IRC log of rif on 2008-08-12
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:49:13 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rif
- 14:49:13 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/08/12-rif-irc
- 14:49:19 [ChrisW]
- zakim, this will be rif
- 14:49:19 [Zakim]
- ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
- 14:49:38 [ChrisW]
- Meeting: RIF Telecon 12-Aug-08
- 14:49:45 [ChrisW]
- Chair: Chris Welty
- 14:50:43 [ChrisW]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0019.html
- 14:51:06 [ChrisW]
- ChrisW has changed the topic to: 12 Aug RIF Telecon Agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0019.html
- 14:51:25 [ChrisW]
- clear agenda
- 14:51:30 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ Admin
- 14:51:34 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ Liason
- 14:51:39 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ Action Review
- 14:51:44 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ F2F11
- 14:51:47 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ Core
- 14:51:51 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ Test Cases
- 14:51:58 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ Peter's review
- 14:52:02 [ChrisW]
- agenda+ AOB
- 14:52:12 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 14:52:12 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 14:58:53 [AxelPolleres]
- AxelPolleres has joined #rif
- 14:59:07 [ChrisWelty]
- ChrisWelty has joined #rif
- 14:59:24 [ChrisWelty]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 14:59:24 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/08/12-rif-minutes.html ChrisWelty
- 15:00:34 [mdean]
- mdean has joined #rif
- 15:01:01 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
- 15:01:05 [ChrisWelty]
- rrsagent, make logs public
- 15:01:08 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 15:01:16 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, ibm is temporarily me
- 15:01:16 [Zakim]
- +ChrisWelty; got it
- 15:01:58 [Zakim]
- +Mike_Dean
- 15:02:23 [StellaMitchell]
- StellaMitchell has joined #rif
- 15:02:36 [AdrianP]
- AdrianP has joined #rif
- 15:02:44 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
- 15:03:31 [Zakim]
- +LeoraMorgenstern
- 15:03:35 [ChrisWelty]
- are people having trouble with zakim?
- 15:03:39 [Zakim]
- +??P39
- 15:03:49 [Zakim]
- +AdrianP
- 15:03:52 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 15:03:56 [StellaMitchell]
- zakim, ibm is temporarily me
- 15:03:56 [Zakim]
- +StellaMitchell; got it
- 15:04:00 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 15:04:00 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 15:04:41 [StellaMitchell]
- no problems with zakim for me
- 15:04:45 [ChrisWelty]
- harold, are you coming?
- 15:05:22 [Zakim]
- +josb
- 15:05:27 [josb]
- josb has joined #rif
- 15:06:23 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, pick a scribe
- 15:06:23 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose LeoraMorgenstern
- 15:06:27 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Okay.
- 15:06:43 [ChrisWelty]
- Scribe: LeoraMorgenstern
- 15:06:53 [ChrisWelty]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/att-0012/2008-08-05-rif-minutes.html
- 15:06:57 [MichaelKifer]
- MichaelKifer has joined #rif
- 15:07:05 [ChrisWelty]
- PROPOSED: Accept minutes of last week's telecon
- 15:07:12 [ChrisWelty]
- RESOLVED: Accept minutes of last week's telecon
- 15:07:21 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- next item admin
- 15:07:28 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- any agenda amendments?
- 15:07:30 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- none
- 15:07:31 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 15:07:31 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "Liason" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 15:07:41 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- (that's liaison)
- 15:07:51 [AdrianP]
- yes
- 15:07:58 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Health Care and Sciences will take up again in September?
- 15:08:05 [Zakim]
- +MichaelKifer
- 15:08:11 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 15:08:11 [Zakim]
- agendum 2 was just opened, ChrisWelty
- 15:08:12 [AdrianP]
- HCLS
- 15:08:16 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 15:08:16 [Zakim]
- agendum 2 was just opened, ChrisWelty
- 15:08:20 [Zakim]
- +??P48
- 15:08:21 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, close item 2
- 15:08:21 [Zakim]
- agendum 2, Liason, closed
- 15:08:22 [Zakim]
- I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 15:08:23 [Zakim]
- 3. Action Review [from ChrisW]
- 15:08:25 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 15:08:25 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "Action Review" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 15:08:36 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- s/Health Care and Sciences/HCLS
- 15:08:37 [AxelPolleres]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-text/2008JulSep/0007.html ... yesterday's chat on rdf:text (former rif:text).
