IRC log of prov on 2011-06-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:47:14 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #prov

14:47:14 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/23-prov-irc

14:47:16 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

14:47:16 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #prov

14:47:18 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be

14:47:19 [trackbot]

Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference

14:47:19 [trackbot]

Date: 23 June 2011

14:47:19 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

14:47:59 [pgroth]

Zakim, list conferences

14:47:59 [Zakim]

I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM, UW_POI(POIWG)10:00AM, Team_Comm()10:30AM active

14:48:01 [Zakim]

also scheduled at this time are INC_LLDXG()10:00AM, INC_(DecisionXG)10:00AM, Team_Global(review)8:00AM, SW_HCLS()11:00AM, WAI_PFWG(HTML TF)11:00AM, XML_PMWG()10:00AM,

14:48:05 [Zakim]

... WAI_RDWG()11:00AM, VB_VBWG(CCXML)11:00AM, Team_(test)14:20Z, Styl_XSL-FO-()11:00AM, Math_IG()10:00AM, Team_(audio-webrtc)14:00Z, MM_MMI(EMMA)10:00AM, SW_(PROV)11:00AM,

14:48:08 [Zakim]

... SW_HCLS(TMO)11:00AM, WF_TF()9:00AM, WAI_PFWG(AAPI)10:00AM, I18N_WG(MLW)11:00AM

14:48:34 [pgroth]

Zakim, this is SW_(PROV)

14:48:34 [Zakim]

pgroth, I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be SW_(PROV)".

14:48:49 [pgroth]

Zakim, this will be SW_(PROV)

14:48:49 [Zakim]

ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes

14:49:47 [Zakim]

SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

14:49:53 [Zakim]

+??P2

14:50:03 [jorn]

Zakim, ??p2 is me

14:50:03 [Zakim]

+jorn; got it

14:50:15 [pgroth]

Chair: pgroth

14:50:59 [Zakim]

+ +1.312.348.aaaa

14:51:12 [pgroth]

Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:51:12 [Zakim]

On the phone I see jorn, +1.312.348.aaaa

14:52:24 [pgroth]

+1.312.348.aaaa is me

14:52:44 [Zakim]

- +1.312.348.aaaa

14:53:02 [jorn]

Zakim, aaaa is pgroth

14:53:02 [Zakim]

sorry, jorn, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'

14:53:13 [Zakim]

+??P3

14:53:22 [pgroth]

Zakim, ??P3 is me

14:53:22 [Zakim]

+pgroth; got it

14:53:39 [pgroth]

Scribe: Satya Sahoo

14:55:13 [Paolo]

Paolo has joined #prov

14:56:26 [GK]

GK has joined #prov

14:57:36 [Yogesh]

Yogesh has joined #prov

14:58:04 [zednik]

zednik has joined #prov

14:58:33 [Zakim]

+ +1.213.290.aabb

14:58:42 [Zakim]

+??P4

14:58:47 [JimM]

JimM has joined #prov

14:58:48 [stain]

Zakim: +??P4 is me

14:59:01 [Zakim]

+??P0

14:59:02 [Yogesh]

zakim, +1.213 is me

14:59:02 [Zakim]

+Yogesh; got it

14:59:06 [jorn]

zakim, ??p4 is stain

14:59:06 [Zakim]

+stain; got it

14:59:25 [GK]

zakim, ??p0 is me

14:59:25 [Zakim]

+GK; got it

14:59:26 [Zakim]

+ +1.518.276.aacc

14:59:36 [Zakim]

+ +1.832.386.aadd

14:59:46 [Zakim]

+ +1.518.633.aaee

14:59:53 [Zakim]

+ +1.509.375.aaff

14:59:58 [Lena]

Lena has joined #prov

15:00:05 [JimM]

zakim, +1.518 is me

15:00:05 [Zakim]

sorry, JimM, I do not recognize a party named '+1.518'

15:00:28 [JimM]

zakim, +1.518.276.aacc is me

15:00:28 [Zakim]

+JimM; got it

15:00:33 [stain]

I can't find http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-16-06 as linked to in the agenda

15:00:47 [Zakim]

+??P10

15:00:51 [StephenCresswell]

StephenCresswell has joined #prov

15:00:57 [dgarijo]

dgarijo has joined #prov

15:00:59 [pgroth]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.23

15:00:59 [Zakim]

