17:05:43 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
17:05:43 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/14-rif-irc
17:06:06 <sandro> zakim, who is here?
17:06:06 <Zakim> apparently SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended, sandro
17:06:08 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, AdrianP, sandro, mdean, Hassan, trackbot, Zakim
17:06:16 <sandro> zakim, this will be rif
17:06:22 <Zakim> ok, sandro, I see SW_RIF(F2F12)11:00AM already started
17:07:16 <csma> csma has joined #rif
17:07:16 <Zakim> +Anish_Karmarkar
17:07:46 <sandro> zakim, Anish_Karmarkar is RIF_Meeting_Room
17:07:47 <Zakim> +RIF_Meeting_Room; got it
17:08:15 <Harold> Harold has joined #rif
17:10:30 <sandro> scribenick: Harold 
17:10:53 <PaulVincent> PaulVincent has joined #rif
17:11:39 <cke> cke has joined #rif
17:12:02 <sandro> zakim, who is here?
17:12:02 <Zakim> On the phone I see Mike_Dean, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), RIF_Meeting_Room
17:12:06 <Zakim> On IRC I see cke, PaulVincent, Harold, csma, RRSAgent, AdrianP, sandro, mdean, Hassan, trackbot, Zakim
17:13:43 <Michael_Kifer> Michael_Kifer has joined #rif
17:13:53 <sandro> Zakim, RIF_Meeting_Room has Christian, Gary, Harold, Adrian, Jos, Paul, Micheal_Kifer, Changhai, Sandro
17:13:53 <Zakim> +Christian, Gary, Harold, Adrian, Jos, Paul, Micheal_Kifer, Changhai, Sandro; got it
17:15:18 <sandro> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:15:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see Mike_Dean, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), RIF_Meeting_Room
17:15:20 <Zakim> RIF_Meeting_Room has Christian, Gary, Harold, Adrian, Jos, Paul, Micheal_Kifer, Changhai, Sandro
17:18:24 <ChrisW> ChrisW has joined #rif
17:19:03 <ChrisW> ChrisW has changed the topic to: Jan 14 RIF F2F
17:19:51 <GaryHallmark> GaryHallmark has joined #rif
17:22:56 <Harold> Agenda amendments:
17:23:16 <Harold> * One hour on safeness
17:24:19 <Harold> * Harold's PRD read
17:25:21 <StellaMitchell> StellaMitchell has joined #rif
17:26:54 <Harold> Test 
17:26:57 <Harold> Cases
17:27:44 <PaulVincent> Question on Conflict Resolution part in PRD agenda: does this not also apply in some way to logic languages (eg in Prolog, selection is order related)...? Just in case this needs to be specified in Core even if there is a simple default for BLD et al...
17:27:45 <Zakim> +[IBM]
17:28:07 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Blank_Node
17:28:31 <josb> josb has joined #rif
17:28:33 <sandro> Zakim, IBM is temporarily Stella
17:28:33 <Zakim> +Stella; got it
17:28:38 <StellaMitchell> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
17:28:38 <Zakim> sorry, StellaMitchell, I do not recognize a party named 'ibm'
17:31:11 <Harold> Christian: Can you derive this in BLD, Core, ...?
17:31:51 <Harold> Jos?Michael: Yes, in BLD.
17:32:10 <Harold> s/Jos?Michael/Jos+Michael/
17:34:13 <sandro> csma: if there were a named node, I'm sure it would work.  I'm not sure about the bnode
17:35:24 <sandro> sandro: typical RDF forward-chaining system just do this by inventing names, and marking them as invented.
17:36:19 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
17:37:24 <Zakim> + +44.145.441.aaaa
17:37:30 <sandro> welcome, Dave.   We're talking about http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Blank_Node
17:39:10 <PaulVincent> Issue: how blank RDF nodes map to PRD (eg object-based rule engines)... probably it is a local variable, so should be no issue... 
17:39:10 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-89 - How blank RDF nodes map to PRD (eg object-based rule engines)... probably it is a local variable, so should be no issue...  ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/89/edit .
17:39:16 <PaulVincent> Oops
17:42:22 <sandro> Stella: is this Core or SafeCore?
