Provenance Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 15 September 2011

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.15
Seen
Curt Tilmes, Daniel Garijo, Graham Klyne, Ilkay Altintas, Kai Eckert, Khalid Belhajjame, Luc Moreau, Paolo Missier, Paul Groth, Sandro Hawke, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Ted Thibodeau, Timothy Lebo, Vinh Nguyen, Yogesh Simmhan
Chair
Paul Groth
Scribe
Stian Soiland-Reyes
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. Accepted Minutes of last weeks telecon link
  2. Name was decided as Prov / PROV (casing not decided) link
Topics
  1. Admin

  2. Action items to review

  3. Scribes

  4. Named graphs requirements

    Went over the various requirements for Named Graphs for the RDF Working Group. Polled who would be present at the call between the RDF working group and the provenance working group. Action item on Satya to prepare examples of where Named Graphs would be necessary.

  5. Name for the standard

    Resolved that PROV will be the name of the standard

  6. First working draft of the PAQ

    Discussed the time table for producing a first working draft of the PAQ document. It seems that it will be possible but is dependent on the delivery of the conceptual model.

  7. Formal model document

    Discussed extending the explanation of the formal model document to use a scientific workflow example in particular to illustrate roles. Discussed attaching roles to entities instead of a relationship. Key discussion item was how to make associating roles "natural" in RDF. The group also discussed how to represent attributes of entities within OWL.

    1. Roles and times - how they can be associated with Used and Generated

    2. How can we identify attributes of an entity

  8. Conceptual Model

    Paolo and Luc gave an update on their progress on revising the Conceptual Model Document. Significant updates have been made to try and address a number of issues. The aim is to release an updated version on Monday.

14:47:07 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-irc

14:47:09 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

14:47:11 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be

14:47:11 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

14:47:12 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:47:12 <trackbot> Date: 15 September 2011
14:48:55 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.15
14:49:01 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
14:49:16 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public

Paul Groth: rrsagent, make logs public

14:50:44 <pgroth> anybody up for scribing?

Paul Groth: anybody up for scribing?

14:55:30 <pgroth> can I get a scribe?

Paul Groth: can I get a scribe?

14:58:58 <pgroth> can I get a scribe?

Paul Groth: can I get a scribe?

14:59:27 <stain> I can scribe

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I can scribe

14:59:35 <stain> if people not on the queue remember to say their name ;)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: if people not on the queue remember to say their name ;)

14:59:42 <pgroth> thanks stain

Paul Groth: thanks stain

14:59:50 <pgroth> Scribe: stain

(Scribe set to Stian Soiland-Reyes)

15:00:52 <pgroth> Topic: Admin

1. Admin

15:00:53 <Paolo> zakim, who is on the phone?

Paolo Missier: zakim, who is on the phone?

15:00:56 <Zakim> sorry, Paolo, I don't know what conference this is

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Paolo, I don't know what conference this is

15:01:09 <tlebo> Zakim, this is #prov

Timothy Lebo: Zakim, this is #prov

15:01:10 <Zakim> On IRC I see smiles, Paolo, rgolden, kai, Curt, tlebo, Vinh, Luc, Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see smiles, Paolo, rgolden, kai, Curt, tlebo, Vinh, Luc, Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

15:01:25 <Zakim> sorry, tlebo, I do not see a conference named '#prov' in progress or scheduled at this time

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, tlebo, I do not see a conference named '#prov' in progress or scheduled at this time

15:01:38 <MacTed> Zakim, this is prov

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, this is prov

15:01:38 <pgroth> Zakim, this is prov

Paul Groth: Zakim, this is prov

15:01:51 <Luc> zakim, who is on the call?

Luc Moreau: zakim, who is on the call?

15:01:53 <Zakim> ok, MacTed; that matches SW_(PROV)11:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, MacTed; that matches SW_(PROV)11:00AM

15:01:59 <Zakim> pgroth, this was already SW_(PROV)11:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, this was already SW_(PROV)11:00AM

15:02:05 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; that matches SW_(PROV)11:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pgroth; that matches SW_(PROV)11:00AM

15:02:07 <Zakim> + +1.512.524.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.512.524.aabb

15:02:08 <stain> pgroth: Finish within 1h due to RDF provenance telcon afterwards

Paul Groth: Finish within 1h due to RDF provenance telcon afterwards

15:02:15 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-09-08

Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-09-08

15:02:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P14, Luc, Duncan, ??P45, Curt_Tilmes, +1.315.330.aaaa, ??P61, ??P65, Sandro, ??P5, +1.512.524.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P14, Luc, Duncan, ??P45, Curt_Tilmes, +1.315.330.aaaa, ??P61, ??P65, Sandro, ??P5, +1.512.524.aabb

15:02:21 <pgroth> PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of Sep 08 telecon

PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of Sep 08 telecon

15:02:25 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

15:02:26 <stain> +1

+1

15:02:27 <Curt> +1

Curt Tilmes: +1

15:02:28 <Paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1

15:02:32 <kai> +1

Kai Eckert: +1

15:02:35 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

15:02:41 <khalidbelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1

15:03:00 <pgroth> Resolved: Accepted Minutes of last weeks telecon

RESOLVED: Accepted Minutes of last weeks telecon

15:03:02 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software

Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software

15:03:12 <Zakim> -??P65

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P65

15:03:13 <pgroth>    http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open

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

15:03:14 <Zakim> +??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4

15:03:17 <stain> Topic: Action items to review

2. Action items to review

15:03:19 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

15:03:19 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me

15:03:25 <Paolo> zakim, ??P4 is me

Paolo Missier: zakim, ??P4 is me

15:03:25 <stain> pgroth: no actions

Paul Groth: no actions

15:03:30 <khalidbelhajjame> zakim, ??P4 is me

Khalid Belhajjame: zakim, ??P4 is me

15:03:36 <khalidbelhajjame> sorry Paolo

Khalid Belhajjame: sorry Paolo

<stain> topic: Scribes

3. Scribes

15:03:37 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Scribes

Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Scribes

15:03:44 <Paolo> not sure who I am :-)

Paolo Missier: not sure who I am :-)

15:03:52 <Zakim> +??P15

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15

15:04:00 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it

15:04:02 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted

15:04:07 <stain> pgroth: Need more scribes, please sign up so we don't have to assign

Paul Groth: Need more scribes, please sign up so we don't have to assign

15:04:10 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Paolo; got it

15:04:25 <stain> Topic: Named graphs requirements

4. Named graphs requirements

Summary: Went over the various requirements for Named Graphs for the RDF Working Group. Polled who would be present at the call between the RDF working group and the provenance working group. Action item on Satya to prepare examples of where Named Graphs would be necessary.

<pgroth> SUMMARY: Went over the various requirements for Named Graphs for the RDF Working Group. Polled who would be present at the call between the RDF working group and the provenance working group. Action item on Satya to prepare examples of where Named Graphs would be necessary.
15:04:16 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph

Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph

15:04:19 <Zakim> +khalidbelhajjame; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +khalidbelhajjame; got it

15:04:41 <Zakim> +Vinh

Zakim IRC Bot: +Vinh

15:04:51 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's here?

