IRC log of rif on 2008-01-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:38:39 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:38:39 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-rif-irc
15:38:52 [ChrisW]: zakim, this will be rif
15:38:52 [Zakim]: ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 22 minutes
15:39:04 [ChrisW]: zakim, this will be rif
15:39:04 [Zakim]: ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 21 minutes
15:39:04 [ChrisW]: Meeting: RIF Telecon
15:39:25 [ChrisW]: Meeting: RIF Telecon 15 Jan 2008
15:39:35 [ChrisW]: Chair: Chris Welty
15:40:42 [ChrisW]: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jan/0067.html
15:41:08 [ChrisW]: ChrisW has changed the topic to: 15 Jan RIF Telecon agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jan/0067.html
15:41:16 [ChrisW]: zakim, clear agenda
15:41:16 [Zakim]: agenda cleared
15:42:00 [ChrisW]: Scribe: Gary Hallmark
15:42:25 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make minutes
15:42:25 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
15:42:27 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make minutes
15:42:27 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
15:42:44 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make logs public
15:43:10 [ChrisW]: agenda+ admin
15:43:17 [ChrisW]: agenda+ Liason
15:43:36 [ChrisW]: agenda+ BLD - Issue 47
15:43:41 [ChrisW]: agenda+ BLD - Issue 44
15:43:51 [ChrisW]: agenda+ BLD - Issue 40
15:43:58 [ChrisW]: agenda+ BLD - Issue 45
15:44:02 [ChrisW]: agenda+ AOB
15:44:11 [ChrisW]: zakim, next item
15:44:12 [Zakim]: agendum 1. "admin" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:58:28 [ChrisW]: EtnaRosso, who are you?
15:58:46 [EtnaRosso]: hi ChrisW
15:59:02 [EtnaRosso]: should i go? i'm not involved in rif
15:59:07 [ChrisW]: yes
15:59:14 [EtnaRosso]: ok have a good meeting
15:59:21 [ChrisW]: bye
15:59:24 [EtnaRosso]: EtnaRosso has left #rif
15:59:25 [Hassan]: Hassan has joined #rif
15:59:42 [csma]: csma has joined #rif
16:00:01 [IgorMozetic]: IgorMozetic has joined #rif
16:00:20 [Zakim]: SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:00:49 [GaryHallmark]: GaryHallmark has joined #rif
16:01:58 [josb]: josb has joined #rif
16:02:36 [csma]: zakim, who is on the call?
16:02:40 [StellaMitchell]: StellaMitchell has joined #rif
16:02:47 [Zakim]: On the phone I see no one
16:02:51 [Harold]: Harold has joined #rif
16:03:19 [GaryHallmark]: zakim, this is RIF
16:03:19 [ChrisW]: zakim, this is rif
16:03:22 [Zakim]: GaryHallmark, this was already SW_RIF()11:00AM
16:03:24 [Zakim]: ok, GaryHallmark; that matches SW_RIF()11:00AM
16:03:27 [DaveReynolds]: DaveReynolds has joined #rif
16:03:30 [Zakim]: ChrisW, this was already SW_RIF()11:00AM
16:03:32 [Zakim]: ok, ChrisW; that matches SW_RIF()11:00AM
16:04:03 [GaryHallmark]: Scribe: Gary Hallmark
16:04:09 [GaryHallmark]: ScribeNick: GaryHallmark
16:04:27 [GaryHallmark]: zakim, list agenda
16:04:38 [Zakim]: I see 6 items remaining on the agenda:
16:04:40 [Zakim]: 1. admin [from ChrisW]
16:04:42 [Zakim]: 2. Liason [from ChrisW]
16:04:46 [Zakim]: 3. BLD - Issue 47 [from ChrisW]
16:04:48 [Zakim]: 4. BLD - Issue 44 [from ChrisW]
16:04:50 [Zakim]: 5. BLD - Issue 40 [from ChrisW]
16:04:52 [Zakim]: 7. AOB [from ChrisW]
16:05:04 [AxelPolleres]: AxelPolleres has joined #rif
16:05:32 [patranja]: patranja has joined #rif
16:05:36 [Zakim]: restarting in 2 minutes to recover bridge state
16:06:18 [ChrisW]: Present: Sandro (not on IRC)
16:06:25 [ChrisW]: anyone on IRC who is not on the phone???