17:42:49 <sandro> Jos: this is safe
17:43:07 <DaveReynolds> Surely it is not safe, we don't support exists in conclusions
17:43:37 <sandro> PROPOSED: approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Blank_Node for BLD, Core, PRD, and Safe-Core 
17:44:22 <Harold> Stella: Core sect 5.1?
17:44:25 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Core#Safeness
17:44:44 <sandro> Jos: I believe this "existential" part is an error
17:44:49 <GaryHallmark> dave, a test conclusion is actually a rule condition, not a rule conclusion
17:45:55 <DaveReynolds> object
17:48:04 <sandro> forall ?X  if ?X["http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type"^^rif:iri -> <http://example.org/example#named>] then ex:a[ex:b -> ex:c]
17:48:22 <sandro> test case conclusion: ex:a[ex:b -> ex:c]
17:49:31 <sandro> forall ?X  if ?X["http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type"^^rif:iri -> <http://example.org/example#named>] then test:passed(test:RDF_combination_Blank_node)
17:50:15 <sandro> DaveReynolds: Either is fine.
17:50:34 <Harold> Dave: Withdraw objection.
17:51:30 <sandro> PROPOSED: approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Blank_Node for BLD, Core, PRD, and Safe-Core 
17:51:39 <sandro> +1
17:51:45 <GaryHallmark> +1
17:51:54 <AdrianP> +1
17:51:57 <Harold> +1
17:51:59 <Hassan> +1
17:52:00 <josb> +1
17:52:02 <sandro> RESOLVED: approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Blank_Node for BLD, Core, PRD, and Safe-Core 
17:52:07 <Michael_Kifer> +1
17:52:29 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_1
17:55:42 <sandro> Sandro: this is basically a demonstration of what rif:iri means.     
17:56:02 <DaveReynolds> But rif:iri is not a datatype in the RDF sense, it is a symbol space.
17:58:28 <sandro> jos: Indeed it's not...
18:02:34 <sandro> Sandro: If we approve this, I'm likely to use it as a hammer to to say "rif:iri" really is a datatype...
18:02:53 <sandro> Jos: We could say rif:iri as a dt isn't defined in these combinations...
18:03:19 <sandro> Sandro: I think we'd better got with "not defined"...
18:04:22 <josb> http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/#Common_RIF-RDF_Interpretations
18:05:12 <sandro> jos: Condition 6 implies this...
18:06:35 <sandro> Issue: Can rif:iri be used as a datatype in RDF graphs, in combination with RIF?    ie approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_1
18:06:35 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-90 - Can rif:iri be used as a datatype in RDF graphs, in combination with RIF?    ie approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_1 ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/90/edit .
18:07:23 <DaveReynolds> Another way of putting it: is rif:iri *required* to be in all datatype maps. 
18:07:36 <Harold> Stella: Do we need XML version for all test cases?
18:07:43 <Harold> Sandro: yes.
18:07:56 <Harold> ... no preferred one.
18:08:08 <Harold> ... depends on platform.
18:08:24 <StellaMitchell> for the imported RDF documents, that is
18:10:00 <DaveReynolds> Please could someone post the link to the Test Case you are talking about?
18:10:14 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2
18:12:06 <sandro> DaveReynolds: Surely this requires d-entailment?
18:12:18 <sandro> Jos: Nope, even with Simple you get RIF datatype support.
18:14:46 <sandro> Sandro: There's no way to get RDF out of RIF.  There's no export.   So xs:string deosn't matter.
18:16:17 <Harold> Christian: explanins RDF-RIF interchange on the whiteboard.
18:17:02 <sandro> Jos: Who cares.      Yes, when you pass the rdf-manipulating-rule through RIF, you may find one is producting   "foo" and the other "foo"^^xs:string.   No one really cares about the difference.
18:18:07 <sandro> csma; round tripping could give you both
18:18:17 <sandro> Jos: this is like preserving the order of triples
18:19:38 <DaveReynolds> I agree the test case is fine. Jos which is condition in the document that specifies that mapping for plain literals?  I can find the informative section and the formal conditions for well-typed literals but can't immediately spot the formal condition that covers plain literals.
