See also: IRC log
- Carsten Lutz, Uli Sattler, Conrad Bock, Alan Ruttenberg, Sandro Hawke, Bijan Parsia, Michael Smith, Peter Patel-Schneider, Doug Lenat, Evan Wallace, Martin Dzbor, Jeremy Carroll, Ratnesh Sahay
- James Hendler, Ian Horrocks
- Alan Ruttenberg
- Conrad Bock, Alan Ruttenberg, Sandro Hawke
(Scribe changed to Conrad Bock)
Action 9: Sandro will check with Josh about UFDTF zakim setup for tomorrow
Alan added items to the previoous minutes.
Discussion of how action items from previous action items didn't make it into previous minutes.
Action 12: peter to send an email about your proposal collocated with OWLED
Action 13: ian to send out email soliciting other proposals for the 2nd f2f
Discussion of minutes editing, remove "chit chat", general readability, 20-30 minutes in cleanup.
PROPOSED: accept previous minutes, as is
Vote on whether to accept uncleaned up minutes from previously.
Action 14: Alan to clean up minutes
Vote and discussion result: not accept uncleaned up minutes.
ACTION Sandro: to explain how to fix red names on wiki pages.
Action 15: Alan to upload the rest of the inline images in the Syntax document
ACTION peter: post survey on April FTF dates.
Action 16: peter to make wiki page to get feedback on dates for F2F2, and send e-mail about it.
Alan surveys on accepting five issues in agenda
Datatype issues not in n-ary discussion
Action 27: jeremy to show why rdfs:datatype and owl:DataRange are different
Bijan Parsia: Using XML Schema's namespace requires doing in a way they can accept. In particular, need approval for using their namespace.
Bijan Parsia: A URI is different from a qualified name. Only true in RDF land.
Bijan Parsia: Can't use existing element as attribute or vice-versa.
Bijan; You can derive a URI from a qname, but the XML WG might not approve of the URI.
Action 17: Smith to take the issue of URI/qname approival from XML WG
Alan Ruttenberg: We can define datatypes in XML, and if we lefft everything alone, could import documents with XML datatypes. Would be annoying because of one file per datatype.
Jeremy Carroll: Can put multiple datatypes on same file with different ID's.
Bijan Parsia: Need both inlining and referencing datatypes.
Bijan Parsia: WOuld rather have one way of referencing datatypes.
Jeremy Carroll: Final document does have one way (picks a winner).
Alan Ruttenberg: Would be good to settle ourrequirements on this.
Alan Ruttenberg: Heard four opinions on requirements so far.
Peter Patel-Schneider: No mechanism for datatype import in the member submission.
Alan; Any objection to discussion on email on requirements?
Bijan Parsia: No bias in sub mission against importing.
Evan Wallace: MIght as well use best practices, otherwise fall bak to inline.
Alan Ruttenberg: Agreement to discuss on mailing list?
Action 29: Mike to lead discussion on datatype import.
Clarification of Mike's last action: to convene half-hour telecon on data types issue
(Scribe changed to Alan Ruttenberg)
(Scribe changed to Sandro Hawke)
Bijan Parsia: Tools should not use the Ontology Name to check for inclusion cycles.
Alan Ruttenberg: but protege-4 does that.
Bijan Parsia: I think that's a bug
Alan Ruttenberg: Matthew believes it's right, I think....
Alan Ruttenberg: And it's not that he's confused. He's sure his approach is right.
Alan Ruttenberg: If this issue can proceed independently, something something something.
Bijan Parsia: Definition of ontology closure can be separated from ontology naming.
Bijan Parsia: We could just use XML Include, and things would come out pretty much the same.
Bijan Parsia: If nothing else is different other than the ontology name.... I don't know what one would make of that.
Bijan Parsia: Import closure reaches a fixpoint when doing more imports doesn't add anything.
Alan Ruttenberg: Your defining an import-processing-model, calling in 'include', in which the ontology name doesn't matter.
Peter Patel-Schneider: in 1.0 import is defined completely independently of ontology names.
Peter Patel-Schneider: in 1.1, it's completely different. [ some O....O' definition ]
Alan Ruttenberg: If one wants to sign the ontology, ....
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm not saying what it should be, I'm saying what 1.1 says.
Let's deprecate owl:imports!!!!!!!!!!
Alan Ruttenberg: there is a requirement from users that people be able to sign their ontologies, include metadata, include versioning, ....
Bijan Parsia: The 1.1 defn is a bug because it's less-liberal than 1.0, so it's not backward compatible.
MikeSmith, when you use "/me" like that, it's left out of the IRC log.
Bijan Parsia: I think we should align the current specs with OWL 1.1
Bijan Parsia: ... and then think about a deeper redesign, eg using XML Include.
Alan Ruttenberg: I don't know anyone who like owl:import as is.
Action 18: Alan to brain dump on owl imports issue to mailing list
Peter Patel-Schneider: should rich annotations be on the agenda at F2F1?
Action 19: Alan to include imports, possibility of annotations as subject for f2f