+??P11

15:01:09 [tfrancart]

tfrancart has joined #prov

15:01:15 [pgroth]

stain, you're right

15:01:29 [Zakim]

+??P12

15:01:29 [pgroth]

Sandro, can you check

15:01:46 [Zakim]

+??P13

15:01:59 [dgarijo]

Zakim, ??P13 is me

15:01:59 [Zakim]

+dgarijo; got it

15:02:00 [Paolo]

zakim, ??P12 is me

15:02:00 [Zakim]

+Paolo; got it

15:02:05 [pgroth]

here are the minutes from last week http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-16

15:02:07 [jorn]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-16

15:02:09 [GK]

Previous minutes link in agenda at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.23 seems to be broken...

15:02:42 [stain]

GK: it was just magically fixed

15:02:44 [SamCoppens]

SamCoppens has joined #prov

15:02:59 [Zakim]

- +1.509.375.aaff

15:03:04 [Zakim]

+??P15

15:03:04 [stain]

where's our Luc!

15:03:20 [stain]

oh wait, it's pgroth chairing today

15:03:33 [jorn]

zakim, who is speaking?

15:03:39 [pgroth]

Regrets: Luc Moreau

15:03:42 [Paolo]

very noisy. can't hear a thing

15:03:44 [jorn]

zakim, who is noisy?

15:03:45 [Zakim]

jorn, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds

15:03:55 [Zakim]

jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: GK (73%), Yogesh (31%)

15:04:01 [smiles]

smiles has joined #prov

15:04:07 [Zakim]

+ +1.509.375.aagg

15:04:15 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

15:04:32 [satya]

satya has joined #prov

15:04:45 [jcheney]

jcheney has joined #prov

15:04:46 [Paolo]

can the people who are typing please mute themselves

15:04:46 [GK]

@stain Yeah... by the time I got there with a fix it was fixed

15:04:59 [stain]

Zakim: whois noisy?

15:05:01 [Zakim]

+ +1.216.368.aahh

15:05:04 [dgarijo]

satya, are you in the call yet?

15:05:07 [stain]

Zakim: who is noisy?

15:05:10 [jorn]

zakim, who is noisy?

15:05:17 [dcorsar]

dcorsar has joined #prov

15:05:21 [Zakim]

jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: GK (33%), Yogesh (34%), pgroth (16%), +1.832.386.aadd (9%), +1.509.375.aagg (16%), +1.216.368.aahh (42%)

15:05:23 [dgarijo]

:)

15:05:27 [Zakim]

+Yolanda

15:05:46 [pgroth]

PROPOSED to accept the minutes of 16 Jun telecon

15:05:51 [dgarijo]

there is a lot of noise ...

15:05:52 [Yogesh]

zakim, mute Yogesh

15:05:52 [Zakim]

Yogesh should now be muted

15:06:08 [pgroth]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-16

15:06:13 [Zakim]

+??P28

15:06:18 [dgarijo]

+1

15:06:20 [Yogesh]

+1

15:06:21 [zednik]

+1

15:06:21 [smiles]

+1

15:06:23 [dcorsar]

+1

15:06:28 [SamCoppens]

+1

15:06:30 [Paolo]

(I was not there)

15:06:31 [StephenCresswell]

+1

15:06:32 [tfrancart]

+1

15:06:34 [JimM]

+1

15:06:37 [stain]

+1

15:06:40 [jorn]

+1

15:06:45 [pgroth]

Zakim, who is noisy?

15:06:52 [YolandaGil]

YolandaGil has joined #prov

15:06:56 [Zakim]

pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: +1.832.386.aadd (37%)

15:07:13 [satya]

Paul:Minutes of Jun 16 meeting approved

15:07:16 [pgroth]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open

15:07:30 [Zakim]

-Paolo

15:08:06 [satya]

Paul: Scribes needed for next week's telcon, please volunteer

15:08:43 [satya]

Paul: Update on the connection task force for the first F2F

15:08:47 [Zakim]

+??P12

15:08:48 [edoardo]

edoardo has joined #prov

15:08:58 [pgroth]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Connection_Proposal

15:08:59 [Zakim]

+??P29

15:09:00 [Paolo]

zakim, ??P12 is me

15:09:00 [Zakim]

+Paolo; got it

15:09:10 [jcheney]

zakim, ??P29 is me

15:09:10 [Zakim]

+jcheney; got it

15:09:23 [pgroth]

catalog: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Connections_Template_Catalog