15:04:53 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:04:54 <stain> pgroth: several people ave signed up for this telcon. Any comments on the requirements?

Paul Groth: several people ave signed up for this telcon. Any comments on the requirements?

15:04:57 <Zakim> + +1.858.210.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.858.210.aacc

15:04:58 <Luc> who will joing the call?

Luc Moreau: who will joing the call?

15:05:05 <Zakim> + +1.213.290.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.213.290.aadd

15:05:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P14, Luc, Duncan, khalidbelhajjame, Curt_Tilmes, +1.315.330.aaaa, ??P61, Sandro, ??P5, +1.512.524.aabb, MacTed (muted), Paolo, ??P15, Vinh, +1.858.210.aacc,

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P14, Luc, Duncan, khalidbelhajjame, Curt_Tilmes, +1.315.330.aaaa, ??P61, Sandro, ??P5, +1.512.524.aabb, MacTed (muted), Paolo, ??P15, Vinh, +1.858.210.aacc,

15:05:22 <Zakim> ... +1.213.290.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: ... +1.213.290.aadd

15:05:28 <pgroth> +1

Paul Groth: +1

15:05:30 <Luc> +1

Luc Moreau: +1

15:05:30 <kai> +1

Kai Eckert: +1

15:05:32 <Paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1

15:05:36 <Zakim> On IRC I see dcorsar, khalidbelhajjame, Yogesh, smiles, Paolo, rgolden, kai, Curt, tlebo, Vinh, Luc, Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see dcorsar, khalidbelhajjame, Yogesh, smiles, Paolo, rgolden, kai, Curt, tlebo, Vinh, Luc, Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro

15:05:37 <stain> pgroth: Say +1 if you are attending the call

Paul Groth: Say +1 if you are attending the call

15:05:40 <Luc> satya?

Luc Moreau: satya?

15:05:52 <MacTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

15:05:57 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo

15:06:00 <satya> Hi Luc, I am here

Satya Sahoo: Hi Luc, I am here

15:06:04 <stain> pgroth: the call is immediately following this call

Paul Groth: the call is immediately following this call

15:06:07 <Luc> will you join rdf call?

Luc Moreau: will you join rdf call?

15:06:08 <pgroth> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Sep/0073.html

Paul Groth: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Sep/0073.html

15:06:16 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

15:06:17 <stain> Thursday 15 Sep, 1215pm US Eastern time for 45-60 minutes 18:15 Paris/Berlin/A'dam; 117:15 London)

Thursday 15 Sep, 1215pm US Eastern time for 45-60 minutes 18:15 Paris/Berlin/A'dam; 117:15 London)

15:06:18 <pgroth> Call agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.15

Paul Groth: Call agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.15

15:06:55 <Yogesh> zakim, +1.213.290 is me

Yogesh Simmhan: zakim, +1.213.290 is me

15:06:56 <Zakim> +Yogesh; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Yogesh; got it

15:07:18 <tlebo> Zakim, aaaa is me

Timothy Lebo: Zakim, aaaa is me

15:07:18 <satya> Can we give examples from previous work?

Satya Sahoo: Can we give examples from previous work?

15:07:18 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo; got it

15:07:20 <stain> Luc: Concrete examples of where we need named graphs. We don't have concrete examples at this point in time. Wanted to ask members like Satya and members working with (?)

Luc Moreau: Concrete examples of where we need named graphs. We don't have concrete examples at this point in time. Wanted to ask members like Satya and members working with (?)

15:07:28 <Zakim> +??P46

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P46

15:07:32 <stain> ... when would we have a serialisation to RDF where we can discuss the need for named graphs?

... when would we have a serialisation to RDF where we can discuss the need for named graphs?

15:07:44 <stain> satya: we can create a usecase for named graphs directly

Satya Sahoo: we can create a usecase for named graphs directly

15:08:01 <kai> q+

Kai Eckert: q+

15:08:03 <stain> satya: we have previous examples from biomedical domains, requiring named graphs to refer to a set of provenance assertions

Satya Sahoo: we have previous examples from biomedical domains, requiring named graphs to refer to a set of provenance assertions

15:08:06 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

15:08:10 <stain> ... both examples can be given

... both examples can be given

15:08:33 <stain> Luc: as a working group we need to decide that indeed this is the way we want to do things. We may need an internal discussion before telling the RDF WG

Luc Moreau: as a working group we need to decide that indeed this is the way we want to do things. We may need an internal discussion before telling the RDF WG

15:08:40 <stain> ... to avoid misleading them

... to avoid misleading them

15:08:48 <stain> satya: could we have an example on the provenance ontology wiki page?

Satya Sahoo: could we have an example on the provenance ontology wiki page?

15:08:53 <stain> Luc: perhaps that, yes

Luc Moreau: perhaps that, yes

15:08:57 <stain> satya: will create that and put it up

Satya Sahoo: will create that and put it up

15:09:09 <stain> Luc: do this as agenda item for next week?

Luc Moreau: do this as agenda item for next week?

15:09:16 <Luc> q-

Luc Moreau: q-

15:09:24 <stain> ACTION Satya: Do named graph example on provenance ontology page

ACTION Satya: Do named graph example on provenance ontology page

15:09:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-39 - Do named graph example on provenance ontology page [on Satya Sahoo - due 2011-09-22].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-39 - Do named graph example on provenance ontology page [on Satya Sahoo - due 2011-09-22].

15:09:40 <Zakim> + +1.518.633.aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.633.aaee

15:09:49 <stain> kai: (..) Dublin core metadata provenance group, comments on collective requirements.

Kai Eckert: (..) Dublin core metadata provenance group, comments on collective requirements.

15:10:00 <stain> kai: Ability to retrieve the provenance of an RDF resource is required.

Kai Eckert: Ability to retrieve the provenance of an RDF resource is required.

15:10:10 <stain> kai: main thing about named graph is taht we can retrieve provenance about RDF statements

Kai Eckert: main thing about named graph is taht we can retrieve provenance about RDF statements

15:10:25 <stain> kai: this can be misinterpreted as te provenance of the resource (given by the URI) which we can do directly with RDF

Kai Eckert: this can be misinterpreted as te provenance of the resource (given by the URI) which we can do directly with RDF

15:10:27 <Luc> @kai, are your requirements explicit in the requirement page?

Luc Moreau: @kai, are your requirements explicit in the requirement page?

15:10:28 <stain> q+

q+

15:10:43 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:10:44 <tlebo> Will we be adding the named graphs examples to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph ?

Timothy Lebo: Will we be adding the named graphs examples to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph ?

