IRC log of rif on 2008-10-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:48:03 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:48:03 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-rif-irc
14:48:16 [csma]: zakim, this will be RIF
14:48:16 [Zakim]: ok, csma; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
14:48:29 [csma]: Meeting: RIF telecon 14 October 08
14:48:39 [csma]: Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
14:48:54 [csma]: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0039.html
14:49:21 [StuartTaylor]: StuartTaylor has joined #rif
14:49:29 [csma]: csma has changed the topic to: 14 October RIF telecon; agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0039.html
14:49:37 [csma]: Scribe: Stuart Taylor
14:49:49 [csma]: scribenick: StuartTaylor
14:50:36 [csma]: Regrets: Hassan A�t-Kaci, Leora Morgenstern, MohamedZergaoui
14:51:10 [csma]: zakim, reset agenda
14:51:10 [Zakim]: I don't understand 'reset agenda', csma
14:51:18 [csma]: zakim, clear agenda
14:51:18 [Zakim]: agenda cleared
14:51:28 [csma]: agendum+ Admin
14:51:36 [csma]: agendum+ Liaison
14:51:45 [csma]: agendum+ Public comments
14:51:56 [csma]: agendum+ Action review
14:52:07 [csma]: agendum+ Action 577
14:52:19 [csma]: agendum+ Test Cases
14:52:41 [csma]: agendum+ Frames VS objects
14:52:53 [csma]: agendum+ AOB (Pick scribe!)
14:55:34 [Zakim]: SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
14:55:41 [Zakim]: + +0122427aaaa
14:57:52 [Zakim]: +??P18
14:58:02 [StuartTaylor]: zakim, aaaa is me
14:58:03 [Zakim]: +StuartTaylor; got it
14:58:04 [csma]: zakim, ??P18 is me
14:58:04 [Zakim]: +csma; got it
14:59:36 [csma]: zakim, who is on the phone?
14:59:36 [Zakim]: On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma
15:00:22 [ChrisW]: ChrisW has joined #rif
15:00:50 [Zakim]: +[NRCC]
15:01:39 [StellaMitchell]: StellaMitchell has joined #rif
15:02:49 [josb]: josb has joined #rif
15:03:14 [Zakim]: +[IBM]
15:03:27 [StellaMitchell]: zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:03:27 [Zakim]: +StellaMitchell; got it
15:03:38 [Harold]: zakim, NRCC is me
15:03:39 [Zakim]: +Harold; got it
15:03:45 [Zakim]: +josb
15:04:05 [DaveReynolds]: DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:04:29 [Zakim]: +??P0
15:04:48 [csma]: Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:04:48 [Zakim]: On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, Harold, StellaMitchell, josb, DaveReynolds
15:04:59 [Zakim]: +Mike_Dean
15:05:08 [Zakim]: +[IBM]
15:05:13 [mdean]: mdean has joined #rif
15:05:16 [ChrisW]: zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:05:16 [Zakim]: +ChrisW; got it
15:05:38 [csma]: next item
15:05:53 [AxelPolleres]: AxelPolleres has joined #rif
15:05:57 [csma]: PROPOSED: accept minutes of telecon October 7
15:06:06 [Gary_Hallmark]: Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
15:06:14 [csma]: RESOLVED: accept minutes of telecon October 7
15:06:34 [csma]: PROPOSED: accept minutes of F2F11
15:06:51 [csma]: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-26
15:07:03 [csma]: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-27
15:07:13 [Zakim]: +Gary
15:07:35 [csma]: RESOLVED: accept minutes of F2F11
15:07:37 [Zakim]: +??P8
15:07:57 [csma]: next item
15:08:42 [csma]: next item
15:09:02 [csma]: zakim, take up item 3
15:09:02 [Zakim]: agendum 3. "Public comments" taken up [from csma]
15:10:01 [csma]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2008Oct/0001.html
15:10:58 [PaulVincent]: PaulVincent has joined #rif
15:12:59 [csma]: next item
15:13:10 [csma]: zakim, close item 2
15:13:10 [Zakim]: agendum 2, Liaison, closed
15:13:11 [Zakim]: I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:13:13 [Zakim]: 4. Action review [from csma]
15:13:17 [csma]: next item
15:21:40 [StuartTaylor]: StuartTaylor: will work on test cases with yuting
15:22:11 [StuartTaylor]: ... Yuting will post on the mailing list for feedback next week
15:23:04 [csma]: agendum+ F2F12
15:23:14 [csma]: zakim, open item 9
15:23:14 [Zakim]: agendum 9. "F2F12" taken up [from csma]
15:23:27 [ChrisW]: zakim, close item 4
15:23:27 [Zakim]: agendum 4, Action review, closed
15:23:28 [Zakim]: I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:23:29 [Zakim]: 5. Action 577 [from csma]
15:24:52 [ChrisW]: zakim, who is on the phone?