15:09:44 [satya]

Kai: Feedback invited for the catalogs created by the connection task force

15:09:51 [kai]

kai has joined #prov

15:09:55 [pgroth]

Kai = Eric

15:09:58 [pgroth]

Erik

15:10:21 [Zakim]

+??P31

15:10:29 [Zakim]

-stain

15:10:36 [stain]

Zakim: +??P31 is me

15:10:41 [Zakim]

+kai

15:10:44 [pgroth]

Implementation and Test Cases TF Plan to F2F1

15:10:47 [satya]

Paul: Update on the implementation and test task force

15:11:03 [Lena]

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?hl=en_US&formkey=dEp1OVg2REdmLWpSbTlRYks1OFZURVE6MQ#gid=0

15:11:26 [satya]

Lena: Created forms to elicit feedback from provenance users and stakeholders

15:12:15 [satya]

Lena: Forms will be used to understand needs of provenance users

15:12:19 [jcheney]

+q

15:12:41 [iker]

iker has joined #prov

15:12:45 [pgroth]

ack jcheney

15:13:12 [jcheney]

http://www.usenix.org/events/tapp11/tech/final_files/Donaldson.pdf

15:13:18 [jcheney]

q-

15:13:33 [satya]

James: Attended a workshop describing users requirements for provenance use in computing trust

15:14:01 [Paolo]

the paper James just referred to: http://www.ics.forth.gr/~gregkar/tapp/papers/Day%202%20-%20Session%205%20-%20Do%20people%20want%20provenance%20and%20are%20they%20prepared%20to%20pay%20for%20it/Provenance,%20End-User%20Trust%20and%20Reuse%20An%20Empirical%20Investigation%20-%20Donaldson%20et.al.pdf

15:14:06 [satya]

Paul: Update on the Access and Query task force

15:14:15 [Paolo]

(I think!)

15:15:06 [satya]

Simon: Several proposals and still no agreement on any one of them

15:15:45 [dgarijo]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Access_and_Query_Proposal

15:15:50 [Yogesh]

q+

15:15:55 [Yogesh]

zakim, unmute me

15:15:55 [Zakim]

Yogesh should no longer be muted

15:16:08 [satya]

Simon: Curate the draft for the F2F and create a concrete set of points for further discussion

15:16:48 [Yogesh]

zakim, mute me

15:16:48 [Zakim]

Yogesh should now be muted

15:17:46 [GK]

(My comment: not *necessarily* a separate service. SImple case is just use URI for provemamce)

15:18:12 [satya]

Yogesh: Scope for provenance access service needs to be defined

15:19:05 [satya]

Simon: Close to consensus on the technical points in the draft, but there are still some outstanding issues to be resolved

15:19:36 [dgarijo]

+q

15:19:43 [pgroth]

ack Yogesh

15:19:44 [Zakim]

-jorn

15:19:53 [Paolo]

q?

15:19:53 [stain]

find a set of agreed principles

15:20:00 [Zakim]

+??P2

15:20:03 [Yogesh]

zakim, mute me

15:20:03 [Zakim]

Yogesh should now be muted

15:20:06 [jorn]

zakim, ??p2 is me

15:20:06 [Zakim]

+jorn; got it

15:20:43 [pgroth]

ACTION Simon to create a proposal for a set of points of consensus

15:20:43 [trackbot]

Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Simon

15:20:43 [trackbot]

Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. smiles, sdobson2)

15:20:44 [satya]

Simon: Additional points can be added to the access and query task force draft for discussion in the F2F

15:20:58 [pgroth]

ACTION smiles to create a proposal for a set of points of consensus

15:20:59 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-12 - Create a proposal for a set of points of consensus [on Simon Miles - due 2011-06-30].

15:21:13 [Yogesh]

q+

15:22:06 [satya]

Daniel: Will the issues related to provenance from multiple sources (?) be discussed in the F2F?

15:22:07 [dgarijo]

-q

15:22:07 [stain]

I guess those are the kind of thing we'll have to extract as general principles

15:22:22 [GK]

q+ to suggest first nailing down points about which consensus is easy - then move on

15:22:37 [Yogesh]

zakim, unmute me

15:22:37 [Zakim]

Yogesh should no longer be muted

15:23:38 [dgarijo]

@satya I meant multiple sources describing the provenance of a resource.