16:06:41 [PaulaP]: I am not on the phone yet
16:06:48 [ChrisW]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jan/att-0028/rif-minutes-jan8-2008.html
16:06:58 [ChrisW]: Minutes of Jan 8 Telecon
16:07:15 [ChrisW]: RESOLVED: Accept Jan 8 Telecon minutes
16:07:23 [ChrisW]: zakim, next agendum
16:07:23 [Zakim]: agendum 2. "Liason" taken up [from ChrisW]
16:08:02 [AxelPolleres]: test
16:09:03 [csma]: @Axel, Zakim is not with us, that's why...
16:09:17 [csma]: ...he got to excited and had to leave...
16:09:26 [markproctor]: markproctor has joined #rif
16:09:29 [Zakim]: Zakim has joined #rif
16:09:30 [ChrisW]: zakim, thisis rif
16:09:37 [ChrisW]: zakim, this is rif
16:09:38 [Zakim]: I don't understand 'thisis rif', ChrisW
16:09:44 [Zakim]: ok, ChrisW; that matches SW_RIF()11:00AM
16:09:47 [GaryHallmark]: josb: owl DL and owl Full have incompatible RIF mappings
16:09:59 [ChrisW]: zakim, who is on the phone?
16:09:59 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, ??P29, [IBM], +39.047.1.aaaa, [NRCC], ??P48, ??P46, Stella_Mitchell, ??P59
16:10:04 [Zakim]: +[LMU]
16:10:10 [ChrisW]: zakim, ibm is temporarily me
16:10:10 [Zakim]: +ChrisW; got it
16:10:21 [Harold]: Did the OWL WG look into the RIF builtin proposal?
16:10:52 [csma]: zakim, ??P29 is me
16:11:00 [Zakim]: +csma; got it
16:11:01 [Harold]: q+
16:11:13 [csma]: ack ??P29
16:11:18 [ChrisW]: zakim, who is on the phone?
16:11:26 [Zakim]: On the phone I see PaulaP (muted), Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), Gary_Hallmark, csma, ChrisW, josb, [NRCC], ??P48, ??P46, Stella_Mitchell, ??P59
16:12:00 [IgorMozetic]: zakim, ??P46 is me
16:12:06 [Zakim]: +IgorMozetic; got it
16:12:07 [IgorMozetic]: zakim, mute me
16:12:10 [Zakim]: IgorMozetic should now be muted
16:12:39 [GaryHallmark]: harold: RIF uses functions as operators, what does owl do?
16:12:51 [GaryHallmark]: josb: mathML is being discussed, more on Friday
16:13:21 [ChrisW]: q?
16:13:25 [ChrisW]: ack h
16:13:26 [Harold]: q-
16:13:29 [ChrisW]: ack ??
16:14:39 [csma]: ack harold
16:14:48 [Zakim]: +Sandro
16:15:06 [Zakim]: -??P59
16:15:22 [Zakim]: On the phone I see PaulaP (muted), Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, csma, ChrisW, josb, [NRCC], ??P48, IgorMozetic (muted), Stella_Mitchell
16:15:33 [Zakim]: +??P59
16:15:34 [Harold]: 41#
16:15:45 [ChrisW]: zakim, NRCC is Harold
16:15:45 [Zakim]: +Harold; got it
16:16:08 [csma]: zakim, ??P59 is axel
16:16:08 [Zakim]: +axel; got it
16:16:12 [Zakim]: +??P67
16:16:14 [DaveReynolds]: zakim, ??P48 is me
16:16:14 [Zakim]: +DaveReynolds; got it
16:16:34 [csma]: zakim, axel is AxelPolleres
16:16:34 [Zakim]: +AxelPolleres; got it
16:16:42 [mproctor]: mproctor has joined #rif
16:16:56 [GaryHallmark]: zakim, who is on the phone?