- 15:08:43 [Zakim]
- -??P48
- 15:08:45 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 15:08:46 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 15:08:54 [AxelPolleres]
- my actions: ACTION-551 is done, ACTION-552 is continued.
- 15:08:55 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian had action on making PRD conditions equivalent to BLD conditions.
- 15:09:03 [Zakim]
- +[NRCC]
- 15:09:08 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: not finished
- 15:09:09 [DaveReynolds]
- DaveReynolds has joined #rif
- 15:09:22 [Harold]
- zakim, [NRCC] is me
- 15:09:23 [Zakim]
- +Harold; got it
- 15:09:26 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 15:09:26 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 15:09:28 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Also, Axel had an action to summarize open DTB issues.
- 15:09:36 [Zakim]
- +??P48
- 15:09:42 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel: continued. But will be ready by next week
- 15:09:54 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel had action to remove section 4.3.5. Done.
- 15:10:15 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian, Stella (and Leora) had an action to discuss test cases.
- 15:10:21 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- That is pending discussion.
- 15:10:33 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 15:10:33 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "F2F11" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 15:10:57 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- F2F11 is scheduled fro Sept. 26-27.
- 15:11:12 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Participants or potential participants are encouraged to make reservations now.
- 15:11:27 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- You need to get in early to get a relatively reasonable hotel rate.
- 15:12:02 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Harold: recommendation of not-so-expensive hotel within walking distance
- 15:12:10 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: laughs
- 15:12:21 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: no IBM special rates for Manhattan
- 15:12:33 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: recommends Expedia
- 15:12:52 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: recommends looking in parts of Brooklyn close ot Manhattan and taking the subway.
- 15:13:02 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- s/close ot/close to/
- 15:13:03 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 15:13:03 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "Core" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 15:13:31 [Zakim]
- +Gary_Hallmark
- 15:13:34 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Need to take phone call
- 15:13:53 [ChrisWelty]
- harold, can you scribe for a few minutes?
- 15:14:07 [Harold]
- Ok
- 15:14:12 [josb]
- no functions should mean no lists
- 15:14:23 [ChrisWelty]
- Scribe: Harold
- 15:14:49 [AxelPolleres]
- no functions in heads might be enough.
- 15:15:01 [josb]
- decidability of reasoning
- 15:15:10 [JeffP]
- JeffP has joined #rif
- 15:15:26 [JeffP]
- (I am with Dave on phone)
- 15:15:33 [Harold]
- Dave: Separation External/Internal may be an issue for lists.
- 15:15:45 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- I'm back; I can scribe again.
- 15:15:49 [AxelPolleres]
- q+
- 15:16:03 [ChrisWelty]
- ack axel
- 15:16:14 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, DaveReynolds contains JeffP
- 15:16:14 [Zakim]
- +JeffP; got it
- 15:16:18 [Harold]
- Scribe: Leora
- 15:16:35 [josb]
- why allow them at all?
- 15:16:56 [josb]
- q+
- 15:16:57 [Zakim]
- -Gary_Hallmark
- 15:17:45 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: <missing a few moments of context> talking about a limited set of defined built-ins and no other user-defined functions
- 15:17:47 [AxelPolleres]
- safety (i.e. no free vars in heads) + safety of built-ins (i.e. no otherwise unbound variables in built-ins)
- 15:17:51 [Zakim]
- +Gary_Hallmark
- 15:18:19 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: Axel was imposing certain restrictions on use of function symbols.
- 15:18:34 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: I see no reason for using function symbols except for external function symbols,
- 15:18:49 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: and restrictions are already defined here, so we have no problem with these.
- 15:18:53 [MichaelKifer]
- MichaelKifer has joined #rif
- 15:19:02 [Harold]
- So, we have some design principles for Core: Decidability would be #1(no function symbols).
- 15:19:10 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:19:10 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should now be muted
- 15:19:42 [AxelPolleres]
- jos... assume:
- 15:19:42 [AxelPolleres]
- a(x) :- a(y), external( add(y,1,x) ).
- 15:19:43 [AxelPolleres]
- a(1).
- 15:19:52 [AxelPolleres]
- so, externals can also be problematic.