15:24:52 [Zakim]: On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, Harold, StellaMitchell, josb, DaveReynolds, Mike_Dean, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres
15:25:20 [StuartTaylor]: csma: preferred date of Jan 15-16 means that Sandro cannot attend F2F12
15:26:18 [StuartTaylor]: s/cannot attend/would miss part of/
15:28:14 [StuartTaylor]: csma: most people would strongly prefer 15-16 rather than 14-15
15:28:59 [StuartTaylor]: ... any objection that F2F12 is on 14 - 15?
15:29:30 [AxelPolleres]: I will have difficulties anyway in January, but I think I could join via phone some time at least.
15:30:13 [StuartTaylor]: ... the problem with 14 - 15 is that people would have to wait until Sat 16th for flights
15:30:51 [StuartTaylor]: s/Sat 16th/Sat 17th/
15:31:04 [Zakim]: +??P20
15:31:05 [csma]: Decision is: F2F12 will be 14-15 Jan 2009
15:31:14 [csma]: next item
15:31:52 [ChrisW]: action: Gary to start F2F12 wiki page
15:31:52 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-621 - Start F2F12 wiki page [on Gary Hallmark - due 2008-10-21].
15:33:12 [csma]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html
15:34:03 [MichaelKifer]: MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:34:06 [csma]: PROPOSED: Core should keep safe disjunction in rule bodies.
15:34:06 [csma]: Implementations can be direct or use a well-known preprocessing step.
15:34:06 [csma]: Comment: An example of a solution to issue-70 is Option 2,
15:34:06 [csma]: which will be able to cope with disjunction. (See
15:34:06 [csma]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html
15:34:06 [csma]: and follow up).
15:34:07 [StuartTaylor]: AxelPolleres: disjunction and safety discussed yesterday
15:34:59 [StuartTaylor]: s/AxelPolleres:/Harold:/
15:35:04 [StuartTaylor]: thanks, Dave :)
15:35:12 [Zakim]: +mkifer
15:35:32 [Harold]: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/7
15:35:35 [csma]: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/75
15:36:01 [StuartTaylor]: csma: Harold, can you explain the link with issue 70
15:36:07 [AxelPolleres]: ISSUE-70... basically both Option 2 and 3 are fine, but 2 is over-cautious.
15:36:13 [StuartTaylor]: Harold: it is about safeness
15:36:46 [StuartTaylor]: ... safeness can be retained using disjunction
15:38:28 [StuartTaylor]: csma: the proposed resolution would be between Option 2 and 3 from Axel's email?
15:39:14 [Zakim]: -Mike_Dean
15:39:33 [AxelPolleres]: Option 3 in the original mail has a typo in bullet 3 ( Or instead of And)
15:41:17 [Harold]: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/48
15:41:17 [Harold]: PROPOSED: RIF Core will include member (#) but syntactically
15:41:17 [Harold]: restricted its use in rule conditions.
15:41:17 [Harold]: Rationale 1: PRD rules almost always start with a member test
15:41:17 [Harold]: in the condition.
15:41:17 [Harold]: Rationale 2: PR leverages type system from host programming language
15:41:19 [Harold]: and that is externally defined and immutable by rules.
15:41:21 [Harold]: Comment 1: Note that in RIF-RDF the equivalent property rdf:type
15:41:23 [Harold]: would still be permitted in rule conclusions.
15:41:25 [Harold]: Comment 2: If PRD introduces member (#) in the conclusion,
15:41:27 [Harold]: this restriction to conditions in Core should be reconsidered.
15:42:44 [DaveReynolds]: Agreed - we did not take external-# into account in the discussion
15:43:29 [StuartTaylor]: csma: this proposed resolution should be discussed in the PRD task force
15:44:05 [ChrisW]: is it possible for something "ground" to not be a "fact"?