16:16:56 [Zakim]: On the phone I see PaulaP (muted), AxelPolleres, ??P67, Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, csma, ChrisW, josb, Harold, DaveReynolds, IgorMozetic (muted), Stella_Mitchell
16:17:01 [GaryHallmark]: zakim, list agenda
16:17:01 [Zakim]: I see nothing on the agenda
16:17:26 [ChrisW]: TOPIC: Issue 47
16:17:36 [csma]: PROPOSED: to close issue 47 without action (i.e. equality stays in BLD as it is currently specified)
16:17:57 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: last week, nobody objected
16:18:43 [DaveReynolds]: I'll abstain
16:18:45 [Hassan]: me
16:19:04 [csma]: RESOLVED: to close issue 47 without action (i.e. equality stays in BLD as it is currently specified)
16:19:22 [ChrisW]: Abstentions: Hassan (Ilog), DaveR (HP)
16:19:37 [ChrisW]: Topic: Issue-44
16:20:20 [csma]: q+
16:20:31 [ChrisW]: ack ??
16:21:00 [GaryHallmark]: harold: relational tables map naturally to slotted uniterms
16:21:33 [IgorMozetic]: q+
16:22:23 [GaryHallmark]: csma: could just agree on position out of band
16:23:01 [GaryHallmark]: ... in slotted case, need to agree on table and column names anyway
16:24:01 [GaryHallmark]: harold: such a "schema" of DB is needed, but is a different issue
16:25:19 [GaryHallmark]: csma: do not need slotted uniterms to avoid OIDs
16:26:30 [GaryHallmark]: harold: slot names are self-descriptive
16:26:33 [ChrisW]: q?
16:26:36 [csma]: ack csma
16:27:01 [GaryHallmark]: harold: if frames need slots, why not uniterms?
16:27:39 [IgorMozetic]: ack me
16:28:15 [GaryHallmark]: harold: slotted uniterms implemented in ojdrew
16:28:19 [IgorMozetic]: zakim, unmute me
16:28:19 [Zakim]: IgorMozetic was not muted, IgorMozetic
16:28:30 [IgorMozetic]: zakim, mute me
16:28:30 [Zakim]: IgorMozetic should now be muted
16:28:40 [GaryHallmark]: sandro: any relation of frames to bnodes?
16:28:50 [GaryHallmark]: josb: skolemize blank nodes
16:29:17 [MoZ]: MoZ has joined #rif
16:30:25 [GaryHallmark]: sandro: embedding relational DB in RDF is common
16:31:07 [GaryHallmark]: ... should be able to use frames for RDF and relational data
16:31:59 [GaryHallmark]: mark: need anonymous or local OID
16:32:05 [josb]: q?
16:32:37 [josb]: q+
16:32:49 [ChrisW]: ack sandro
16:32:58 [ChrisW]: zakim, mute sandro
16:32:58 [Zakim]: Sandro should now be muted
16:34:20 [GaryHallmark]: csma: RIF does not specify an OID format
16:34:40 [josb]: q?
16:35:10 [GaryHallmark]: mark: rule engines don't generate the OID until fact is inserted into engine
16:35:57 [AxelPolleres]: Is that relating to st- vs multiset-semantics? i.e. two uniterms with different generated oids are different things (objects), but not if you just see the uniterm... our logical semantics is obviously set-based
16:36:12 [AxelPolleres]: s/st-/set-/
16:36:14 [DaveReynolds]: q+
16:36:25 [josb]: q?
16:36:30 [AxelPolleres]: q+
16:36:57 [DaveReynolds]: q-
16:37:09 [csma]: ack josb
16:37:55 [Zakim]: +Sandro.a
16:38:00 [AxelPolleres]: jos, I think the discussion is whether we need slotted uniterms, or whether they can (in *any* case) be emulated with oids?
16:38:04 [Zakim]: -Sandro
16:38:51 [sandro]: sandro has joined #rif
16:39:08 [GaryHallmark]: josb: tuple is self-identifying -- doesn't matter if you use names or positions
16:39:11 [Harold]: q+
16:39:28 [GaryHallmark]: ... reiterates csma's point
16:40:41 [josb]: q+
16:40:50 [GaryHallmark]: harold: Codd's intent of "tuple" seems to include slots
16:41:19 [josb]: columns, not rows!!!!
16:41:36 [ChrisW]: q?
16:41:37 [josb]: not frames, uniterms!!!