18:21:57 <sandro> PROPOSED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2 (for all dialects, and it's Safe)
18:22:02 <josb> The RDF semantics says that plain literals are mapped to strings
18:22:04 <josb> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#interp
18:22:07 <AdrianP> +1
18:22:16 <sandro> +1
18:22:20 <josb> +1
18:22:21 <Hassan> +1
18:22:23 <DaveReynolds> +1
18:22:24 <Harold> +1
18:22:26 <mdean> +1
18:22:27 <GaryHallmark> +1
18:22:30 <josb> condition 6 in http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/#Common_RIF-RDF_Interpretations
18:22:33 <Michael_Kifer> +1
18:22:38 <sandro> RESOLVED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2 (for all dialects, and it's Safe)
18:22:58 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_3
18:23:23 <josb> says that typed literals in the RDF part are interpreted as the same object as their counterpart in RIF
18:23:51 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
18:24:14 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
18:24:22 <Zakim> + +1.212.781.aabb
18:24:34 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, aabb is me
18:24:34 <Zakim> +LeoraMorgenstern; got it
18:24:40 <sandro> PROPOSED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_3 (for all dialects, and it's Safe)
18:24:53 <AdrianP> +1
18:24:58 <josb> so, the plain literal "a" in RDF is mapped to the character sequence "a"
18:25:02 <Harold> +1
18:25:03 <sandro> +1
18:25:06 <Hassan> +1
18:25:07 <GaryHallmark> +1
18:25:12 <josb> in RIF, the symbol "a"^^string is mapped to "a"
18:25:14 <sandro> RESOLVED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_3 (for all dialects, and it's Safe)
18:25:23 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment_1
18:26:26 <Harold> Jos: RDF graphs in the conclusion, instead of in the condition.
18:27:13 <josb> by condition 6, the typed literal "a"^^string is interpreted in the same way as the RIF constant "a"^^string
18:27:49 <sandro> postpost http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment_1 related to issue-90
18:29:00 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment_2
18:30:25 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
18:30:54 <josb> http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/#Entailment
18:31:08 <sandro> Sandro: I am very confused -- how come the test case conclusion is in Turtle, not RIF PS ?
18:31:56 <sandro> Jos: This would be true in RDF only with D-entailment and the dt xs:string.
18:32:51 <Harold> Jos: Used Turtle syntax for conclusions.
18:33:08 <Harold> ... to show properties of the language.
18:34:13 <josb> see http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/#Embedding_Simple_Entailment for implementation of this kind of thing
18:35:27 <Harold> Jos: if you use simple entailment, this is not an entailment.
18:35:43 <StellaMitchell> the ImportSupport property is supposed to help implemantation select which tests are applicable to them
18:35:47 <Harold> Sandro: concerned that we use different languages.
18:36:11 <Harold> Jos: all based on examples from document.
18:38:12 <Harold> Sandro: Perhaps import Turtle and use RIF for rule/conclusion.
18:39:52 <sandro> PROPOSED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment_2 but be sure to make it clear that this is a different kind of test case, about RDF entailment.   (Current wiki template does not properly show that.)
18:40:17 <StellaMitchell> sandro, wiki template shows ImportSupport
18:40:48 <Harold> Harold: slot of different formats (RIF, Turtle) from the Test Case Document should be rendered to illustrate interop.
18:41:22 <josb> +1
18:41:27 <Harold> +1
18:41:31 <sandro> +1
18:41:32 <Hassan> +1
18:41:42 <GaryHallmark> +1
18:41:45 <AdrianP> +1
18:41:46 <DaveReynolds> 0
18:41:47 <sandro> RESOLVED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment_2 but be sure to make it clear that this is a different kind of test case, about RDF entailment.   (Current wiki template does not properly show that.)