15:10:46 <pgroth> ack kai

Paul Groth: ack kai

15:10:48 <Zakim> +Yolanda

Zakim IRC Bot: +Yolanda

<stain> stain: Possible usecase - multiple provenance graphs from multiple asserters over the same process which could be in disagreement

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Possible usecase - multiple provenance graphs from multiple asserters over the same process which could be in disagreement

15:10:51 <pgroth> ack stain

Paul Groth: ack stain

15:11:14 <pgroth> ack satya

Paul Groth: ack satya

15:11:27 <stain> satya: Responding to Kai - on ability to refer to aprts of provenance

Satya Sahoo: Responding to Kai - on ability to refer to aprts of provenance

15:11:42 <stain> satya: distinction to bring up, named graphs and reifications allow you to make assertion on statement level

Satya Sahoo: distinction to bring up, named graphs and reifications allow you to make assertion on statement level

15:12:03 <kai> q+ to ask for an example

Kai Eckert: q+ to ask for an example

15:12:13 <stain> satya: which would let you refer to provenance of RDF subject, predicate and resource level

Satya Sahoo: which would let you refer to provenance of RDF subject, predicate and resource level

15:12:22 <stain> satya: named graph would only give you the granularity of statements

Satya Sahoo: named graph would only give you the granularity of statements

15:12:37 <tlebo> +1, didn't quite follow Satya's distinction.

Timothy Lebo: +1, didn't quite follow Satya's distinction.

15:12:42 <stain> kai: not sure when that granularity would be helpful

Kai Eckert: not sure when that granularity would be helpful

15:12:49 <stain> satya: would explain tis on the wikipage

Satya Sahoo: would explain tis on the wikipage

15:12:52 <tlebo> difference between an RDF statement and its S, P, and O.

Timothy Lebo: difference between an RDF statement and its S, P, and O.

15:12:58 <stain> satya: provenance context entity, google that - example scenario

Satya Sahoo: provenance context entity, google that - example scenario

15:13:22 <stain> satya: need to explain the point of why..

Satya Sahoo: need to explain the point of why..

15:13:28 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me

15:13:28 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted

15:13:30 <MacTed> q+

Ted Thibodeau: q+

15:13:30 <stain> pgroth: about kai's requirement, could you put that there?

Paul Groth: about kai's requirement, could you put that there?

15:13:36 <pgroth> ack kai

Paul Groth: ack kai

15:13:37 <Zakim> kai, you wanted to ask for an example

Zakim IRC Bot: kai, you wanted to ask for an example

15:13:39 <pgroth> ack MacTed

Paul Groth: ack MacTed

15:13:54 <Zakim> +??P49

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P49

15:14:05 <satya> @Mac: I don't think there is a difference

Satya Sahoo: @Mac: I don't think there is a difference

15:14:06 <stain> MacTed: what is the difference, if the resource is a building, brick, etc.. granularity requirement for an entity should be the same

Ted Thibodeau: what is the difference, if the resource is a building, brick, etc.. granularity requirement for an entity should be the same

15:14:09 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P49 is me

Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P49 is me

15:14:09 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it

15:14:18 <kai> q+

Kai Eckert: q+

15:14:28 <stain> Zakim, who is speaking?

Zakim, who is speaking?

15:14:40 <Zakim> stain, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 21 (14%), ??P14 (22%), MacTed (19%)

Zakim IRC Bot: stain, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 21 (14%), ??P14 (22%), MacTed (19%)

15:14:52 <pgroth> ack kai

Paul Groth: ack kai

15:14:59 <stain> pgroth: collection of smaller things

Paul Groth: collection of smaller things

15:15:03 <Zakim> +??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0

15:15:22 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:15:35 <stain> kai: you want to describe provenance of something, at least you have a good possiblity to identify a set of RDF statements with named graphs. Reification, yes, but you can't directly talk about a set of statements because you can't identify them. But I don't see this to have antying to do with granuliaryt

Kai Eckert: you want to describe provenance of something, at least you have a good possiblity to identify a set of RDF statements with named graphs. Reification, yes, but you can't directly talk about a set of statements because you can't identify them. But I don't see this to have antying to do with granuliaryt

15:15:52 <stain> MacTed: should reword requirements 2 to "Ability to retrieve the provenance of a set of triples"

Ted Thibodeau: should reword requirements 2 to "Ability to retrieve the provenance of a set of triples"

15:16:17 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:16:20 <stain> pgroth: Kai and Satya has different requirements - we might not understand Satya's reqs which he will clarify

Paul Groth: Kai and Satya has different requirements - we might not understand Satya's reqs which he will clarify

15:16:27 <stain> pgroth: we'll discuss this afterwards

Paul Groth: we'll discuss this afterwards

15:16:51 <tlebo> what about named graphs needs to be handled as something more than files in a directory?

Timothy Lebo: what about named graphs needs to be handled as something more than files in a directory?

15:16:44 <stain> Topic: Name for the standard

5. Name for the standard

Summary: Resolved that PROV will be the name of the standard

<pgroth> Summary: Resolved that PROV will be the name of the standard
<stain> Proposed: "Prov" as the name for the standard

PROPOSED: "Prov" as the name for the standard

15:16:50 <stain> pgroth: Moving towards PROV - Luc can explain

Paul Groth: Moving towards PROV - Luc can explain

15:17:07 <stain> Luc: Last week's telcon there was strong support for the name "Prov"

Luc Moreau: Last week's telcon there was strong support for the name "Prov"

15:17:27 <stain> Luc: this was put out on email last Friday, but not received much feedback except from GK who did not oppose it

Luc Moreau: this was put out on email last Friday, but not received much feedback except from GK who did not oppose it

15:18:06 <stain> RESOLVED: Name was decided as Prov / PROV  (casing not decided)

RESOLVED: Name was decided as Prov / PROV (casing not decided)

15:18:08 <sandro> It's just a name;  I wouldn't all-caps it.

Sandro Hawke: It's just a name; I wouldn't all-caps it.

15:18:19 <stain> Agree - we said last week that it was not a acronym

Agree - we said last week that it was not a acronym

15:18:49 <stain> TOPIC: First working draft of the PAQ

6. First working draft of the PAQ

Summary: Discussed the time table for producing a first working draft of the PAQ document. It seems that it will be possible but is dependent on the delivery of the conceptual model.

<pgroth> Summary: Discussed the time table for producing a first working draft of the PAQ document. It seems that it will be possible but is dependent on the delivery of the conceptual model.
15:19:11 <stain> pgroth: Time table for this. GK is not on the phone.

Paul Groth: Time table for this. GK is not on the phone.