15:44:27 [DaveReynolds]: A fact is surely just a rule conclusion without a rule condition, at least in Core.
15:45:03 [josb]: q+
15:45:08 [csma]: ack jos
15:45:14 [Gary]: forall ?x (A(?x)) is not ground
15:45:29 [ChrisW]: but it is a fact?
15:45:39 [DaveReynolds]: Part of the conformance clause
15:46:18 [Harold]: <Harold> > > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/70
15:46:18 [Harold]: <Harold> PROPOSED: Parameterize the conformance clauses of Core with safeness requirements "strict" and "none" (default: "none").
15:46:18 [Harold]: <Harold> (modulo nice word for "none")
15:47:23 [StuartTaylor]: Harold: we have excluded weak, only none or strong
15:47:43 [cke]: cke has joined #rif
15:48:47 [csma]: q?
15:49:42 [csma]: next item
15:49:47 [Zakim]: +??P7
15:50:35 [csma]: zakim, take up item 7
15:50:35 [Zakim]: agendum 7. "Frames VS objects" taken up [from csma]
15:50:59 [ChrisW]: zakim, list agenda
15:50:59 [Zakim]: I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
15:51:01 [Zakim]: 6. Test Cases [from csma]
15:51:01 [Zakim]: 7. Frames VS objects [from csma]
15:51:02 [Zakim]: 8. AOB (Pick scribe!) [from csma]
15:51:53 [ChrisW]: zakim, who is talking?
15:52:03 [Zakim]: ChrisW, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P7 (1%), csma (74%), ??P20 (35%)
15:52:20 [ChrisW]: zakim, ?p20 is Adrian
15:52:20 [Zakim]: sorry, ChrisW, I do not recognize a party named '?p20'
15:52:21 [StuartTaylor]: csma: there is a problem with PRD and the semantics of frames
15:52:26 [ChrisW]: zakim, p20 is Adrian
15:52:26 [Zakim]: sorry, ChrisW, I do not recognize a party named 'p20'
15:52:29 [ChrisW]: zakim, ??p20 is Adrian
15:52:29 [Zakim]: +Adrian; got it
15:52:35 [josb]: q+
15:52:42 [ChrisW]: zakim, ??p7 is cke
15:52:42 [Zakim]: +cke; got it
15:52:47 [ChrisW]: zakim, who is on the phone?
15:52:47 [Zakim]: On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, Harold, StellaMitchell, josb, DaveReynolds, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres, Adrian, mkifer, cke
15:53:12 [ChrisW]: q?
15:54:10 [ChrisW]: changkai: main difference between frames and objects is multi-valued slots
15:54:33 [Zakim]: +Mike_Dean
15:55:44 [csma]: ack jos
15:55:47 [MichaelKifer]: q+
15:56:33 [csma]: o[p->1]
15:57:14 [csma]: o[p->1] O[p->2]
15:57:26 [csma]: o[p->1] o[p->2]
15:58:07 [StuartTaylor]: csma: the first, above would be translated to PRD as an object that contains p with the value 1. if I assert the third example the value for p would be related by 2, which is not the semantics of frames
15:58:10 [csma]: o[p->(1 2]]
15:58:29 [DaveReynolds]: s/related/replaced/
15:59:42 [ChrisW]: just extend the syntax to indicate single-valued slots in PRD
16:00:04 [csma]: ack michaelk
16:01:34 [StuartTaylor]: MichaelKifer: we need to decide on single or multivalued slots in core
16:02:11 [csma]: o[p->(1 2)] o[p->3]
16:02:40 [csma]: o[p->(1 2 3)] or o[p->((1 2) 3)]?
16:03:07 [DaveReynolds]: o[p->{(1 2) 3}] where {} is set not list, no ordering
16:04:00 [csma]: I used () for sets, sorry; replace with {} everywhere
16:04:16 [DaveReynolds]: csma - ah sorry
16:06:01 [csma]: the problem is, if PRD understands only single-valued slots and interprets multi-valued slots as single, collection-typed, values, then, how to differentiate between single values that are collections and collections that represent multiple values?
16:06:13 [ChrisW]: just extend the syntax to indicate single-valued slots in PRD
16:06:30 [csma]: Frames: o[p->v]
16:06:45 [csma]: Object: o[p=v]
16:06:57 [csma]: objects are frames of a special kind?