18:41:56 <sandro> (For all languages)
18:42:12 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2
18:43:02 <sandro> ACTION: jos to add a version of http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2 with the import having a ^^xs:string
18:43:02 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - jos
18:43:02 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
18:43:11 <sandro> ACTION: jdb to add a version of http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2 with the import having a ^^xs:string
18:43:11 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - jdb
18:43:25 <sandro> ACTION: jdebruij2  to add a version of http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2 with the import having a ^^xs:string
18:43:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-684 -  to add a version of http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_2 with the import having a ^^xs:string [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-01-21].
18:44:22 <sandro> PROPOSED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment_3 with the same caveats as http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment_2
18:44:27 <DaveReynolds> -1
18:44:42 <StellaMitchell> I changed the language label
18:45:26 <sandro> Yeah, you shouldn't use rdf:text in Turtle.
18:47:50 <josb> So, you would propose not to define combination with RDF graphs that use rdf:text?
18:48:40 <sandro> Yes
18:49:36 <sandro> dave: it's fine for rdf:text to be in the RIF part.
18:49:47 <pvincent> pvincent has joined #rif
18:50:49 <Harold> Dave: Must that you do the mapping back again into RDF.
18:51:43 <josb> Again, so, you would propose not to define combination with RDF graphs that use rdf:text?
18:51:49 <sandro> csma: this   ( ex:a ex:p "with language tag@en"^^rdf:text .  ) is bad syntax, as I'm understanding it.
18:55:32 <Harold> Jos: propose to extend issue 90 to rdf:text.
18:56:16 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Member_1
19:01:11 <sandro> PROPOSED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Member_1 for all dialects (BLD, Core, CoreSafe, PRD)
19:01:26 <DaveReynolds> +1
19:01:27 <GaryHallmark> +1
19:01:28 <sandro> +1
19:01:29 <Harold> +1
19:01:29 <AdrianP> +1
19:01:32 <Hassan> +1
19:01:33 <Michael_Kifer> +1
19:01:35 <josb> +1
19:01:41 <sandro> RESOLVED: Approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Member_1 for all dialects (BLD, Core, CoreSafe, PRD)
19:01:43 <StellaMitchell> Three are 3 more proposed RDF combination test cases, and you can find them here: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:RDF%2BBLD_Test
19:02:21 <Harold> Sandro: Loved to see another test case showing ## vs. subclass.
19:02:43 <sandro> ACTION: jos to write a test case or two to illiustrate how ## and rdfs:subClassOf relate
19:02:43 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - jos
19:02:43 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
19:02:53 <sandro> ACTION: jdebruij2 to write a test case or two to illiustrate how ## and rdfs:subClassOf relate
19:02:53 <trackbot> Created ACTION-685 - Write a test case or two to illiustrate how ## and rdfs:subClassOf relate [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-01-21].
19:03:20 <Zakim> -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
19:03:21 <sandro> csma: Obviously, these '##' test cases don't apply to Core if ## isn't in Core.
19:03:45 <Zakim> -DaveReynolds
19:03:47 <Zakim> -Stella
19:03:57 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
19:04:59 <sandro> action: josb remind Sandro that 'josb' works in assigning actions.
19:04:59 <trackbot> Created ACTION-686 - Remind Sandro that 'josb' works in assigning actions. [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-01-21].
19:05:16 <sandro> action: jdb remind Sandro that 'jdb' works in assigning actions.
19:05:16 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - jdb
19:05:27 <sandro> trackbot, reload
19:05:58 <sandro> action: jdb remind Sandro that 'jdb' ALSO works in assigning actions.
19:05:58 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - jdb
19:30:06 <Zakim> +DaveReynolds
19:31:23 <Zakim> +LeoraMorgenstern
19:42:14 <pvincent> scribenick pvincent
19:42:24 <Zakim> +[IBM]
19:42:49 <StellaMitchell> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
19:42:49 <Zakim> +StellaMitchell; got it
19:43:06 <pvincent> F2F12 late am agenda item = 11:30-12:30 - Object representation (and relationship with frames) 
19:45:13 <pvincent> CSMA: presentation on Objects vs Frames - how to translate to/from an OO rule language and RIF frames
19:45:45 <pvincent> CSMA: problem is translating back and forth, where there is no external object model / schema
19:45:47 <sandro> csma: not a problem when you have a schema....