16:41:43 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: does converting to frames do anything bad?
16:42:25 [GaryHallmark]: axel: tuples can appear > 1 (multiset)
16:43:07 [josb]: q?
16:43:55 [GaryHallmark]: josb: pure relational is set based, SQL is multiset
16:44:27 [Harold]: q+
16:45:01 [csma]: ack axel
16:45:05 [GaryHallmark]: axel: need OIDs anyway to handle duplicate tuples
16:45:29 [GaryHallmark]: harold: what about positional frames?
16:45:48 [josb]: q-
16:45:59 [AxelPolleres]: +1 to what you said now, harold. I didn't speak againt named uniterms.
16:46:12 [GaryHallmark]: ... slots and OIDs are independent, so 4 combinations
16:46:36 [AxelPolleres]: ... only against the use case relational databases. Agree, that this is ugly in RDBMS
16:46:41 [csma]: q+
16:46:49 [csma]: ack csma
16:47:16 [GaryHallmark]: csma: RIF not meant to interchange DBs
16:47:38 [csma]: zakim, mute me
16:47:38 [Zakim]: csma should now be muted
16:47:50 [GaryHallmark]: harold: but we are close to datalog and should be useful for such interchange
16:48:08 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: straw poll
16:48:10 [Harold]: Gary: yes.
16:48:28 [DaveReynolds]: DaveReynolds has joined #rif
16:48:46 [ChrisW]: Who favors keeping named-argument uniterms?
16:48:54 [GaryHallmark]: -1
16:48:56 [Harold]: +1
16:48:56 [Hassan]: 0
16:48:58 [josb]: -1
16:49:00 [IgorMozetic]: +1
16:49:01 [PaulaP]: 0
16:49:08 [AxelPolleres]: +1 for reasons mentioned in the last telecon, I favor keeping BLD general and we have a clean definition of these already
16:49:14 [StellaMitchell]: +1
16:49:16 [sandro]: +1
16:49:48 [ChrisW]: Who favors removing named-argument uniterms?
16:50:09 [josb]: +1
16:50:09 [csma]: +1
16:50:11 [IgorMozetic]: -1
16:50:11 [sandro]: 0
16:50:12 [GaryHallmark]: +1
16:50:13 [AxelPolleres]: -1
16:50:13 [DaveReynolds]: +1
16:50:13 [Hassan]: 0
16:50:15 [PaulaP]: 0
16:50:20 [StellaMitchell]: 0
16:50:36 [Harold]: 0
16:50:52 [Zakim]: -AxelPolleres
16:51:37 [Zakim]: +??P21
16:51:56 [ChrisW]: Topic: Builtins
16:52:05 [csma]: PROPOSED: BLD WD2 will include the builtins listed in [6] (functions on numerics), [7] (functions on strings) and [8] (functions on dates and times)
16:52:25 [ChrisW]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jan/0073.html
16:52:44 [csma]: PROPOSED: BLD WD2 will include the builtins listed in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jan/0073.html
16:52:46 [DaveReynolds]: q+
16:52:48 [josb]: q+
16:52:52 [csma]: ack harold
16:52:55 [ChrisW]: ack harold
16:53:06 [ChrisW]: ack daver
16:53:37 [Hassan]: I agree
16:53:45 [csma]: zakim, unmute me
16:53:45 [Zakim]: csma should no longer be muted
16:54:02 [PaulaP]: this list is for BLD, we didn't discuss this issue for Core
16:54:03 [GaryHallmark]: dave: status of builtin functions vs. predicates?
16:54:29 [sandro]: Sandro: are external calls excluded from core (as Dave seems to be assuming) ?
16:54:54 [josb]: q?
16:55:04 [GaryHallmark]: ... don't we need predicates if we don't have equality (talking about Core)
16:55:32 [GaryHallmark]: ... functions w/o equality makes it hard to return a computed value in an answer
16:56:45 [Harold]: Sandro, I dont remember a decision; I think we do need external calls (builtins, fcts or preds) in the Core.
16:56:53 [GaryHallmark]: csma: PRD prefers builtin fcns to preds
16:56:58 [GaryHallmark]: s/to/over
16:57:19 [PaulaP]: we have functions and operators in the list
16:57:35 [sandro]: Harold, I agree we want builtins --- I'm just not sure if they might be function-style.