15:19:26 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

15:19:29 <stain> Yogesh: nothing to add

Yogesh Simmhan: nothing to add

15:19:57 <stain> Luc: In last weeks call, we are still aiming to release by end of month - to do this we need a resolution by the group that we are willing to release the document as working drafts

Luc Moreau: In last weeks call, we are still aiming to release by end of month - to do this we need a resolution by the group that we are willing to release the document as working drafts

15:20:14 <stain> Luc: would like to have the documents approved on the 29th in 2 weeks time

Luc Moreau: would like to have the documents approved on the 29th in 2 weeks time

15:20:48 <stain> Luc: to do so we will finish the model document this week, ontology document following soon. Wanted to know if PAQ document would follow same time table

Luc Moreau: to do so we will finish the model document this week, ontology document following soon. Wanted to know if PAQ document would follow same time table

15:21:02 <stain> pgroth: hangup on PAQ document is dependent on conceptual model

Paul Groth: hangup on PAQ document is dependent on conceptual model

15:21:21 <stain> pgroth: GK has emailed that we need to have those terms clearly defined in conceptual model

Paul Groth: GK has emailed that we need to have those terms clearly defined in conceptual model

15:21:40 <stain> pgroth: don't know the details. Likely we can follow the same timeline, but a week later for PAQ

Paul Groth: don't know the details. Likely we can follow the same timeline, but a week later for PAQ

15:21:42 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:21:45 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

15:21:45 <stain> pgroth: Any other comments?

Paul Groth: Any other comments?

15:21:58 <stain> TOPIC: Formal model document

7. Formal model document

Summary: Discussed extending the explanation of the formal model document to use a scientific workflow example in particular to illustrate roles. Discussed attaching roles to entities instead of a relationship. Key discussion item was how to make associating roles "natural" in RDF. The group also discussed how to represent attributes of entities within OWL.

<pgroth> Summary: Discussed extending the explanation of the formal model document to use a scientific workflow example in particular to illustrate roles. Discussed attaching roles to entities instead of a relationship. Key discussion item was how to make associating roles "natural" in RDF. The group also discussed how to represent attributes of entities within OWL.
15:22:14 <stain> satya: discussion on role

Satya Sahoo: discussion on role

15:22:24 <stain> satya: call on Monday, discussing how to model roles and how to interpret them in our model

Satya Sahoo: call on Monday, discussing how to model roles and how to interpret them in our model

15:22:34 <stain> pgroth: that's the next discussion point

Paul Groth: that's the next discussion point

15:22:46 <stain> satya: working on extensibility of prov ontology

Satya Sahoo: working on extensibility of prov ontology

15:23:06 <stain> satya: how different domains can extend ontology, doing concrete examples

Satya Sahoo: how different domains can extend ontology, doing concrete examples

15:23:25 <stain> satya: to see if we can make Taverna example as an other usecase to deminstrate extension with new classes and properties for scientific workflows

Satya Sahoo: to see if we can make Taverna example as an other usecase to deminstrate extension with new classes and properties for scientific workflows

15:23:32 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:23:40 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

15:23:40 <stain> q+

q+

15:23:46 <Paolo> +1 for using the Taverna example

Paolo Missier: +1 for using the Taverna example

15:23:50 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

15:24:07 <stain> Luc: Is this document to become a normative document, is it then appropriate to have an example for specific technology like Taverna, or a more neutral example

Luc Moreau: Is this document to become a normative document, is it then appropriate to have an example for specific technology like Taverna, or a more neutral example

15:24:26 <stain> Luc: Perhaps don't specify this as part of the specs

Luc Moreau: Perhaps don't specify this as part of the specs

15:24:36 <tlebo> can we accumulate tool-specific concrete examples on the wiki?

Timothy Lebo: can we accumulate tool-specific concrete examples on the wiki?

15:24:37 <stain> satya: take out Taverna specific details, but follow the scenario in a general way

Satya Sahoo: take out Taverna specific details, but follow the scenario in a general way

15:25:47 <stain> stain: Would not include specific Taverna-details, but do a general simplified example for scientific workflows - good because one can also show a diagram of the abstract workflow

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Would not include specific Taverna-details, but do a general simplified example for scientific workflows - good because one can also show a diagram of the abstract workflow

15:24:47 <pgroth> ack stain

Paul Groth: ack stain

15:25:05 <dgarijo> I agree with Satya. It is just a Taverna workflow, but could be any scientific workflow system

Daniel Garijo: I agree with Satya. It is just a Taverna workflow, but could be any scientific workflow system

15:25:41 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:26:06 <stain> pgroth: so build another example from the Taverna example, but do a general one?

Paul Groth: so build another example from the Taverna example, but do a general one?

15:26:08 <dgarijo> @stain: +1

Daniel Garijo: @stain: +1

15:26:21 <stain> satya: perhaps just a diagram on how Stian could hae extended the ontology, and some explanation

Satya Sahoo: perhaps just a diagram on how Stian could hae extended the ontology, and some explanation

15:26:31 <stain> Ilkay: Could also try to validate this from the Kepler point of view

Ilkay Altintas: Could also try to validate this from the Kepler point of view

15:26:42 <stain> satya: that would help a lot - you could work with Stian

Satya Sahoo: that would help a lot - you could work with Stian

15:27:08 <stain> Ilkay: Will contact Stian

Ilkay Altintas: Will contact Stian

15:27:20 <stain> Subtopic: Roles and times - how they can be associated with Used and Generated

7.1. Roles and times - how they can be associated with Used and Generated

15:27:23 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

15:27:37 <stain> satya: could Luc bring up the initial issue?

Satya Sahoo: could Luc bring up the initial issue?

15:27:42 <pgroth> ace Luc

Paul Groth: ace Luc

15:27:46 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

15:28:04 <stain> Luc: Conceptual model defines a type of relationship, Process execution Used an Entity, or an Entity was Generated by an PE

Luc Moreau: Conceptual model defines a type of relationship, Process execution Used an Entity, or an Entity was Generated by an PE

15:28:32 <stain> Luc: and there are some properties to those relations, like te notion of "role" which we just call a qualifier in the model, describing the type of interaction

Luc Moreau: and there are some properties to those relations, like te notion of "role" which we just call a qualifier in the model, describing the type of interaction

15:28:38 <stain> not just binary relation, an n-ary relation

not just binary relation, an n-ary relation

15:28:40 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

15:28:59 <stain> Luc: Back some years ago in an early OPM serialisation, these n-ary relations was exposed as resources

Luc Moreau: Back some years ago in an early OPM serialisation, these n-ary relations was exposed as resources

15:29:13 <stain> there were some comments that it was not a very natural RDFisation

there were some comments that it was not a very natural RDFisation

15:29:26 <stain> Luc: OPMV used RDF properties to express those relations

Luc Moreau: OPMV used RDF properties to express those relations

15:29:27 <Paolo> q-

Paolo Missier: q-

15:29:30 <Zakim> +??P38

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P38

15:29:40 <stain> Luc: Which is fine if you don't talk about roles and times together with Use/Generation

Luc Moreau: Which is fine if you don't talk about roles and times together with Use/Generation

15:29:49 <stain> Luc: But what if you want to do this, how would you do this in RDF

Luc Moreau: But what if you want to do this, how would you do this in RDF

15:30:02 <Zakim> -??P46

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P46

15:30:14 <stain> satya: what we discussed was to specically have a class Role, we have been discussing how to model this

Satya Sahoo: what we discussed was to specically have a class Role, we have been discussing how to model this