19:46:56 <sandro> slide: Assert(Obj[att->val2]) ----> Obj.att=(val1 val2)
19:48:33 <sandro> Harold: We had a proposal for lists that was very close, but didn't quite make it into BLD.
19:49:30 <pvincent> CSMA: only remaining problem: no way to specify if a frame value is single value or multi value
19:50:57 <sandro> Two problems:   losing MaxCardinality, and no-support-for-lists 
19:52:29 <pvincent> CSMA: one solution is cardinality etc metadata but this implies inter-dialect problems
19:54:03 <sandro> Michael_Kifer: This would mean we'd have to have equality in the head...
20:05:06 <pvincent> The problem being discussed: factA and factB existence in Core / logic may be replaced in PRD with factA is replaced with factB (A = B)...
20:06:18 <sandro> Michael_Kifer: We could use metadata to convey cardinality.
20:11:02 <pvincent> CSMA: adds Obj[(comment: Card=1) att->val]
20:11:29 <sandro> Gary:  Two different problems:  (1) How do you convey the maxCard, and (2) what do you do with the infomaiton?
20:11:59 <AdrianP> in BLD o[a->b a->b] reduces to o[a->b a->b]
20:12:16 <DaveReynolds> If the answer to (2) is "it changes how you transform to/from your object model but not the semantics of the rules" then the answer to (1) could indeed be "use metadata"
20:12:20 <AdrianP> but it could be a list collection o[a->list(b,b)]
20:13:33 <AdrianP> in BLD it reduces to o[a->b]
20:20:30 <sandro> pvincent, your scribing is.....   behind.  :-)
20:24:43 <Harold> Put it into the Conformance Clauses?
20:26:29 <Harold> E.g., a slot-uniqueness-conformant BLD?,? consumer/producer ...
20:27:34 <DaveReynolds> Any chance of transcribing something of what you are talking about so we can see it?
20:30:14 <GaryHallmark> test case: car[color->red color->blue] is ok but car[color=red color=blue] is not ok
20:31:33 <pvincent> MK: SANDRO_CAR[metadata Color -> Red] vs SANDRO_CAR[Color=red]
20:31:39 <DaveReynolds> So does Group(  car[color=red]    Forall ?x  (?x[color=blue]) :- (?x(color=red)) )  entail car[color=red] ?
20:33:36 <pvincent> CSMA: suggestion is add cardinality metadata in PRD; then if you want Core compliance you can't use Obj[att=val] only Obj[att->val]
20:40:48 <sandro> csma:  just use some special syntax (eg =) in PRD.
20:43:51 <sandro> csma: So PRD implementations should use "=" when they need to, and "->" when they don't need to, and want interop with Core/BLD.
20:43:54 <pvincent> CSMA: suggesting... PRD supports "=" which does not translate to core, as well as "->"; "=" is not translatable to core as it implies an overwrite
20:45:02 <sandro> Sandro: "=' doesn't just mean maxCard=1, it ALSO implies over-writing.
20:46:36 <sandro> csma: No, we'll use UPDATE action for that
20:46:51 <sandro> Sandro: But, but, but, you just told me....
20:48:32 <DaveReynolds> If PRD does not need the maxCard case to imply update semantics, it certainly doesn't imply equality, so in that case it *is* just annotations to keep track of how to map back results to objects in which case it could be in Core.
20:49:29 <sandro> xPROPOSED: PRD extends frames with some syntactic indicator of maxCard=1 and that over-writing should be done when additional values are encountered, to be used only in rule conclusions. .......   
20:50:19 <sandro> the semantics only matter in the conclusion, but for translations, you need to know about it when you do conditions, maybe?
20:53:04 <sandro> PROPOSED: PRD extends frames with some new syntax for attributes which are single-valued and have replacement semantics (matching OO object attributes).   This doesn't make sense for Core or BLD.
20:53:42 <sandro> Michael_Kifer: Maybe prolog could be changed to do this, maybe....
20:53:54 <sandro> PROPOSED: PRD extends frames with some new syntax for attributes which are single-valued and have replacement semantics (matching OO object attributes).   This doesn't make sense for Core or BLD.
