IRC log of rif on 2009-01-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:48:57 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:48:57 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-irc
15:49:16 [csma]
Meeting: RIF telecon 6 January 2009
15:49:25 [csma]
Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
15:50:07 [csma]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0001.html
15:50:59 [csma]
csma has changed the topic to: RIF telecon 6 January, agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0001.html
15:51:52 [csma]
Regrets: MohamedZergaoui, LeoraMorgenstern, PaulVincent
15:52:14 [csma]
rrsagent, make log public
15:52:21 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:52:21 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-minutes.html csma
15:52:34 [csma]
zakim, reset agenda
15:52:34 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'reset agenda', csma
15:52:39 [csma]
zakim, clear agenda
15:52:41 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
15:52:56 [csma]
agendum administration
15:53:04 [csma]
agendum+ Admin
15:53:14 [csma]
agendum+ Liaison
15:53:24 [csma]
agendum+ Public Comments
15:53:37 [csma]
agendum+ Action review
15:53:46 [csma]
agendum+ F2F12
15:53:54 [csma]
agendum+ DTB
15:54:04 [csma]
agendum+ ACTION-546
15:54:14 [csma]
agendum+ Test Cases
15:54:21 [Harold]
Harold has joined #rif
15:54:22 [csma]
Agendum+ AOB
15:54:40 [csma]
Hi Harold!
15:58:36 [DaveReynolds]
DaveReynolds has joined #rif
16:00:02 [josb]
josb has joined #rif
16:00:59 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:00:59 [Zakim]
+ +39.047.101.aaaa
16:01:04 [Zakim]
+??P50
16:01:05 [Zakim]
-??P50
16:01:05 [Zakim]
+??P52
16:01:06 [Zakim]
+??P50
16:02:08 [StellaMitchell]
StellaMitchell has joined #rif
16:02:27 [csma]
zakim, ??P50 is me
16:02:27 [Zakim]
+csma; got it
16:02:34 [csma]
ack ??P50
16:02:42 [Hassan]
Hassan has joined #rif
16:02:54 [Zakim]
+Hassan_Ait-Kaci
16:03:13 [Zakim]
+[IBM]
16:03:15 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, ibm is temporarily me
16:03:15 [Zakim]
+StellaMitchell; got it
16:03:26 [Michael_Kifer]
Michael_Kifer has joined #rif
16:03:35 [Zakim]
+ChrisW
16:03:36 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #rif
16:03:52 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:03:54 [Zakim]
On the phone I see csma, josb, DaveReynolds, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), StellaMitchell, ChrisW
16:04:27 [csma]
Harold, Can you scribe today?
16:04:56 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has joined #rif
16:04:57 [Zakim]
+Sandro
16:05:08 [Harold]
sorry, no, im still in another meeting.
16:05:20 [Zakim]
+ +1.631.833.aabb
16:05:32 [Michael_Kifer]
zakim, aabb is me
16:05:32 [Zakim]
+Michael_Kifer; got it
16:05:48 [ChrisW]
scribe: Michael_Kifer
16:06:14 [csma]
zakim, next item
16:06:14 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from csma]
16:06:15 [Zakim]
+??P69
16:07:19 [csma]
PROPOSED: to approve the minutes of telecon December 9
16:07:21 [csma]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0092/RIF_Telecon_9-Dec-08.htm
16:07:55 [ChrisW]
PROPOSED: Accept Dec 16 minutes
16:08:01 [csma]
RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of telecon December 9
16:08:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.503.533.aacc
16:08:14 [ChrisW]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0096/RIF_Telecon_16-Dec-08.html
16:08:15 [csma]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0096/RIF_Telecon_16-Dec-08.html
16:08:24 [Gary_Hallmark]
Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
16:08:27 [ChrisW]
RESOLVED: Accept Dec 16 minutes
16:08:44 [csma]
PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of December 23
16:08:55 [csma]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0125/2008-12-23-rif-minutes.html
16:09:12 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:09:12 [Zakim]
On the phone I see csma, josb, DaveReynolds, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), StellaMitchell, ChrisW, Sandro, Michael_Kifer, AxelPolleres, +1.503.533.aacc
16:09:17 [csma]
RESOLVED: to accept the minutres of December 23
16:09:43 [ChrisW]
zakim, aacc is GaryHallmark
16:09:44 [Zakim]
+GaryHallmark; got it
16:09:53 [csma]
next item
16:10:29 [csma]
zakim, close item 2
16:10:29 [Zakim]
agendum 2, Liaison, closed
16:10:30 [Zakim]
I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:10:32 [Zakim]
3. Public Comments [from csma]
16:10:40 [csma]
next item
16:15:08 [csma]
zakim, close item 3
16:15:08 [Zakim]
agendum 3, Public Comments, closed
16:15:09 [Zakim]
I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:15:10 [Zakim]
4. Action review [from csma]
16:15:13 [csma]
next item
16:20:38 [ChrisW]
i've updated: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_TK2
16:20:48 [ChrisW]
AXEL and Michael, please take a look
16:21:05 [ChrisW]
action: Chris to send response to TK2
16:21:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-678 - Send response to TK2 [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-01-13].