16:58:06 [Harold]: Well, only today we decided to keep equality...
16:58:22 [Harold]: ... which is needed to call function-style.
16:58:57 [AxelPolleres]: add(X,Y,Z) it wouldn't bind a value to Z, but it would have aa fixed interpretation which allows only one value for Z if X and Y are bound.
16:59:10 [AxelPolleres]: ... slight difference.
17:00:07 [GaryHallmark]: dave: w/o equality in Core, functional style builtins are less useful than predicate style
17:00:08 [Harold]: Equality with builtin calls on right-hand side corresponds to Prolog's "is" primitive.
17:00:34 [GaryHallmark]: dave: what about list types?
17:01:18 [GaryHallmark]: ... need to agree on specifics of the list type for next draft
17:01:47 [GaryHallmark]: ... need to specify collation
17:01:47 [PaulaP]: e.g contains
17:02:01 [GaryHallmark]: ... e.g. compare builtin
17:02:38 [GaryHallmark]: ... minimum is simple codepoint collation
17:02:53 [csma]: zakim, mute me
17:02:53 [Zakim]: csma should now be muted
17:03:02 [csma]: q+
17:03:27 [GaryHallmark]: ... or just omit colation sensitive builtins altogether
17:04:05 [GaryHallmark]: josb: can't decide on list of builtins before deciding on functional vs. predicate style
17:04:21 [DougL]: DougL has joined #rif
17:04:46 [csma]: Arghhh! The proposed resolution has been implicitely or explicitely on the table for a long long time!
17:04:48 [Zakim]: + +1.512.342.aabb
17:05:00 [DougL]: zakim, aabb is me
17:05:00 [Zakim]: +DougL; got it
17:05:03 [ChrisW]: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/List_of_BLD_built-ins
17:05:14 [csma]: ack csma
17:05:21 [josb]: q-
17:05:23 [csma]: ack josb
17:05:54 [GaryHallmark]: action: daver to add collation issue to builtins wiki page
17:05:55 [trackbot-ng]: Sorry, couldn't find user - daver
17:06:23 [josb]: q+
17:06:25 [GaryHallmark]: action: davereynolds to add collation issue to builtins wiki page
17:06:25 [trackbot-ng]: Sorry, couldn't find user - davereynolds
17:06:52 [GaryHallmark]: action: dreynolds2 to add collation issue to builtins wiki page
17:06:52 [trackbot-ng]: Sorry, couldn't find user - dreynolds2
17:07:06 [GaryHallmark]: action: dreynold2 to add collation issue to builtins wiki page
17:07:06 [trackbot-ng]: Created ACTION-400 - Add collation issue to builtins wiki page [on Dave Reynolds - due 2008-01-22].
17:07:31 [Zakim]: -??P67
17:07:43 [ChrisW]: q?
17:08:00 [ChrisW]: ack jos
17:08:33 [GaryHallmark]: josb: also need to define semantics of builtins
17:08:47 [GaryHallmark]: ... before we can evaluate the proposed list of builtins
17:08:50 [AxelPolleres]: I think, so far, we only have sketched/discussed the semantics for built-on *predicates*, AFAIK
17:09:09 [GaryHallmark]: ... model theoretic RIF semantics wrt builtins
17:09:32 [AxelPolleres]: q+
17:09:42 [GaryHallmark]: s/wrt/w.r.t.
17:09:42 [csma]: ExtTerm
17:10:38 [GaryHallmark]: josb: need semantics of "ExtTerm"
17:10:39 [AxelPolleres]: We diden't fix how ExtTerms look like though (BTW), did we? We just said we want them to be syntacticcally distinguisheable
17:11:00 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: same semantics as "Term"
17:11:15 [GaryHallmark]: josb: but there are outstanding issues w.r.t. Error handling
17:11:31 [AxelPolleres]: q-
17:11:41 [Harold]: We seem not to know yet if Equality should be allowed both in BLD and in Core, but I think we will need builtins in Core. So in order to allow the more natural functional builtins in Core we should allow (restricted) Equality there.