16:07:15 [MichaelKifer]: c[p=>person]
16:07:44 [ChrisW]: you need a syntax to indicate the difference
16:07:54 [MichaelKifer]: c[p {0:1}=>person]
16:07:54 [StuartTaylor]: csma: the problem is that if you import a document from BLD
16:08:03 [ChrisW]: otherwise you are creating a new schema language
16:08:07 [StuartTaylor]: MichaelKifer: you would assume that it is multivalued
16:09:17 [ChrisW]: we have no "way" to handle cardinality constraints
16:10:16 [MichaelKifer]: john[children->bob] and john[children->mary]
16:11:28 [cke]: In OO world, we write: john[children->{bob,mary}]
16:11:48 [DaveReynolds]: Agree with Michael - Core should support BLD frame semantics (multivalued) otherwise we break the semweb compatibility
16:11:59 [ChrisW]: there is no way - "replacement" is non-monotonic
16:12:19 [Gary]: java like syntax: class Person [ children=> collection|individual ]
16:12:30 [StuartTaylor]: csma: using a PRD-specific construct will limit in-operability with BLD
16:14:05 [csma]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0053.html
16:14:11 [DaveReynolds]: Agreed - frame slots represent sets of values not bags of values, at least I hope so
16:14:40 [josb]: they do (represent sets of values)
16:16:11 [csma]: q?
16:16:15 [josb]: who not just extend the PRD syntax?
16:16:37 [josb]: BLD does not need to be extended if something like this is needed in PRD
16:17:04 [ChrisW]: q+
16:17:47 [Gary]: Isn't the notion of frame explained in BLD?
16:18:30 [csma]: ack chrisw
16:19:13 [Gary]: ?x=?y :- ?o[single->?x single->?y]
16:20:11 [Harold]: What about named-argument terms?
16:23:31 [Harold]: A term with named arguments is of the form t(s1->v1 ... sn->vn), where n=0, t ? Const and v1, ..., vn are base terms and s1, ..., sn are pairwise distinct symbols from the set ArgNames.
16:24:26 [josb]: q+
16:24:46 [csma]: ack josb
16:25:27 [josb]: o[p=a], o[p=b]
16:25:30 [josb]: a=b
16:25:50 [AxelPolleres]: aren't slotted *predicates* anyway single-valued... but you don't want that probably either.
16:26:21 [Zakim]: -DaveReynolds
16:27:06 [Harold]: Axel, I just said that using 'named-argument' instead of 'slotted'.
16:28:15 [AxelPolleres]: yeah,but fixed arity maked them probably unusable here.
16:28:16 [josb]: yes
16:28:26 [Gary]: slotted predicates don't work because we want to change a single slot
16:28:33 [ChrisW]: +1 PRD specific solution
16:29:45 [csma]: q?
16:29:54 [Zakim]: -Harold
16:30:30 [csma]: scribe next: Hassan?
16:30:44 [ChrisW]: Regrets: Hassan A�t-Kaci Leora Morgenstern MohamedZergaoui
16:30:46 [Zakim]: -josb
16:30:50 [Zakim]: -StellaMitchell
16:30:50 [ChrisW]: zakim, list attendees
16:30:51 [Zakim]: As of this point the attendees have been +0122427aaaa, StuartTaylor, csma, StellaMitchell, Harold, josb, DaveReynolds, Mike_Dean, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres, mkifer, Adrian, cke
16:30:51 [Zakim]: -AxelPolleres
16:30:54 [Zakim]: -Adrian
16:30:55 [Zakim]: -Gary
16:30:55 [Zakim]: -Mike_Dean
16:30:56 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make minutes
16:30:56 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:30:58 [Zakim]: -mkifer
16:31:03 [Zakim]: -cke
16:31:05 [ChrisW]: rrsagent, make logs public
16:32:47 [ChrisW]: zakim, who is on the phone?
16:32:47 [Zakim]: On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, ChrisW
16:33:03 [Zakim]: -StuartTaylor
16:54:57 [Zakim]: -ChrisW
16:54:59 [Zakim]: -csma
16:55:00 [Zakim]: SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:55:01 [Zakim]: Attendees were +0122427aaaa, StuartTaylor, csma, StellaMitchell, Harold, josb, DaveReynolds, Mike_Dean, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres, mkifer, Adrian, cke
17:01:49 [csma]: csma has left #rif