15:30:22 <GK1> zakim, ??P38 is me

Graham Klyne: zakim, ??P38 is me

15:30:22 <Zakim> +GK1; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +GK1; got it

15:30:30 <stain> satya: we can use the approach of where a Role is a special type of Entity

Satya Sahoo: we can use the approach of where a Role is a special type of Entity

15:30:56 <stain> satya: in the example of Khalid - Khalid as a person, say as a researcher at Univ of Manchester

Satya Sahoo: in the example of Khalid - Khalid as a person, say as a researcher at Univ of Manchester

15:31:08 <stain> satya: but Khalid at a restaurant is te role of Customer

Satya Sahoo: but Khalid at a restaurant is te role of Customer

15:31:16 <stain> satya: or play football, where he assumes the role of a GoalKeeper

Satya Sahoo: or play football, where he assumes the role of a GoalKeeper

15:31:26 <stain> satya: the specialisation that Luc described in a model perspective

Satya Sahoo: the specialisation that Luc described in a model perspective

15:31:39 <stain> satya: we are then pushing the specialisation from the property to the entity itself

Satya Sahoo: we are then pushing the specialisation from the property to the entity itself

15:31:54 <stain> satya: Khalid can assume these different roles

Satya Sahoo: Khalid can assume these different roles

15:31:58 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

15:32:07 <stain> satya: we can relate entities to these roles - and on the role we can assert things like time, etc.

Satya Sahoo: we can relate entities to these roles - and on the role we can assert things like time, etc.

15:32:24 <stain> Paolo: We had a brief discussion with Satya and the rest of the group

Paolo Missier: We had a brief discussion with Satya and the rest of the group

15:32:25 <GK1> So what is he at a restaurant talking research with colleagues?

Graham Klyne: So what is he at a restaurant talking research with colleagues?

15:32:28 <tlebo> I'm not sure we need to relate the Used entity with a distinct Role - Why not put the role directly on the Used Entity?

Timothy Lebo: I'm not sure we need to relate the Used entity with a distinct Role - Why not put the role directly on the Used Entity?

15:32:57 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:32:59 <stain> Paolo: not a relationship, but a persona, an Entity assumes this for the duration of this action

Paolo Missier: not a relationship, but a persona, an Entity assumes this for the duration of this action

15:33:02 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

15:33:13 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

15:33:20 <stain> Paolo: temporarily assocated to entities by way of specialisation, interesting, but departure from model

Paolo Missier: temporarily assocated to entities by way of specialisation, interesting, but departure from model

15:33:25 <dgarijo> @tlebo: you could do that by specializing used, but the role is a trick to model the n-ary relationships

Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: you could do that by specializing used, but the role is a trick to model the n-ary relationships

15:33:26 <satya> @GK: Can you please clarify

Satya Sahoo: @GK: Can you please clarify

15:33:30 <tlebo> BTW, the notes from the OWL telecon are at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2011-09-12

Timothy Lebo: BTW, the notes from the OWL telecon are at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology_Meeting_2011-09-12

15:33:34 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:33:50 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: agree with Paolo.

Khalid Belhajjame: agree with Paolo.

15:33:58 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: relationships we are describing are with relation to attributes

Khalid Belhajjame: relationships we are describing are with relation to attributes

15:34:14 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: if we want to map this, we need to define the relationship in the contextual model as first class citizens

Khalid Belhajjame: if we want to map this, we need to define the relationship in the contextual model as first class citizens

15:34:16 <Zakim> -Yogesh

Zakim IRC Bot: -Yogesh

15:34:28 <tlebo> re "role is a trick to model the n-ary relationships" - that is fine and a Good Thing. But let's put the n-ary directly as the Entity that is used by the PE.

Timothy Lebo: re "role is a trick to model the n-ary relationships" - that is fine and a Good Thing. But let's put the n-ary directly as the Entity that is used by the PE.

15:34:30 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: Luc said someone stated this as a bad idea.. but..

Khalid Belhajjame: Luc said someone stated this as a bad idea.. but..

15:34:31 <GK1> @Satya - I was thinking that it has been said that there can only be one role used - so if it's applied to the "person", which applies?

Graham Klyne: @Satya - I was thinking that it has been said that there can only be one role used - so if it's applied to the "person", which applies?

15:34:39 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: if we can't define the relationships as classes in OWL

Khalid Belhajjame: if we can't define the relationships as classes in OWL

15:34:40 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:34:41 <Zakim> +Yogesh

Zakim IRC Bot: +Yogesh

15:34:46 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

15:34:48 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

15:34:54 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

15:34:58 <Luc> wasGeneratedBy(e1,pe1,qualifier(port="p1", order=1),t1)

Luc Moreau: wasGeneratedBy(e1,pe1,qualifier(port="p1", order=1),t1)

15:35:13 <satya> @GK - no I meant multiple roles can be used

Satya Sahoo: @GK - no I meant multiple roles can be used

15:35:13 <dgarijo> @tlebo: it is modeled that way already

Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: it is modeled that way already

15:35:18 <GK1> (@Satya - being late joining, I may be missing the point.)

Graham Klyne: (@Satya - being late joining, I may be missing the point.)

15:35:28 <stain> @GK1 no, it should be possible to use it in different roles in same PE?

@GK1 no, it should be possible to use it in different roles in same PE?

15:35:40 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

15:35:44 <stain> Luc: Value of the entity at a given port - ordering

Luc Moreau: Value of the entity at a given port - ordering

15:35:46 <GK1> @Satya, @Stian: Ah, OK

Graham Klyne: @Satya, @Stian: Ah, OK

15:35:51 <stain> Luc: one example we want to support in the model

Luc Moreau: one example we want to support in the model

15:36:09 <stain> @GK1 Multiple generation roles for same entity is more interesting :)

@GK1 Multiple generation roles for same entity is more interesting :)

15:36:21 <stain> Luc: Role might have been misunderstood - not like in role-based access controlled

Luc Moreau: Role might have been misunderstood - not like in role-based access controlled

15:36:32 <stain> Luc: It is given information about the actual usage in the system

Luc Moreau: It is given information about the actual usage in the system

15:36:36 <Zakim> - +1.858.210.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.858.210.aacc

15:36:38 <dgarijo> @stain, I think that with this approach it is covered too

Daniel Garijo: @stain, I think that with this approach it is covered too

15:36:44 <stain> Luc: not sure about satya's notion of Role as subclass of Entity

Luc Moreau: not sure about satya's notion of Role as subclass of Entity

15:36:47 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:36:50 <pgroth> ack smiles

Paul Groth: ack smiles

15:37:01 <stain> @dgarijo I believe so too

@dgarijo I believe so too

15:37:09 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

15:37:17 <satya> @Luc: yes, we can model the qualifiers using roles as we discussed

Satya Sahoo: @Luc: yes, we can model the qualifiers using roles as we discussed

15:37:25 <dgarijo> @stain: they would be 2 roles used by the pe and assumed by the same entity

Daniel Garijo: @stain: they would be 2 roles used by the pe and assumed by the same entity

15:37:29 <stain> smiles: about expressibility (???)  - has relationships of roles and time information

Simon Miles: about expressibility (???) - has relationships of roles and time information

15:37:32 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

15:37:37 <stain> (could someone fill in first bit of smiles argument?)