16:21:57 [csma]
next item
16:22:56 [sandro]
action: sandro open registration poll for f2f12
16:22:57 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-679 - Open registration poll for f2f12 [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-01-13].
16:23:23 [Zakim]
+[NRCC]
16:24:11 [csma]
next item
16:25:15 [Michael_Kifer]
*PROPOSED:* add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (based on resolution of issue-79) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:25:28 [sandro]
+1
16:25:29 [josb]
q+
16:25:36 [csma]
ack josb
16:25:43 [AxelPolleres]
q+
16:26:41 [Michael_Kifer]
Jos: not clear how this proposed resolution is related to issue 79.
16:27:00 [Michael_Kifer]
The main idea in 79 was a change in the semantics.
16:27:16 [csma]
PROPOSED: Change all negative guards to return true only for literals that are not of the type, false for non-literals (closing ISSUE-79).
16:27:17 [josb]
yes
16:27:48 [csma]
Ack axel
16:28:40 [DaveReynolds]
q+
16:28:47 [Michael_Kifer]
Jos: include the semantics explicitly in the resolution on isLiteralNotOfType etc.
16:28:47 [csma]
ack dave
16:29:59 [josb]
*PROPOSED:* add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:30:45 [josb]
+1
16:30:48 [DaveReynolds]
*PROPOSED:* add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:30:48 [AxelPolleres]
just let me confirm, we wanted "isLiteralNotOfType" really not "isNotLiteralOfType", yes?
16:30:48 [Hassan]
+1
16:30:52 [Michael_Kifer]
+1
16:31:17 [josb]
Axel: the phrasing in the proposal is what we want
16:31:37 [AxelPolleres]
+1 (right, rethought it)
16:31:39 [sandro]
(BTW, please drop the "*" around proposed. It wont be recognized by the scripts that way.)
16:31:45 [Harold]
+1
16:31:46 [sandro]
+1
16:32:23 [csma]
PROPOSED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:32:46 [DaveReynolds]
q+
16:33:25 [csma]
PROPOSED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Closing ISSUE-79.
16:33:30 [DaveReynolds]
q-
16:33:34 [csma]
ack dave
16:34:53 [Michael_Kifer]
ISSUE-79 closed + membership/non-membership part of ISSUE-80
16:34:56 [csma]
PROPOSED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Closing ISSUE-79 and the membership/non-membership part of ISSUE-80.
16:35:31 [csma]
RESOLVED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Closing ISSUE-79 and the membership/non-membership part of ISSUE-80.
16:36:01 [ChrisW]
action: Chris to close issue-79 and update issue-80 to reflect closing of membership part
16:36:01 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-680 - Close issue-79 and update issue-80 to reflect closing of membership part [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-01-13].
16:36:18 [ChrisW]
action: axel to update DTB to reflect resolution on guards
16:36:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-681 - Update DTB to reflect resolution on guards [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-01-13].
16:38:54 [josb]
Dave, could you point to the place where you would need them?
16:39:42 [ChrisW]
AXEL: can you scribe next week?
16:39:45 [AxelPolleres]
q+
16:40:13 [csma]
ack axel
16:40:41 [Michael_Kifer]
Dave: Wants LiteralsNotEqual
16:43:04 [josb]
q+
16:43:11 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: See http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWLRL#Rules_for_supported_datatypes for the inequality rules in the absence of the proposed builtins and just one line in the simplified version.
