was a claim that jeff pan has something ←
18:17:24 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
18:17:43 <Rinke> IanH: I asked him, he is using the OWL API and wasn't aware it was doing repairs and thing
Ian Horrocks: I asked him, he is using the OWL API and wasn't aware it was doing repairs and thing ←
18:17:44 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
18:17:51 <IanH> ack IanH
Ian Horrocks: ack IanH ←
18:17:53 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
18:18:02 <IanH> ack bijan
Ian Horrocks: ack bijan ←
18:18:25 <Rinke> bijan: I will have (soon) OWL XML translator and ... (built on the OWL API)
Bijan Parsia: I will have (soon) OWL XML translator and ... (built on the OWL API) ←
18:18:38 <bijan> s/{soon{
Bijan Parsia: s/{soon{ ←
18:18:39 <bijan> er
Bijan Parsia: er ←
18:18:52 <Rinke> alanr: people who care about the tests should ..
Alan Ruttenberg: people who care about the tests should .. ←
18:18:54 <bijan> s/(soon)/profile validator based on OWL/XML and a
Bijan Parsia: s/(soon)/profile validator based on OWL/XML and a ←
18:19:28 <Rinke> alanr: what's the status on GRDDL... sandro is that still on your plate?
Alan Ruttenberg: what's the status on GRDDL... sandro is that still on your plate? ←
18:19:37 <Rinke> sandro: nominally it's on my plate
Sandro Hawke: nominally it's on my plate ←
18:19:37 <IanH> Congratulations to one and all on CR votes.
Ian Horrocks: Congratulations to one and all on CR votes. ←
18:19:44 <Rinke> alanr: we should monitor that
Alan Ruttenberg: we should monitor that ←
18:19:45 <IanH> Virtual beers on me as per usual.
Ian Horrocks: Virtual beers on me as per usual. ←
18:20:04 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
18:20:06 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
18:20:08 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
18:20:09 <Zakim> -pfps
Zakim IRC Bot: -pfps ←
18:20:09 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
18:20:10 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
18:20:10 <zimmer> bye
Antoine Zimmermann: bye ←
18:20:10 <Zakim> -uli
Zakim IRC Bot: -uli ←
18:20:11 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
18:20:11 <Zakim> -alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: -alanr ←
18:20:14 <Zakim> -Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille ←
18:20:15 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
18:20:18 <Zakim> -bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: -bijan ←
18:20:20 <Zakim> -MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK_ ←
18:20:22 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
18:20:24 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
18:20:25 <Zakim> -zimmer
Zakim IRC Bot: -zimmer ←
18:20:27 <Zakim> -michael_schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -michael_schneider ←
18:20:29 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended ←
18:20:32 <Zakim> Attendees were bijan, Rinke, bmotik, Sandro, IanH, pfps, alanr, zimmer, michael_schneider, bcuencagrau, Ivan, MarkusK_, +1.518.276.aaaa, hendler, uli, Evan_Wallace, +1.202.408.aabb, msmith,
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were bijan, Rinke, bmotik, Sandro, IanH, pfps, alanr, zimmer, michael_schneider, bcuencagrau, Ivan, MarkusK_, +1.518.276.aaaa, hendler, uli, Evan_Wallace, +1.202.408.aabb, msmith, ←
18:20:34 <Zakim> ... Zhe, Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: ... Zhe, Achille ←
18:20:49 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/05/27-owl-irc#T18-20-49
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2009/05/27-owl-irc#T18-20-49 ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#2) generated 2009-05-29 12:33:13 UTC by 'rhoekstr', comments: 'Cleaned up'