20:54:09 <AdrianP> in Prolog you have lists which can be used to have multiple values
20:55:03 <sandro> (proposal tabled for now.... no objections, but maybe a little more clarification, esp w.r.t. schemas.)
20:55:29 <sandro> ADJOURN until 12:45
20:55:44 <Zakim> -DaveReynolds
20:55:49 <Zakim> -StellaMitchell
20:55:50 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
20:56:51 <sandro> ADJOURN until 1:45
21:01:59 <sandro> Harold, e-mail to www-archive@w3.org and then look at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/w3t-archive/2009Jan/ for it to show up.   Then link to it.
21:26:32 <sandro> Harold, here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jan/0005.html
21:43:19 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
21:44:04 <Zakim> +DaveReynolds
21:58:46 <sandro> zakim, who is on the phone?
21:58:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see Mike_Dean, RIF_Meeting_Room, DaveReynolds
21:58:47 <Zakim> RIF_Meeting_Room has Christian, Gary, Harold, Adrian, Jos, Paul, Micheal_Kifer, Changhai, Sandro
21:58:52 <sandro> starting again.
22:00:57 <PaulVincent> PaulVincent has joined #rif
22:01:00 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/37
22:01:05 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/38
22:01:11 <PaulVincent> scribenick PaulVincent
22:01:21 <sandro> scribenick: PaulVincent
22:01:45 <PaulVincent> First afternoon topic: Interoperability with XML 
22:02:29 <sandro> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0046.html
22:02:56 <csma> csma has joined #rif
22:04:56 <sandro> group is looking at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0046.html
22:05:15 <PaulVincent> Gary: look at example (see link above)
22:05:32 <DaveReynolds> I
22:05:47 <DaveReynolds> Gary - could you speak closer to a mike?
22:06:52 <sandro> better?
22:07:01 <DaveReynolds> Slightly, thanks.
22:07:40 <PaulVincent> Sandro: syntax on curies eg <tns:/shiporder> should not have angled brackets around them as they are not IRIs
22:08:37 <PaulVincent> Gary: This has as simple standard frame naming from schema definitions
22:11:39 <PaulVincent> Note: this XML doc to frame mapping is for the convenience of understanding RIF syntax versus XML docs... it would not be necessary to consider this at runtime (when interchanging rules against XML docs...)
22:16:32 <PaulVincent> Jos: can the full identifier such as /shiporder/item/title not just be replaced by title? 
22:17:12 <PaulVincent> Gary: problem is these named elements can be repeated with different types: element identifier is their path
22:17:40 <PaulVincent> Gary: missing info in this scheme includes order, cardinality, ...
22:30:07 <DaveReynolds> This proposal would also be compatible with using sawsdl to annotate the schema which a URI for the types and properties if you want to.
22:30:19 <DaveReynolds> s/which/with/
22:31:36 <PaulVincent> Gary: Equivalent to JAXB mapping
22:38:57 <sandro> Jos: I still don't understand why you want the whole path, but we can move on.
22:42:05 <PaulVincent> Discussion of Gary's General Rules for XML-Frame mapping ...
22:42:27 <PaulVincent> CSMA: points 1-3 are still available from the schema.
22:43:09 <DaveReynolds> Jos - the names in XML schema are context sensitive, somewhat like nested structs in C or nested static classes in Java. So property foo on complex type A can, for example,  have a different range from property foo on complex type B. They are not the "same" foo so when assigning URIs making them different URIs makes sense.
22:43:19 <Zakim> +ChrisW
22:44:13 <PaulVincent> CSMA: ... hence that a RIF engine has different requirements for XML-to-frame versus an interchange for engines that will use the schema natively...
22:47:12 <DaveReynolds> Are you talking about xml schema component designators?
22:47:25 <DaveReynolds> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-ref/
22:47:28 <sandro> XML Schema Component Designators.
22:49:36 <Zakim> -ChrisW
22:50:10 <Zakim> +ChrisW
22:51:12 <sandro> Adrian: What about xs:any
22:51:27 <sandro> Sandro: ... then you're in the land of schema-free XML, and none of this applies.