16:43:17 [csma]
ack jos
16:43:19 [Michael_Kifer]
and LiteralsEqual (just for symmetry, but not strictly necessary)
16:44:16 [AxelPolleres]
CHRIS: I am not 100% sure for next week, I will be in vienna, need to check phone availability, but normally, it should work. will there be a teleconf? (people travelling to F2F12?)
16:45:42 [josb]
error :- ?lt1[owl:differentFrom->?lt2] and
16:45:44 [josb]
?l1=?l2
16:47:07 [josb]
nevermind, this does not work
16:47:30 [josb]
q+
16:48:31 [sandro]
s/CHRIS:/Chris, /
16:49:27 [ChrisW]
axel - never mind, no telecon next week!
16:50:17 [josb]
q+
16:51:19 [ChrisW]
i am about to close action 666
16:51:24 [ChrisW]
prepare yourselves
16:52:17 [DaveReynolds]
q+
16:52:45 [ChrisW]
rrsagent, pointer
16:52:45 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-irc#T16-52-45
16:53:03 [josb]
q?
16:53:11 [csma]
ack jos
16:54:08 [Michael_Kifer]
Jos: not a good idea to have equal/not equal for individual data types
16:54:32 [AxelPolleres]
I think we just need the mapping of operators (lt, gt, eq, neq) for datatypes to built-ins, just as XPAth/XQuery seem to do it implicitly...
16:54:55 [Michael_Kifer]
Jos: are u proposing LiteralNotEqual/LiteralEqual?
16:55:04 [csma]
ack dave
16:55:58 [josb]
I am saying we don't need individual equal/not-equal for datatypes if we have generic (not-)equal predicates
16:57:23 [Michael_Kifer]
yes, I agree. Individual type-based builtins are problematic
16:57:55 [josb]
If we go for generic we should remove individual
16:58:04 [josb]
I am still leaning towards keeping the individual ones, though
17:00:36 [csma]
PROPOSED: add LiteralNotEqual/LiteralEqual predicates and remove the equality/inequality predicates for individual data types.
17:01:06 [DaveReynolds]
I would prefer to keep the individual ones as well, what's the argument for removing them?
17:02:53 [Michael_Kifer]
Axel: predicates DateEqual are not expressible through LiteralEqual
17:03:39 [Michael_Kifer]
Jos: we just need to adjust LiteralEqual
17:05:14 [AxelPolleres]
sounds nice!
17:05:28 [csma]
PROPOSED: add LiteralNotEqual/LiteralEqual predicates and remove the equality/inequality predicates for individual data types.
17:05:50 [josb]
F2F
17:06:21 [Michael_Kifer]
Axel: we need to write the semantics of these predicates precisely
17:06:31 [josb]
Axel: I think I know how we can make it extensible
17:07:00 [josb]
Do we really need a straw proposal?
17:07:52 [josb]
q+
17:07:59 [csma]
ack jos
17:09:50 [josb]
late afternoon should work? would be morning in Vienna
17:10:20 [josb]
oops, is the other way around
17:10:42 [Zakim]
-DaveReynolds
17:10:54 [sandro]
issue-81?
17:10:54 [trackbot]
ISSUE-81 -- Support for additional OWL-RL datatype -- OPEN
17:10:54 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/81
17:11:18 [AxelPolleres]
summary: what it boils down to is that the semantics of the following built-ins needs to be worded such that it is parametric with respect tot the supported datatypes: isLiteralOfType, isLiteralNotOfType, isLiteralEqual, isLiteralNotEqual
17:11:48 [josb]
Axel: for isLiteralOfType, DT would be a parameter
17:12:14 [josb]
for (not-)equal, we don't need the parameter; indeed, it would not be very generic in that case
17:12:33 [sandro]
PROPOSED: Add to RIF Core all the XML Schema datatypes in OWL-RL (as listed in http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/81)
17:12:55 [josb]
q+
17:13:01 [csma]
ack jos
17:13:03 [Michael_Kifer]
minua the last 3?