- 15:20:02 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: You could devise certain restrictions (e.g., function symbols without variables) but I doubt they would be useful
- 15:20:28 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, who is on the phone
- 15:20:28 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who is on the phone', AdrianP
- 15:20:33 [AxelPolleres]
- right, that was why I suggestedt safety for head vars and vars in externals.
- 15:20:37 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:20:37 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see ChrisWelty, Mike_Dean, LeoraMorgenstern, AxelPolleres, AdrianP (muted), StellaMitchell, josb, MichaelKifer (muted), Harold, DaveReynolds, Gary_Hallmark
- 15:20:41 [Zakim]
- DaveReynolds has JeffP
- 15:21:24 [AxelPolleres]
- q+
- 15:21:31 [ChrisWelty]
- ack josb
- 15:21:37 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: what more than Datalog would we want in the core?
- 15:21:56 [ChrisWelty]
- core: datalog + keep frame syntax
- 15:22:22 [josb]
- q+
- 15:22:39 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel: we could allow unbound variable in body as long it doesn't occur in the recursion.
- 15:22:40 [ChrisWelty]
- ack axel
- 15:22:57 [ChrisWelty]
- ack j
- 15:23:00 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: Rule A(x) will never terminate.
- 15:23:18 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: If you want any sort of safety, go for full-fledged safety.
- 15:23:27 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel: was only referring to external predicates.
- 15:23:36 [AdrianP]
- same applies for tautologies - so we need the Datalog safeness condition
- 15:24:33 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- s/safety/safeness
- 15:24:51 [AxelPolleres]
- an extended notion of safeness for external preds would need binding patterns.
- 15:24:56 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: I don't see the need to go with binding patterns for core.
- 15:25:12 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: simplicity of implementation is one of the design requirements for core.
- 15:25:17 [AxelPolleres]
- standards safety for both heads and externals is fair enough for core for me.
- 15:25:28 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: But guarantee of termination is also crucial.
- 15:25:36 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 15:25:48 [AxelPolleres]
- jos' statement is not in conflict with chrisW's ...
- 15:25:58 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: Also, if there is a notion of safety, easier to implement..
- 15:26:17 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: I don't find simplicity of implementation to be correlated with decidability.
- 15:27:16 [JeffP]
- +1 on decidability on core
- 15:27:16 [AxelPolleres]
- yes. I'd even say, finite (minimal) models are a desideratum for core.
- 15:27:18 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: Certain algorithms are associated with guaranteed termination.
- 15:27:27 [josb]
- I prefer satisfiability for Core, but do not consider it a strong requirement
- 15:27:42 [ChrisWelty]
- ack dave
- 15:28:00 [Harold]
- q+
- 15:28:29 [AxelPolleres]
- q+
- 15:28:54 [ChrisWelty]
- ack h
- 15:29:00 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Dave: <missing>
- 15:29:23 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Dave: Feature of DTB that we have binding patterns there. (as summarized by Harold)
- 15:29:35 [ChrisWelty]
- ack a
- 15:30:17 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel, could you repeat that?
- 15:30:30 [Zakim]
- -Mike_Dean
- 15:31:10 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel: I f we say every variable occurring in external predicate needs to be bound in non-external predicates, then we don't need binding patterns, because everything is bound.
- 15:31:20 [josb]
- What Axel describes is a notion of safeness
- 15:31:33 [josb]
- Binding patterns help in the definition of safeness
- 15:31:41 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel: the idea of binding pattenrns is to loosen this restriction. If for example, we say we only need to bind two out of three variables.
- 15:32:08 [josb]
- it does
- 15:32:20 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel: for Datalog, we don't have external predicates, so we would only have to say that variables appearing in predicates in the head also have to appear in the body.
- 15:32:53 [josb]
- q+
- 15:33:04 [Harold]
- Paraphrasing Axel, safeness can be seen as an overarching "binding principle", so no syntactic "binding patterns" would be needed.
- 15:33:23 [AxelPolleres]
- dave, that would allow exactly the example I wrote above...
- 15:34:25 [AdrianP]
- typically mode declarations are used to define such kinds of binding patterns, e.g. add(+,+,?) would mean first argument is bound input, second one too, third one can be output or input, i.e. free or bound
- 15:34:52 [ChrisWelty]
- ack j
- 15:35:13 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: I don't think Axel's strict defintion of safeness is useful.