15:23:41 [Yogesh]

zakim, mute me

15:23:41 [Zakim]

Yogesh should now be muted

15:23:43 [pgroth]

ack Yogesh

15:23:54 [Yogesh]

zakim, mute me

15:23:54 [Zakim]

Yogesh should now be muted

15:23:58 [Paolo]

@satya who is reporting on the Model TF?

15:24:03 [pgroth]

ack GK

15:24:03 [Zakim]

GK, you wanted to suggest first nailing down points about which consensus is easy - then move on

15:24:19 [satya]

GK: Contentious points can be deferred

15:24:37 [satya]

@Daniel: thanks for clarifying

15:25:24 [satya]

Simon: Prioritize issues that can be discussed and resolved in the F2F

15:26:10 [satya]

Paul: Update on Model task force

15:26:33 [dgarijo]

@Paul=Paolo

15:26:40 [satya]

Paolo: Three step plan, (a) cleaning up the provenance concept definitions

15:27:02 [dgarijo]

ips

15:27:14 [satya]

Paolo: Conference call tomorrow to discuss the F2F draft

15:27:35 [satya]

Paolo: (b) Create draft by end of June

15:27:57 [satya]

Paolo: (c) Put the draft for discussion during F2F

15:28:48 [satya]

Paul: Definitions derived from CS will make it more complex

15:28:51 [JimM]

+q

15:29:17 [satya]

Paolo: We can use existing modeling work to define the provenance terms

15:29:56 [satya]

Paolo: There are inconsistencies in the provenance concept terms

15:31:02 [satya]

Jim: The definitions are consistent but specific parameters associated with terms are not very clear (?)

15:31:04 [smiles]

q+

15:31:28 [JimM]

-q

15:32:04 [satya]

Paolo: Will try to reconcile the different descriptions

15:32:41 [satya]

Paul: Agreed to derive common sense definitions

15:33:13 [satya]

Paul: Agreed on the definition of "thing"

15:33:36 [satya]

q+

15:34:07 [satya]

Paolo: Tomorrow's Model task force telcon can help in reconciling the different definitions

15:34:59 [satya]

Simon: The primer of the WG will help users to understand the provenance concept definitions

15:35:41 [stain]

@paolo +10

15:35:49 [smiles]

q-

15:36:52 [satya]

q-

15:37:01 [GK]

q+ to note a common WG principle is that consensus can be reviewed *iff* there is new information.

15:37:58 [satya]

Paul: We need to move forward after a consensus is reached

15:38:08 [stain]

.. almost like a court case

15:38:58 [GK]

q-

15:39:38 [satya]

Paolo: Model task force participants will be present at F2F

15:40:52 [Paolo]

@satya: agree

15:41:26 [Zakim]

+ +1.315.330.aaii

15:41:37 [tlebo]

tlebo has joined #prov

15:41:40 [satya]

Paul: Discussion on temporal properties

15:41:50 [pgroth]

Temporal Property: Thing proposed Creation time of a thing precedes any of its use times

15:42:15 [stain]

+1

15:42:16 [jcheney]

+1

15:42:20 [tfrancart]

+1

15:42:21 [GK]

0

15:42:22 [satya]

Paul: Should we discuss about temporal properties now?

15:42:27 [dgarijo]

+1

15:42:29 [Paolo]

-1 : none seems controversial to me

15:42:29 [satya]

0

15:42:30 [Lena]

0

15:42:31 [JimM]

0

15:42:32 [iker]

+1

15:42:33 [zednik]

0

15:42:35 [Yogesh]

0

15:42:41 [dcorsar]

0

15:42:44 [smiles]

0

15:42:50 [kai]

0

15:42:55 [tlebo]

0

15:43:39 [pgroth]

Proposed: Creation time of a thing precedes any of its use times

15:43:51 [zednik]

q+

15:43:52 [stain]

-1

15:43:53 [stain]

q+

15:44:03 [satya]

Paul: Agreement over the proposed definition?

15:44:21 [Paolo]

q+

15:44:31 [smiles]

q+

15:44:37 [Zakim]

-jcheney

15:44:47 [tlebo]

q+

15:45:10 [satya]

Zednik: We should be careful about setting restrictions about measurement of the time associated with a thing

15:45:37 [Zakim]

+??P29

15:45:37 [GK]

Agree with not saying too much ... part of more general problem: do we assume provenance is always 100% correct?