(could someone fill in first bit of smiles argument?)

15:38:15 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

15:38:20 <stain> Paolo: supportive of example Luc gave, good on general req to codify this relationship which won't go away. smiles idea is sensible - two-layer approach where you can express this or not

Paolo Missier: supportive of example Luc gave, good on general req to codify this relationship which won't go away. smiles idea is sensible - two-layer approach where you can express this or not

15:38:56 <stain> Paolo: interesting as Satya described it - for the duration of an activity, an entity assumes a persona/role - but I'm afraid..(?) this example. could Satya explain?

Paolo Missier: interesting as Satya described it - for the duration of an activity, an entity assumes a persona/role - but I'm afraid..(?) this example. could Satya explain?

15:38:57 <smiles> my argument was to have 2 ontology representations: one is intuitive, maybe relies on reasoning but lacks expressivity; the other allows expression of time on edges etc. but relies on "used" etc being classes

Simon Miles: my argument was to have 2 ontology representations: one is intuitive, maybe relies on reasoning but lacks expressivity; the other allows expression of time on edges etc. but relies on "used" etc being classes

15:38:59 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

15:39:02 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:39:03 <tlebo> @stain - smiles' two layers?

Timothy Lebo: @stain - smiles' two layers?

15:39:19 <smiles> (a la OPMV and OPMO)

Simon Miles: (a la OPMV and OPMO)

15:39:30 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:39:37 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: RDF simon of having two versions - like the notion of roles. If we want to do this properly will not appear in the simplified version, it qualifies the relationship

Khalid Belhajjame: RDF simon of having two versions - like the notion of roles. If we want to do this properly will not appear in the simplified version, it qualifies the relationship

15:39:45 <tlebo> I don't think it's about simple vs. complex, it's about whether the extra context (role, time) is asserted on the used Entity or not.

Timothy Lebo: I don't think it's about simple vs. complex, it's about whether the extra context (role, time) is asserted on the used Entity or not.

15:39:49 <pgroth> ack satya

Paul Groth: ack satya

15:39:49 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: would it be sensible to have the simplified version in the ontology

Khalid Belhajjame: would it be sensible to have the simplified version in the ontology

15:40:00 <stain> @tlebo that makes sense

@tlebo that makes sense

15:40:10 <stain> satya: not two versions of ontology, Role should be part of ontology

Satya Sahoo: not two versions of ontology, Role should be part of ontology

15:40:18 <stain> satya: question is what the information we are trying to represent

Satya Sahoo: question is what the information we are trying to represent

15:40:31 <stain> satya: statements on the entity or on the process execution

Satya Sahoo: statements on the entity or on the process execution

15:40:45 <tlebo> satya: two distinct things: (I missed the intro)

Satya Sahoo: two distinct things: (I missed the intro) [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ]

15:40:51 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

15:41:01 <tlebo> qualifier on the relationship vs. qualifier on the entity.

Timothy Lebo: qualifier on the relationship vs. qualifier on the entity.

15:41:08 <stain> satya: say entity on port 1, ordering 1 - are these properties on the entity itself - qualifier on the entity, then modelling roles as entity allows us to say this

Satya Sahoo: say entity on port 1, ordering 1 - are these properties on the entity itself - qualifier on the entity, then modelling roles as entity allows us to say this

15:41:18 <stain> satya: that entity was the first package on a port

Satya Sahoo: that entity was the first package on a port

15:41:31 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:41:32 <Luc> why is it a qualification of the entity? it's not an attribute of the entity?

Luc Moreau: why is it a qualification of the entity? it's not an attribute of the entity?

15:41:33 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

15:41:55 <stain> @Luc agree - and an entity can be used for multiple roles wit different properties

@Luc agree - and an entity can be used for multiple roles wit different properties

15:42:06 <stain> like a hammer used both for hammering nails and pulling them out

like a hammer used both for hammering nails and pulling them out

15:42:06 <Luc> @stain, indeed

Luc Moreau: @stain, indeed

15:42:33 <stain> (but you could say those are two views of the hammer?)

(but you could say those are two views of the hammer?)

15:42:43 <tlebo> Does this work?    :my_pe prov:used [ a prov:Entity; prov:actually :Khalid; a prov:Role, a restaurant:Customer, time:begin :t1, time:end :t2 ] ?

Timothy Lebo: Does this work? :my_pe prov:used [ a prov:Entity; prov:actually :Khalid; a prov:Role, a restaurant:Customer, time:begin :t1, time:end :t2 ] ?

15:43:09 <stain> Paolo: (..) complex bit you need to make explicit. that data was produced.. (?)

Paolo Missier: (..) complex bit you need to make explicit. that data was produced.. (?)

15:43:17 <stain> @tlebo that is satya's proposal, yes

@tlebo that is satya's proposal, yes

15:43:27 <stain> @tlebo kind of like ORE proxies

@tlebo kind of like ORE proxies

15:43:46 <stain> satya: (..) customer left the restaurant at this point in time, etc.

Satya Sahoo: (..) customer left the restaurant at this point in time, etc.

15:43:54 <stain> Paolo: we don't have this in the abstract model

Paolo Missier: we don't have this in the abstract model

15:44:01 <stain> satya: possibly need to bring this up to the WG

Satya Sahoo: possibly need to bring this up to the WG

15:44:12 <tlebo> @stain, thanks, I agree with this approach. Before Monday's telecon with Luc, I conceived of Role and the used Entity as distinct (but I don't like that difference without a purpose).

Timothy Lebo: @stain, thanks, I agree with this approach. Before Monday's telecon with Luc, I conceived of Role and the used Entity as distinct (but I don't like that difference without a purpose).

15:44:12 <stain> Paolo: like the idea of qualifying entities, bu tneed to bring this into the language and discuss this

Paolo Missier: like the idea of qualifying entities, bu tneed to bring this into the language and discuss this

15:44:40 <stain> pgroth: no final agreement, but conversation! Need to move on on the agenda

Paul Groth: no final agreement, but conversation! Need to move on on the agenda

15:44:57 <stain> Subtopic: How can we identify attributes of an entity

7.2. How can we identify attributes of an entity

15:45:06 <stain> Luc: Identify an entity and attribute (key-value pairs)

Luc Moreau: Identify an entity and attribute (key-value pairs)

15:45:19 <stain> Luc: these describe something constant int he world during the duration of the entity's existence

Luc Moreau: these describe something constant int he world during the duration of the entity's existence

15:45:25 <dgarijo> if anyone is interested to particiate, we have our ontology telecon on Mondays :)

Daniel Garijo: if anyone is interested to particiate, we have our ontology telecon on Mondays :)

15:45:31 <stain> Luc: Need to know which attributes have been "stamped" on the entity to characterise it

Luc Moreau: Need to know which attributes have been "stamped" on the entity to characterise it

15:45:41 <stain> Luc: Don't know how to find these attributes with the OWL mapping

Luc Moreau: Don't know how to find these attributes with the OWL mapping

15:45:55 <stain> Luc: Some examples were discussed, Stian had one proposal, but don't know if this has been incorporated

Luc Moreau: Some examples were discussed, Stian had one proposal, but don't know if this has been incorporated

15:45:56 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

15:46:47 <GK> @Stian, that sounds like reading too much into anonimiy of a node

Graham Klyne: @Stian, that sounds like reading too much into anonimiy of a node

15:46:52 <tlebo> The entity need NOT be a bnode/anonymous. It can be named with a URI (the bnodes in examples are a shorthand).