- 15:35:26 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: Definition should take external predicates into account.
- 15:35:29 [AxelPolleres]
- not in the standard datalog sense...
- 15:35:32 [Harold]
- In LP, "binding patterns" were often called "mode declarations". Introducing explicit "mode declarations" syntax for Core would be problematic: An extralogical feature that we may not want througout all RIF dialects (e.g. in BLD).
- 15:35:37 [Zakim]
- -Gary_Hallmark
- 15:35:53 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: More precisely, one uses external predicates to define safeness.
- 15:36:34 [DaveReynolds]
- Harold: not proposing mode declarations could be part of user rules, just defined in the spec as restrictions on using of DTB fns/preds
- 15:36:34 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos, could you repeat that?
- 15:36:40 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: <missing something>
- 15:36:59 [AxelPolleres]
- the thing is that a binding pattern for my example, alone would not "save" you... the extension of a() would still be infinite.
- 15:37:07 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Youre' talking about having a mechanism to specify whether a variable needs to be free or bound?
- 15:37:19 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: I don't think we need anything more.
- 15:37:29 [AxelPolleres]
- i.e. either you take safety in the strict sense OR you take binding patterns plus safe recursion.
- 15:37:44 [DaveReynolds]
- Axel: agreed
- 15:37:46 [AxelPolleres]
- jos, do you agree?
- 15:37:56 [AdrianP]
- not all Datalog engines support binding patterns / mode declarations
- 15:38:14 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: do people agree with Jos? (No, seems, that Axel doesn't.)
- 15:38:30 [Harold]
- Dave, Yes, that's fine.
- 15:39:24 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Axel: either take strict safety or restrictions on bindings in recursion.
- 15:39:37 [Zakim]
- +Gary_Hallmark
- 15:40:39 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: yes, Datalog and the addition of external predicates does complicate things.
- 15:41:19 [AdrianP]
- Datalog semantics for hybrid Ontology - rule systems have been defined, it is the same problem
- 15:41:39 [ChrisWelty]
- Core as datalog + a limited set of datatypes & builtins
- 15:41:40 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- David: <again, having trouble hearing him>
- 15:42:57 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: We need to make sure Core has certain attributes--- e.g., decidability, ease of implementation
- 15:43:06 [ChrisWelty]
- Core should be easy to implement, decidable?, tractable?, extendable to BLD & PRD
- 15:43:13 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Harold: We need to keep PRD in mind --- what do we bring from PRD to core?
- 15:43:14 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 15:43:14 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 15:43:23 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Harold: E.g., Christian's notion of negation?
- 15:43:38 [Harold]
- Yes.
- 15:44:13 [Harold]
- Because we might adapt FLD's/BLD's negations for that.
- 15:44:23 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: And also Assert action
- 15:44:32 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Gary: same as frame formula or term in PRD
- 15:45:02 [Harold]
- We have called Assert-only PRD "Pur Production Rules".
- 15:45:17 [AxelPolleres]
- note that Datalog safety does not extend straightforwardly to allowing discjunction in the body, but we excluded that already, right?
- 15:45:20 [AdrianP]
- the semantics of the head in core for PRD would then be an assert
- 15:45:21 [Harold]
- s/Pur Production Rules/Pure Production Rules/
- 15:45:38 [josb]
- right
- 15:45:42 [DaveReynolds]
- Axel: right, I think we agreed to exclude that last week
- 15:45:50 [AdrianP]
- yes, pure production rules without negation would be Core (from the PRD perspective)
- 15:46:06 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: someone has to step up to take on the job of writing this all up.
- 15:46:06 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 15:46:06 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 15:46:12 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Looking for volunteers.
- 15:46:16 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 15:46:16 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 15:46:21 [AxelPolleres]
- q+
- 15:46:37 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Harold: Will work on this from the BLD point of view. Perhaps some PRD people will join. And perhaps Dave?
- 15:46:51 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- And Axel and Adrian also.
- 15:47:12 [AdrianP]
- I would join from the PRD perspective, since I will work on the conditions of PRD anyway
- 15:47:12 [AxelPolleres]
- q-
- 15:47:13 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Harold, can you start the wiki page for the core document?