15:45:43 [jcheney]

zakim, ??P29 is me

15:45:43 [Zakim]

+jcheney; got it

15:45:47 [satya]

Stain: Agrees with stephan zednik

15:46:34 [satya]

Stain and Paolo: Measurement of time especially in distributed systems may be problematic

15:46:44 [tlebo]

q?

15:46:50 [zednik]

q-

15:46:51 [pgroth]

ack zednik

15:46:55 [pgroth]

ack stain

15:46:59 [pgroth]

acd Paolo

15:47:02 [pgroth]

ack Paolo

15:47:05 [Paolo]

@Stian: I can't believe you just brought relativity into the scope of provenance observations :-))

15:47:08 [pgroth]

ack smiles

15:47:15 [tlebo]

q-

15:47:18 [tlebo]

q+ (for Paulo)

15:47:22 [Paolo]

q?

15:47:23 [tlebo]

q+

15:47:25 [satya]

Simon: Agrees with past three speakers, seems to be unnecessary

15:47:33 [smiles]

q-

15:47:37 [satya]

simon: Discussing about this

15:47:39 [tlebo]

q

15:47:43 [tlebo]

q-

15:47:45 [stain]

@Paolo - well - if you send a probe on a one-way mission to outer space provenance of its data might be quite important! :)

15:47:48 [tlebo]

q?

15:48:06 [tlebo]

q- (for Paulo)

15:48:08 [satya]

Paulo: What kind of time is being discussed - when measurement was done or provenance was recorded

15:48:23 [dgarijo]

@stain: that's a nice point.

15:48:50 [GK]

@stian, @dgarijo +1

15:49:29 [satya]

Paulo: We need to understand the context of the notion of time

15:49:31 [JimM]

+q

15:49:55 [Zakim]

-jorn

15:50:09 [GK]

Ah, yes, pseudo-time?

15:50:26 [stain]

@JimM - but what about compound accounts? Can you not combine provenances without sorting out the clocks?

15:50:32 [satya]

Jim: Timestamp is associated with an OPM account

15:50:56 [smiles]

yes

15:50:59 [stain]

yes

15:50:59 [Paolo]

@Paul: yes

15:51:00 [zednik]

yes

15:51:03 [tlebo]

no

15:51:06 [GK]

q+ I think we *can* have provenance without time

15:51:08 [satya]

Paul: Can we have discussion about provenance without discussing time

15:51:09 [Lena]

yes

15:51:14 [GK]

I think we *can* have provenance without time

15:51:15 [JimM]

@stain: a judge would have to decide how to synchronize clocks

15:51:23 [JimM]

-q

15:51:27 [stain]

q+

15:51:29 [Zakim]

+??P2

15:51:33 [satya]

GK: We can have provenance time

15:51:33 [jorn]

zakim, ??p2 is me

15:51:33 [Zakim]

+jorn; got it

15:51:41 [dgarijo]

I agree with GK. We can but for some domains it is necessary.

15:51:58 [JimM]

yes - prov w/o time is OK, time is a nice annotation...useful evidence supporting provenance

15:52:00 [GK]

@dgarijo, agreed.

15:52:09 [satya]

Stian: Likes to have notion of profile

15:52:13 [satya]

q+

15:52:16 [smiles]

@stain completely agree

15:52:20 [pgroth]

ack stain

15:52:24 [pgroth]

ack satya

15:52:40 [stain]

Stian: Also that you can have provenance without Time (Taverna workflow system has that in current OPM export - but the provenance still makes sense)

15:52:45 [Paolo]

better say: as long as timestamps on events are not used for reasoning, that's fine

15:52:49 [tlebo]

q+

15:53:20 [smiles]

q+

15:53:22 [stain]

and such a common order might not even exist

15:53:52 [JimM]

would common order matter if there were no hidden dependencies?

15:53:57 [GK]

Sometimes, you just don't know. If time info is available that that can help.

15:54:24 [satya]

Tim: When two provenance accounts are being combined, we need to use time

15:54:24 [stain]

@GK exactly.. it's very useful information - but might not have that luxury or it might be giving wrong indications

15:54:27 [Paolo]

indeed you may not be able to synchronize different accounts that are obtained using different clocks

15:54:36 [stain]

so you need provenance of the timestamps!