Timothy Lebo: The entity need NOT be a bnode/anonymous. It can be named with a URI (the bnodes in examples are a shorthand).

15:47:12 <GK> ... you can assign a new URI a an anlymous node without changing the meaning

Graham Klyne: ... you can assign a new URI a an anlymous node without changing the meaning

15:47:13 <tlebo> *used Entity

Timothy Lebo: *used Entity

15:48:10 <stain> Stian: suggested :entity :charactizedBy [ :location "Manchester", :colour :red ]

Stian Soiland-Reyes: suggested :entity :charactizedBy [ :location "Manchester", :colour :red ]

15:48:12 <Luc> we could use named graphs to "wrap" the attributes

Luc Moreau: we could use named graphs to "wrap" the attributes

15:48:47 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: to introduce Properties or Attributes into the formal model - or characterized-by, descibed-by

Khalid Belhajjame: to introduce Properties or Attributes into the formal model - or characterized-by, descibed-by

15:49:09 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:49:12 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: then it can be instances of this - distinguish characterized attributes and other supplemental

Khalid Belhajjame: then it can be instances of this - distinguish characterized attributes and other supplemental

15:49:15 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

15:49:36 <tlebo> How would :entity :charactizedBy [ :location "Manchester", :colour :red ]     handle :entity prov:??  <http://tw.rpi.edu/instances/TimLebo> . (MY _actual_ URI,not a description of me)

Timothy Lebo: How would :entity :charactizedBy [ :location "Manchester", :colour :red ] handle :entity prov:?? <http://tw.rpi.edu/instances/TimLebo> . (MY _actual_ URI,not a description of me)

15:49:36 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: what is the scenario given - most of the time attributes on the entity will be part of characterizing it

Khalid Belhajjame: what is the scenario given - most of the time attributes on the entity will be part of characterizing it

15:49:37 <GK> @Stian :entity :charactizedBy [ :location "Manchester", :colour :red ] ; [ :location "London" ; :color :blue ] . is also valid?

Graham Klyne: @Stian :entity :charactizedBy [ :location "Manchester", :colour :red ] ; [ :location "London" ; :color :blue ] . is also valid?

15:50:11 <stain> @GK - no, it has granularity 1 so that those nodes would be merged

@GK - no, it has granularity 1 so that those nodes would be merged

15:50:29 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: not quite clear yet..

Khalid Belhajjame: not quite clear yet..

15:50:38 <stain> Luc: Might have a series of properties your thing has. Like a colour

Luc Moreau: Might have a series of properties your thing has. Like a colour

15:50:41 <GK> @stian quite - just clarifying.

Graham Klyne: @stian quite - just clarifying.

15:50:42 <Zakim> - +1.512.524.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.512.524.aabb

15:50:43 <stain> Luc: (car colour example)

Luc Moreau: (car colour example)

15:50:49 <stain> @GK it is an important point

@GK it is an important point

15:50:51 <tlebo> :entity :charactizedBy [ owl:sameAs  <http://tw.rpi.edu/instances/TimLebo> ]  . # would fit, but is a bit indirect.

Timothy Lebo: :entity :charactizedBy [ owl:sameAs <http://tw.rpi.edu/instances/TimLebo> ] . # would fit, but is a bit indirect.

15:51:05 <stain> Luc: It is an active assertion by the asserter to say that some attributes were constant.

Luc Moreau: It is an active assertion by the asserter to say that some attributes were constant.

15:51:15 <stain> Luc: The asserter might not care about colour, but talk about registration of the car

Luc Moreau: The asserter might not care about colour, but talk about registration of the car

15:51:30 <stain> Luc: Although the colour is recorded, it might not be part oft he characterisation made by the asserter

Luc Moreau: Although the colour is recorded, it might not be part oft he characterisation made by the asserter

15:51:51 <stain> Luc: We want to distinguish what the asserter says characterizes an entity or other props

Luc Moreau: We want to distinguish what the asserter says characterizes an entity or other props

15:52:02 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: so someone else added the colour attribute?

Khalid Belhajjame: so someone else added the colour attribute?

15:52:03 <stain> Luc: right

Luc Moreau: right

15:52:11 <stain> pgroth: how to write this down in OWL.. given the time

Paul Groth: how to write this down in OWL.. given the time

15:52:13 <tlebo> Luc's point about distinguishing between assertions of provenance maker and OTHER assertions about the same thing - this is handled by placing those attributess on the used :Entity, no?

Timothy Lebo: Luc's point about distinguishing between assertions of provenance maker and OTHER assertions about the same thing - this is handled by placing those attributess on the used :Entity, no?

15:52:23 <stain> pgroth: we can keep discussing this on mailing list and move on to conceptual model agenda item

Paul Groth: we can keep discussing this on mailing list and move on to conceptual model agenda item

15:52:27 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:52:33 <stain> TOPIC: Conceptual Model

8. Conceptual Model

Summary: Paolo and Luc gave an update on their progress on revising the Conceptual Model Document. Significant updates have been made to try and address a number of issues. The aim is to release an updated version on Monday.

<pgroth> Summary: Paolo and Luc gave an update on their progress on revising the Conceptual Model Document. Significant updates have been made to try and address a number of issues. The aim is to release an updated version on Monday.
15:52:44 <GK> Update recent?

Graham Klyne: Update recent?

15:52:52 <stain> Paolo: moving forward with Luc

Paolo Missier: moving forward with Luc

15:53:06 <stain> Paolo: on track for internal release tomorrow

Paolo Missier: on track for internal release tomorrow

15:53:12 <Luc> we should go for Monday release, realistically

Luc Moreau: we should go for Monday release, realistically

15:53:27 <stain> Paolo: few things in flux, a section on providing a high-level overview of model

Paolo Missier: few things in flux, a section on providing a high-level overview of model

15:53:30 <stain> Paolo: working on that

Paolo Missier: working on that

15:53:45 <stain> Paolo: adding a more precise description on what we mean by collections and relationships to support collection membership

Paolo Missier: adding a more precise description on what we mean by collections and relationships to support collection membership

15:54:03 <stain> Luc: spent some time thinking about entities, following issues/emails by GK

Luc Moreau: spent some time thinking about entities, following issues/emails by GK

15:54:12 <GK> Good, I look forward to seeing the update.