- 15:47:17 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 15:47:17 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 15:47:19 [ChrisWelty]
- action: harold to start a core draft wiki page
- 15:47:19 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-556 - Start a core draft wiki page [on Harold Boley - due 2008-08-19].
- 15:47:26 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 15:47:26 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "Test Cases" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 15:47:37 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 15:47:37 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 15:47:57 [ChrisWelty]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Test
- 15:48:19 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: <overview of intiial Test document>
- 15:48:32 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: This is the document that we're writing for test documents
- 15:48:40 [AdrianP]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/TCS
- 15:48:49 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: There's also another document (the TCS doc) intended for discussion)
- 15:48:53 [DaveReynolds]
- DaveReynolds has joined #rif
- 15:49:13 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Test document will be the official working draft for test cases
- 15:49:34 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: TCS doc is intended for discussion of questions and issues.
- 15:49:59 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Stella proposed we first discuss purpose of test suite.
- 15:50:14 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Do we want to define test suite for conformance?
- 15:50:29 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Or do we want to just give examples for test cases?
- 15:51:11 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Or will there also be test cases for validating implementation?
- 15:51:50 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: two parts: 1. Define test suite (for BLD, PRD, built ins for DTB)
- 15:52:01 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- and could be informative or conformant.
- 15:52:09 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 15:52:41 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- 2. Also might give concrete xml syntax for specifying test cases.
- 15:53:07 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Why not just specify test cases in xml of dialect?
- 15:53:30 [Harold]
- Adrian, does your "test theory" already distinguish consumers and producers? http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#Conformance_Clauses
- 15:53:42 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Perhaps current dialects might not be expressive enough for some tests.
- 15:54:01 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: encourage to start small, and focus on test cases for BLD. and soon, PRD.
- 15:54:17 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: but would be hesitant to start inventing a new dialect.
- 15:54:52 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Be careful with test cases for PRD, because it's evolving so quickly. Wait till it's stable. BLD, on the other hand, is stable.
- 15:55:11 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: And it's critical for next step of BLD --- a call for implementation ---
- 15:55:16 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: that there are test cases.
- 15:55:17 [ChrisWelty]
- ack d
- 15:55:39 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Dave:<answered some of these questions in his email>
- 15:56:04 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Dave: Should be neither conformance suite nor informative, but normative
- 15:56:44 [Harold]
- Dave, using finitely many tests, you can anyway only disprove conformance, not prove it.
- 15:57:00 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: We're not imagining a test suite is exhaustive in terms of the dialect.
- 15:57:18 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Being able to run the test suite does not guarantee full compliance; not sure it's possible to have such a test suite.
- 15:57:34 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Another question: which kind of test cases?
- 15:57:45 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: initial categorization in test case document
- 15:57:57 [AdrianP]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Test
- 15:58:09 [MichaelKifer]
- MichaelKifer has joined #rif
- 15:59:06 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: why have different categories?
- 15:59:16 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: to distinguish different test suites
- 15:59:27 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: also may facilitate collection process from community
- 15:59:32 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris:
- 15:59:47 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: don't really see point of classification system prior to the tests.
- 16:00:04 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: why not come up with test cases first?
- 16:00:22 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: tests may wind up in multiple categories
- 16:00:45 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: first get tests, then see if some natural ordering comes from them.
- 16:01:16 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: what are some of the important features of BLD to test? Important to have test cases of classifcation, of forms, of external functions, etc.
- 16:01:29 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Work toward more explicit test cases.
- 16:01:31 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 16:01:31 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- q+
- 16:01:41 [AdrianP]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case
- 16:01:44 [ChrisWelty]
- ack d
- 16:01:58 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Dave: main thing are validation tests, entailment tests, etc.
- 16:02:13 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Dave: best to concentrate on these
- 16:02:15 [ChrisWelty]
- ack l
- 16:02:41 [AdrianP]
- some test cases are here http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case
- 16:04:55 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: I gave a RIF presentation 2 weeks ago; first question was: do you have any examples; and I suspect that's going to be true for anyone who gives a presentation on RIF.
- 16:05:13 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Since there are lots of people who learn from examples, not from reading documents.
- 16:05:55 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Jeff, you expressed interest in submitting some examples. Would you still like to do this?