17:13:15 [Michael_Kifer]
s/minua/minus/
17:14:07 [Michael_Kifer]
Jos: issue with integer/float data types in OWL
17:14:09 [sandro]
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWLRL#Datatypes_supported
17:15:47 [sandro]
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/#Feature_Overview_3
17:15:55 [csma]
Jos would object to owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary unless technical issue resolved
17:16:06 [josb]
q+
17:16:36 [AxelPolleres]
jos: all others are ok?
17:17:13 [sandro]
Jos: I would prefer we change our datatypes to work the OWL way (non-disjoint value spaces)
17:18:49 [csma]
ACTION: Jos to edit ISSUE-81 to explain the technical reason that make owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary incompatible with RIF current data types
17:18:49 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Jos
17:18:49 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
17:18:57 [josb]
Axel: xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary, owl:real are problematic
17:19:15 [csma]
ACTION: Jdebruij2 to edit ISSUE-81 to explain the technical reason that make owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary incompatible with RIF current data types
17:19:15 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-682 - Edit ISSUE-81 to explain the technical reason that make owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary incompatible with RIF current data types [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-01-13].
17:19:33 [josb]
q+
17:20:42 [josb]
q?
17:21:24 [csma]
ack jos
17:22:32 [sandro]
Sandro: So the implementation burden of "the owl way" is like this: when you compare an int and real for equality, you can't just say "no", you have to convert to compatible numeric types and then compare.
17:22:55 [csma]
ACTION: jdebruij2 to ask Dave to have a look at ISSUE-81 before F2F12
17:22:56 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-683 - Ask Dave to have a look at ISSUE-81 before F2F12 [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-01-13].
17:23:22 [csma]
next item
17:23:40 [josb]
s/ISSUE-81/implementation burden for non-overlapping numeric types, related to ISSUE-81/
17:23:45 [csma]
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/546
17:25:52 [csma]
next item
17:26:27 [csma]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0000.html
17:27:09 [Hassan]
I prefer it!
17:27:20 [josb]
yes, it is
17:27:28 [AxelPolleres]
+1
17:27:57 [csma]
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/581
17:28:56 [Michael_Kifer]
No telecon on Jan 13
17:28:56 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Chaining_strategy_numeric-add_1, ...
17:29:22 [Michael_Kifer]
But there will be a telecon on Jan 20
17:30:15 [Zakim]
-[NRCC]
17:30:39 [Hassan]
+1 to adjourn
17:30:49 [Zakim]
-Hassan_Ait-Kaci
17:30:52 [Zakim]
-StellaMitchell
17:30:54 [Zakim]
-GaryHallmark
17:31:01 [Zakim]
-josb
17:31:13 [csma]
zakim, list attendees
17:31:13 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been +39.047.101.aaaa, josb, DaveReynolds, csma, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, StellaMitchell, ChrisW, Sandro, +1.631.833.aabb, Michael_Kifer, AxelPolleres,
17:31:16 [Zakim]
... +1.503.533.aacc, GaryHallmark, [NRCC]
17:31:27 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:31:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-minutes.html csma
17:32:21 [Zakim]
-AxelPolleres
17:32:48 [Zakim]
-Michael_Kifer
17:34:35 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:34:35 [Zakim]
On the phone I see csma, ChrisW, Sandro
17:35:14 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is talking?
17:35:26 [Zakim]
ChrisW, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: csma (74%), Sandro (46%)
17:35:30 [ChrisW]
zakim, mute sandro
17:35:30 [Zakim]
Sandro should now be muted
17:36:34 [ChrisW]
zakim, unmute sandro
17:36:34 [Zakim]
Sandro should no longer be muted
17:37:18 [Zakim]
-csma
17:37:27 [Zakim]
-ChrisW
17:43:08 [Zakim]
-Sandro
17:43:10 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:43:11 [Zakim]
Attendees were +39.047.101.aaaa, josb, DaveReynolds, csma, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, StellaMitchell, ChrisW, Sandro, +1.631.833.aabb, Michael_Kifer, AxelPolleres, +1.503.533.aacc,
17:43:14 [Zakim]
... GaryHallmark, [NRCC]
17:57:53 [csma]
csma has left #rif
18:02:27 [Hassan]
Hassan has joined #rif
19:37:26 [sandro]
sandro has joined #rif