Graham Klyne: Good, I look forward to seeing the update.

15:54:21 <stain> Luc: we came to a resolution here, a reasonable way to talk about entities

Luc Moreau: we came to a resolution here, a reasonable way to talk about entities

15:54:32 <stain> Luc: Using them in the document

Luc Moreau: Using them in the document

15:54:33 <GK> "here" is earlier this telecon?

Graham Klyne: "here" is earlier this telecon?

15:54:42 <stain> (sorry I am not sure)

(sorry I am not sure)

15:54:53 <stain> Paolo: discussion on Account - coming along

Paolo Missier: discussion on Account - coming along

15:55:16 <stain> Paolo: shift in view from Roles and Attributes - perhaps most of the things you talk about can be qualified by attributes (key/values)

Paolo Missier: shift in view from Roles and Attributes - perhaps most of the things you talk about can be qualified by attributes (key/values)

15:55:19 <stain> Paolo: some extension point

Paolo Missier: some extension point

15:55:31 <stain> Paolo: one way to extend the model is to add attribute value/pairs to a profile for instance

Paolo Missier: one way to extend the model is to add attribute value/pairs to a profile for instance

15:55:38 <stain> Paolo: define how those are used

Paolo Missier: define how those are used

15:55:46 <stain> Paolo: one consequence is the discussion on wasGeneratedBy

Paolo Missier: one consequence is the discussion on wasGeneratedBy

15:55:51 <stain> Paolo: also on Account

Paolo Missier: also on Account

15:56:03 <stain> Paolo: can be nested inside each other - scoping rules

Paolo Missier: can be nested inside each other - scoping rules

15:56:19 <stain> Paolo: getting complex.. giving ourselves a few more days

Paolo Missier: getting complex.. giving ourselves a few more days

15:56:22 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:56:24 <stain> pgroth: any questions

Paul Groth: any questions

15:56:25 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

15:56:26 <Luc> "here" was "at our meeting Paolo and I"

Luc Moreau: "here" was "at our meeting Paolo and I"

15:56:39 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:56:40 <GK> @luc thanks

Graham Klyne: @luc thanks

15:56:42 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: in two weeks time would like to have.. (? )

Khalid Belhajjame: in two weeks time would like to have.. (? )

15:56:57 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: how would this work - we raise issues towards the doc in one week and other week..? We only have two weeks!

Khalid Belhajjame: how would this work - we raise issues towards the doc in one week and other week..? We only have two weeks!

15:57:04 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: should plan how to manage issues

Khalid Belhajjame: should plan how to manage issues

15:57:04 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

15:57:08 <stain> khalidbelhajjame: to make it for the deadline

Khalid Belhajjame: to make it for the deadline

15:57:23 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

15:57:31 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

15:57:35 <stain> Luc: to raise issues with the tracker

Luc Moreau: to raise issues with the tracker

15:57:44 <stain> Luc: realistically we will not address them all by end of Monday or the 29th

Luc Moreau: realistically we will not address them all by end of Monday or the 29th

15:57:50 <stain> Luc: there will still be work to be done

Luc Moreau: there will still be work to be done

15:58:05 <stain> Luc: want to have it in a state where we can say it is our first public working draft with clearly identified/marked issues

Luc Moreau: want to have it in a state where we can say it is our first public working draft with clearly identified/marked issues

15:58:15 <pgroth> ack satya

Paul Groth: ack satya

15:58:19 <stain> satya: can we also have a (?)

Satya Sahoo: can we also have a (?)

15:58:29 <stain> satya: if Luc/Paolo meets to have a telcon

Satya Sahoo: if Luc/Paolo meets to have a telcon

15:58:38 <stain> Luc: meeting Paolo in London next week

Luc Moreau: meeting Paolo in London next week

15:58:40 <stain> Luc: rest by email

Luc Moreau: rest by email

15:58:56 <stain> Luc: can schedule a telecon if that is wanted

Luc Moreau: can schedule a telecon if that is wanted

15:59:05 <stain> satya: or just a skype call so we can listen in

Satya Sahoo: or just a skype call so we can listen in

15:59:13 <stain> Paolo: we don't have a regular call, but can set one up

Paolo Missier: we don't have a regular call, but can set one up

15:59:22 <stain> Paolo: or join your ontology call on Mondays

Paolo Missier: or join your ontology call on Mondays

15:59:25 <satya> great thanks!

Satya Sahoo: great thanks!

15:59:34 <stain> pgroth: ok, need to end now for next telcon! (RDF WG)

Paul Groth: ok, need to end now for next telcon! (RDF WG)

15:59:36 <Zakim> -dgarijo

Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo

15:59:37 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

15:59:38 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo

15:59:39 <Zakim> -??P61

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P61

15:59:39 <Zakim> -Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc

15:59:40 <stain> pgroth: see you all next week

Paul Groth: see you all next week

15:59:40 <Zakim> -??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P0

15:59:41 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

15:59:41 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public

Paul Groth: rrsagent, set log public

15:59:42 <dgarijo> goodbye!

Daniel Garijo: goodbye!

15:59:43 <Zakim> -??P15

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P15

15:59:47 <Zakim> - +1.518.633.aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.518.633.aaee

15:59:48 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes

Paul Groth: rrsagent, draft minutes

15:59:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-minutes.html pgroth

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-minutes.html pgroth

15:59:49 <Zakim> -Vinh

Zakim IRC Bot: -Vinh

15:59:51 <Zakim> -Yogesh

Zakim IRC Bot: -Yogesh

15:59:52 <stain> pgroth: will you do the magic bit of the wiki?

Paul Groth: will you do the magic bit of the wiki?

15:59:52 <Zakim> -??P14

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P14

15:59:55 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes

Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes

15:59:56 <sandro> quick break before rdf/prov telecon!

Sandro Hawke: quick break before rdf/prov telecon!

16:00:04 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon

Paul Groth: trackbot, end telcon

16:00:04 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees

16:00:05 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes

16:00:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-minutes.html trackbot

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-minutes.html trackbot

16:00:06 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye

16:00:06 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-actions.rdf :

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-actions.rdf :

16:00:06 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Satya to Do named graph example on provenance ontology page [1]

ACTION: Satya to Do named graph example on provenance ontology page [1]

16:00:06 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-irc#T15-09-24

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/15-prov-irc#T15-09-24

16:00:07 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Luc, Duncan, Curt_Tilmes, +1.315.330.aaaa, Sandro, +1.512.524.aabb, MacTed, Paolo, khalidbelhajjame, Vinh, +1.858.210.aacc,

Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Luc, Duncan, Curt_Tilmes, +1.315.330.aaaa, Sandro, +1.512.524.aabb, MacTed, Paolo, khalidbelhajjame, Vinh, +1.858.210.aacc,



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#13) generated 2011-09-21 14:37:54 UTC by 'pgroth', comments: 'summaries added'