17:11:47 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: not ready for resolution
17:12:37 [ChrisW]: Topic: Issue 45
17:12:54 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: the issue is about lists
17:13:03 [Harold]: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Core/List_Constructor
17:13:14 [AxelPolleres]: +1 to jos, nothing to add, we need to have the semantics of built-in preds and functions on the table, then we can discuss it. Agree that it should be straightfwd for most predicates, not sure about functions at the moment, but hopefully similar
17:14:53 [DougL]: I think we should have both, don't you think?
17:15:01 [josb]: -1 to have both
17:16:17 [josb]: q+
17:16:18 [AxelPolleres]: as for the tagnames, should we use ones more similar to the resp. rdf vocabulary, i.e. List, first, rest, nil instead of Pair
17:16:21 [GaryHallmark]: harold: alternatives are pairs vs. n-ary sequences
17:17:06 [GaryHallmark]: ... n-ary sequences are more common
17:17:08 [DougL]: I meant for conceptual impedance matching, allowing both, not saving a few bits. What is the COST of allowing both?
17:17:23 [josb]: q-
17:17:30 [AxelPolleres]: rdf doesn't have seq ... prolog doesn't have seq
17:17:36 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: anyone really want pairs?
17:17:43 [ChrisW]: q?
17:17:57 [Hassan]: q+
17:18:00 [AxelPolleres]: they use the pair stuff, but Prolog has syntactic sugar for something which looks like seqs.
17:18:33 [Harold]: Axel, prolog has seq's [e1, e2, ..., eN].
17:18:49 [AxelPolleres]: I see the point with the blowup in the xml though...
17:19:55 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: pairs take a lot of space to represent in xml
17:20:06 [csma]: zakim, mute me
17:20:06 [Zakim]: csma should now be muted
17:20:46 [josb]: q+
17:21:05 [csma]: ack hassan
17:21:07 [DougL]: These are arguments for allowing sequences; they are not arguments for NOT having pairs as well.
17:21:33 [GaryHallmark]: hassan: not completely equivalent in non-ground case
17:21:57 [DougL]: that sounds good to me (whoever is saying that)
17:22:01 [DaveReynolds]: +1 to Jos
17:22:01 [Hassan]: +1 with Jos
17:22:14 [csma]: @Doug: it is Jos De Bruijn
17:22:21 [DougL]: +2 Jos then
17:22:30 [GaryHallmark]: josb: use pairs in language defn, sequences in xml
17:22:47 [DougL]: (+2 means: I not only agree, I wish I had said that)
17:23:26 [DaveReynolds]: +1
17:23:27 [DougL]: +1
17:23:27 [Hassan]: +1
17:23:29 [josb]: +1
17:23:30 [PaulaP]: +1
17:23:31 [Harold]: +1
17:23:34 [IgorMozetic]: 0
17:23:42 [sandro]: +1
17:23:47 [AxelPolleres]: 0 why have syntactic sugar in the XML and not in the presentation syntax?
17:23:50 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: straw poll on Jos's statement
17:24:03 [csma]: ack jos
17:24:04 [ChrisW]: ack jos
17:24:07 [josb]: axel: sequences cannot be incomplete, as Hassan mentioned
17:24:09 [csma]: ack axel
17:24:40 [GaryHallmark]: axel: but language defn should be readable, therefore use sequences
17:24:50 [IgorMozetic]: +1 for Axel
17:24:54 [GaryHallmark]: ... don't read xml, don't care about xml syntax
17:24:58 [josb]: fine with me as well
17:25:04 [Hassan]: fine here too
17:25:39 [GaryHallmark]: axel: semantics uses pairs, presentation syntax and xml syntax uses sequences
17:26:26 [GaryHallmark]: ... prefer 1b for semantics, 1a for syntax
17:26:40 [josb]: Seq ( a ?Y c | ?R) as shortcut?
17:27:02 [GaryHallmark]: ... 1a, 1b from http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Core/List_Constructor
17:27:34 [ChrisW]: Topic: AOB
17:27:36 [csma]: zakim, unmute me
17:27:36 [Zakim]: csma should no longer be muted
17:27:38 [GaryHallmark]: chrisw: let's resolve next week
17:27:58 [AxelPolleres]: jos? didn't get your example.