15:55:20 [Paolo]

@Stian knowledge of which clocks you've used is not necessarily sufficient for this

15:55:56 [Zakim]

-jcheney

15:56:00 [satya]

@Stian: you need provenance of timestamps is your application requires it - it is not a universal requirement

15:56:22 [stain]

say account1 is a probe orbiting the sun and reporting solar spots. Account2 is the same, but from a telescope at earth. If they also look at some astronomical event, they might not even going to agree on temporal ordering.

15:56:22 [GK]

For me, this important/interesting thing about this discussion is how to reconcile conflicting provenance accounts; provenance for provenance may help, and may include time and other factors (e.g. trust)

15:56:33 [satya]

Paul: Is there a need for temporal ordering

15:56:56 [SamCoppens]

SamCoppens has left #prov

15:57:15 [satya]

GK: It may make sense to talk about provenance without temporal information

15:57:24 [Paolo]

if your provenance inferences/assertions do depend on time, you are in trouble

15:57:25 [stain]

GK: +1 - so we can make time important to the model, but not required

15:57:35 [Zakim]

+??P29

15:57:54 [stain]

if we don't have a model of time, then "traditional provenance" (ie. a lab book) would not be matching our mdoel

15:58:16 [JimM]

timestamps are useful and potentially independent evidence for/against provenance assertions

15:58:19 [stain]

+1

15:58:20 [GK]

q+ to add a qualification if consensus can be found

15:58:22 [Yogesh]

+1

15:58:27 [smiles]

+1

15:58:27 [zednik]

+1 : time stamps addressed, but not required

15:58:31 [satya]

Paul: Timestamp should be catered for by the model but not required by it

15:58:33 [Zakim]

-??P28

15:58:35 [jcheney]

+1 to allowing time without over-constraining its semantics

15:58:38 [JimM]

q?

15:58:40 [iker]

iker has left #prov

15:58:43 [smiles]

ack smiles

15:58:47 [tlebo]

q-

15:58:54 [Zakim]

-Yogesh

15:59:21 [JimM]

+q

15:59:26 [pgroth]

ack GK

15:59:26 [Zakim]

GK, you wanted to add a qualification if consensus can be found

15:59:30 [pgroth]

ack JimM

15:59:31 [Lena]

is it in the scope of this WG to define what is "required" and what is not?

15:59:32 [GK]

+1, (subject to consensus qualification)

15:59:56 [Yogesh]

Yogesh has left #prov

16:00:14 [Lena]

or should we focus on representing what can be useful for representing provenance?

16:00:22 [satya]

Jim: Time is important parameter of provenance descriptions

16:00:53 [GK]

(Bruce schneier did some work on secure logs that might eb an alternative approach - but don't want to discuss that)

16:01:05 [satya]

Jim: Time also helps in computing trust of provenance description

16:01:24 [Zakim]

-[IPcaller]

16:01:27 [Zakim]

- +1.315.330.aaii

16:01:30 [Zakim]

- +1.509.375.aagg

16:01:31 [pgroth]

zakim, bye

16:01:37 [jorn]

bye

16:01:38 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #prov

16:01:40 [Zakim]

leaving. As of this point the attendees were jorn, +1.312.348.aaaa, pgroth, +1.213.290.aabb, Yogesh, stain, GK, +1.832.386.aadd, +1.518.633.aaee, +1.509.375.aaff, JimM, dgarijo,

16:01:40 [JimM]

time is not core to provenance, but it is good evidence

16:01:43 [Zakim]

... Paolo, +1.509.375.aagg, [IPcaller], +1.216.368.aahh, Yolanda, jcheney, kai, +1.315.330.aaii

16:01:48 [pgroth]

zakim, make log public

16:01:51 [Paolo]

Paolo has left #prov

16:02:02 [pgroth]

rrsagent, make log public

16:02:11 [pgroth]

rrsagent, draft minutes

16:02:11 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/23-prov-minutes.html pgroth

16:03:13 [pgroth]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/HowToSetUp

16:04:54 [pgroth]

pgroth has left #prov

16:13:02 [GK1]

GK1 has joined #prov

16:13:42 [GK1]

Trying to configure alternative IRC client on this channel

16:14:58 [GK1]

GK1 has left #prov

16:15:01 [GK1]

GK1 has joined #prov

16:15:08 [GK1]

GK1 has left #prov

16:56:13 [tfrancart]

tfrancart has joined #prov

16:56:28 [tfrancart]

tfrancart has left #prov