22:51:44 <PaulVincent> Discussion on issues with Garys proposal
22:52:50 <PaulVincent> CSMA: some of these are for translation of XML docs into RIF which is not required for all RIF use cases (eg where PRD is running rules in an external engine)
22:53:36 <PaulVincent> Sandro: # and ## for ground facts should be in core
22:54:24 <DaveReynolds> Sandro - you may have to fight for that. The divergence between ## and rdfs causes me problems I'm trying to keep ## out of Core :-)
22:55:39 <PaulVincent> Move to CSMA proposal at http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF%2BXML_data-schema 
22:56:48 <DaveReynolds> For the record: on Gary's proposal, the rules don't explicitly say that the simple type mapping is done but it should be. So in the example  the price value would map to "9.90"^^xsd:decimal.
22:57:02 <sandro> +1 DaveReynolds 
22:59:47 <PaulVincent> CSMA discussing Named element selection: named descendent
23:00:40 <sandro> csma: note that I used xs:double cast in the first example, since it's schema-less.
23:02:11 <Zakim> +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
23:03:04 <PaulVincent> CSMA discussing sub-element query: child
23:05:25 <PaulVincent> CSMA now discussing attribute query: attribute
23:07:42 <DaveReynolds> I'm going to sign off in a moment.
23:08:00 <PaulVincent> Goodnight, Dave
23:08:32 <PaulVincent> CSMA discusses With an XML Schema for the target XML document
23:08:51 <sandro> any thoughts on this stuff, DaveReynolds ?
23:08:51 <DaveReynolds> One comment on the approach which I'll leave with you :-) Does this proposal assume well -striped XML? The use of # suggests that it does.
23:09:10 <Zakim> -DaveReynolds
23:14:03 <PaulVincent> CSMA discusses Schema-element selection: schema-element descendant
23:20:25 <sandro> Jos: Can csma's proposal be done just by providing a predicate for xpath?
23:22:17 <sandro> Jos: It would avoid this odd mixing of syntaxes
23:23:21 <sandro> csma: eh then the whole query woul dhave to be in xpath
23:24:00 <Zakim> -ChrisW
23:24:40 <Zakim> +ChrisW
23:26:24 <Zakim> -ChrisW
23:27:36 <Zakim> +ChrisW
23:36:15 <sandro> csma: on board ---- ?x # ex:/descendant::shiporder
23:36:33 <PaulVincent> CSMA: X # FX:/DESCENDENT::SHIPORDER
23:38:31 <Zakim> -ChrisW
23:39:20 <sandro> cmsa: My proposal ---    ?x @ tns:/descendant::shiporder  ?x[child::shipto->?y]
23:40:23 <sandro> cmsa: Gary's Proposal  ---   ?x # tns:shiporder      DEEP: ?x[tns:/shiporder/shipto -> ?y ]    FLAT:  ?x[tns:/shipto->?y]
23:42:13 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
23:43:01 <sandro> Sandro: test case --- you cannot quanltify over slot names in csma's proposal.
23:43:53 <sandro> sandro: csma, you're providing a bunch of external/magic slot names and types.
23:44:24 <sandro> jos: Gary's doesn't need/use externals.       csma's uses externals.
23:44:30 <Hassan> Hassan has joined #rif
23:46:50 <sandro> csma:   ... and ?y[child::name->"Ola Nordmann"]
23:47:53 <sandro> csma: equivalent to     ?x[child::shipto/child::name->""Ola Nordmann"]      and we could start from root.
23:51:01 <sandro> jos: how about a general embedding?     every XML document mapped to a RIF formula?
23:51:18 <sandro> sandro: Yeah, you could use a trimmed down version of the PSVI (post-schema-validation infoset).
23:55:21 <sandro> sandro: Is something like this necessary for PRD's success?
23:56:09 <sandro> changhai: I think so; I think I like the flexibility in the direction of csma's proposal....
23:57:02 <sandro> ... I'm concerned about how we get collections of values into RIF.
23:58:15 <sandro> csma: Use of type information from xml schema is included explicitely in mine.  I think you can use it the same way in Gary's.