17:28:15 [GaryHallmark]: harold: which wiki are we supposed to use?
17:28:15 [AxelPolleres]: ... what does the pipe there?
17:28:21 [ChrisW]: Paula, can you scribe next week?
17:28:24 [josb]: we need to distinguish between last element and tail
17:28:43 [josb]: after | is the tail (see bottom of page)
17:28:46 [AxelPolleres]: I wouldn't allow '|' in Seq
17:29:13 [GaryHallmark]: sandro: wants feedback on conversion of docs to new wiki
17:29:16 [ChrisW]: zakim, who is on the phone?
17:29:16 [Zakim]: On the phone I see PaulaP (muted), Sandro.a, AxelPolleres, DougL, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), Gary_Hallmark, csma, ChrisW, josb, Harold, DaveReynolds, IgorMozetic (muted),
17:29:19 [Zakim]: ... Stella_Mitchell
17:30:23 [PaulaP]: bye
17:30:26 [Zakim]: -PaulaP
17:30:27 [ChrisW]: paula
17:30:55 [GaryHallmark]: sandro: new wiki can allow wiki editing and html editing
17:31:03 [Hassan]: Sorry gotta go... Bye...
17:31:09 [Zakim]: -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
17:31:23 [AxelPolleres]: but use Seq ( a b c) as a shortcut for rif:list( rif:frst (a) rif:rest( rif:list(rif:irst(b) rif:rest( rif:List( rif:first(c) rif:rest(rif:nil) ) ) )
17:31:23 [Zakim]: -Stella_Mitchell
17:31:25 [Zakim]: -IgorMozetic
17:31:26 [Zakim]: -josb
17:31:29 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make minutes
17:31:29 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
17:31:29 [Zakim]: -DaveReynolds
17:31:37 [Zakim]: -AxelPolleres
17:31:41 [Zakim]: -DougL
17:31:48 [AxelPolleres]: AxelPolleres has left #rif
17:32:07 [ChrisW]: Regrets: MichaelKifer
17:32:09 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make minutes
17:32:09 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
17:32:22 [ChrisW]: d'oh
17:32:26 [ChrisW]: zakim, list attendees
17:32:26 [Zakim]: As of this point the attendees have been Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, +39.047.1.aaaa, Stella_Mitchell, ChrisW, PaulaP, josb, csma, IgorMozetic, Sandro, Harold, DaveReynolds,
17:32:30 [Zakim]: ... AxelPolleres, +1.512.342.aabb, DougL
17:32:36 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make minutes
17:32:36 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
17:33:02 [ChrisW]: d'oh again
17:33:12 [ChrisW]: Regrets: MichaelKifer LeoraMorgenstern PaulVincent
17:33:18 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make minutes
17:33:18 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
17:33:25 [ChrisW]: last time I swear
17:33:55 [ChrisW]: jmmmm
17:34:38 [sandro]: zakim, list attendees
17:34:38 [Zakim]: As of this point the attendees have been Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, +39.047.1.aaaa, Stella_Mitchell, ChrisW, PaulaP, josb, csma, IgorMozetic, Sandro, Harold, DaveReynolds,
17:34:41 [Zakim]: ... AxelPolleres, +1.512.342.aabb, DougL
17:35:22 [Zakim]: -Gary_Hallmark
17:36:06 [csma]: zakim, who is on the phone?
17:36:06 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Sandro.a, csma, ChrisW, Harold
17:37:58 [Zakim]: -Harold
17:38:00 [Zakim]: -Sandro.a
17:38:03 [Zakim]: -ChrisW
17:38:06 [Zakim]: -csma
17:38:08 [Zakim]: SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:38:09 [Zakim]: Attendees were Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, +39.047.1.aaaa, Stella_Mitchell, ChrisW, PaulaP, josb, csma, IgorMozetic, Sandro, Harold, DaveReynolds, AxelPolleres,
17:38:11 [Zakim]: ... +1.512.342.aabb, DougL
17:38:21 [csma]: csma has left #rif
19:38:51 [sandro]: sandro has joined #rif
19:59:49 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #rif
21:18:52 [sandro]: sandro has joined #rif