- 16:06:10 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jeff: Yes, I have a colleague of mine just joined the WG and will be doing this.
- 16:06:36 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 16:06:36 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 16:07:08 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 16:07:08 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 16:07:08 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- chris: I can officiall assign the action to him when he officially joins the WG and is on a telecon.
- 16:07:32 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Anyone else who has even the simplest examples around should submit them.
- 16:07:50 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: Should we have an open call for test cases?
- 16:08:12 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: <open within the WG>
- 16:08:29 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: We do have that: we have the wiki and a wiki template for writing test cases.
- 16:08:40 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: What's the process for someone to create a new test case?
- 16:09:00 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Adrian: For category page for test cases, there is a template for creating test cases; template is shown on bottom of page.
- 16:10:14 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: would be better to just click on a button and get a template.
- 16:11:07 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: <general instructions for creating wiki pages>
- 16:11:12 [ChrisWelty]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Test_Case_Example
- 16:11:26 [ChrisWelty]
- action: Chris to make WG call for use cases
- 16:11:26 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-557 - Make WG call for use cases [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-08-19].
- 16:11:29 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: I will make a call for the working group to submit test cases.
- 16:11:35 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- q+
- 16:11:44 [ChrisWelty]
- ack l
- 16:15:43 [AdrianP]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Test_Case_Format
- 16:16:11 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 16:16:11 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "Peter's review" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 16:16:18 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 16:16:18 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 16:16:30 [ChrisWelty]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2008Aug/0000.html
- 16:16:38 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- <Adrian's posting this link followed some discussion on test case format, need to specify what it means to pass a test, etc.>
- 16:16:48 [ChrisWelty]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_PPS4
- 16:17:55 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Peter Patel-Schneider wrote a critique of BLD; seems to be a lot of confusion over terminology.
- 16:18:04 [ChrisWelty]
- action: debruij2 to draft initial response to PFPS4
- 16:18:04 [trackbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - debruij2
- 16:18:04 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: Jos, would you take an action to respond?
- 16:18:07 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Jos: yes.
- 16:18:16 [ChrisWelty]
- action: jos to bla
- 16:18:16 [trackbot]
- Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - jos
- 16:18:16 [trackbot]
- Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
- 16:18:25 [ChrisWelty]
- action: jdebrui2 to draft initial response to PFPS4
- 16:18:25 [trackbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - jdebrui2
- 16:18:32 [ChrisWelty]
- action: jdebruij2 to draft initial response to PFPS4
- 16:18:32 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-558 - Draft initial response to PFPS4 [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2008-08-19].
- 16:18:46 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, next item
- 16:18:46 [Zakim]
- agendum 8. "AOB" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 16:18:54 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, list agenda
- 16:18:54 [Zakim]
- I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
- 16:18:55 [Zakim]
- 8. AOB [from ChrisW]
- 16:19:16 [Zakim]
- -Harold
- 16:19:16 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- Chris: proposal to adjourn
- 16:19:18 [Zakim]
- -StellaMitchell
- 16:19:20 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, list attendees
- 16:19:20 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been ChrisWelty, Mike_Dean, LeoraMorgenstern, AxelPolleres, AdrianP, StellaMitchell, josb, MichaelKifer, Harold, Gary_Hallmark, JeffP
- 16:19:23 [Zakim]
- -Gary_Hallmark
- 16:19:25 [Zakim]
- -AdrianP
- 16:19:28 [Zakim]
- -josb
- 16:19:29 [Zakim]
- -MichaelKifer
- 16:19:32 [Zakim]
- -DaveReynolds
- 16:19:39 [Zakim]
- -AxelPolleres
- 16:19:44 [ChrisWelty]
- Regrets: Sandro Hawke MohamedZergaoui
- 16:19:50 [ChrisWelty]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:19:51 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/08/12-rif-minutes.html ChrisWelty
- 16:23:10 [Zakim]
- -ChrisWelty
- 16:23:12 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
- 16:23:13 [Zakim]
- Attendees were ChrisWelty, Mike_Dean, LeoraMorgenstern, AxelPolleres, AdrianP, StellaMitchell, josb, MichaelKifer, Harold, Gary_Hallmark, JeffP
- 17:44:21 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rif
- 17:44:21 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/08/12-rif-irc