15:08:02 <Paolo> @daniel back on now

15:08:20 <dgarijo> I can scribe

15:08:21 <tlebo> I'll scribe

15:08:26 <tlebo> go ahead, Dani

15:08:28 <dgarijo> ok

15:08:40 <dgarijo> Paolo: One action on Luc about completeness (done)

15:08:51 <dgarijo> ... discussion in the list, Paolo made edits in DM

15:09:19 <dgarijo> ... there can be some inconsistencies sometimes

15:09:47 <dgarijo> ... another issue, about membership, has already been addressed

15:09:55 <dgarijo> ... I joined prov-o call on monday

15:10:07 <dgarijo> ... and the changes were well received

15:10:17 <Luc> q?

15:10:22 <dgarijo> Luc: any questions?

15:10:47 <Paolo> Luc contextualization still an issue: Tim?

15:11:21 <Paolo> tlebo converged on contextualization being a case of specialization

15:11:33 <Paolo> tlebo DM has converged to that def

15:11:47 <Paolo> tlebo next step prov-o will capture that in the ontology

15:12:17 <Paolo> tlebo GK still has concerns about violating /breaking RDF semantics -- GK invited to discuss

15:12:52 <Luc> q?

15:13:01 <Paolo> tlebo  is contextualization at risk? concerns that it's going too far, its capabilities don't warrant the extra level of explanation for that construct

15:13:53 <Paolo> Luc: setting an action on Graham to elaborate on his concern and provide an example

15:14:31 <Paolo> Luc: useful to see how the construct is expressed in RDF. when is this happening?

15:14:37 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Bundle_contextualization

15:14:37 <Paolo> tlebo: early next week

15:15:33 <pgroth> +q

15:15:35 <Paolo> Luc: should contextualization be in the doc, or marked as "at risk"? propose to address this after the review, and make this a question to reviewers

15:15:39 <dgarijo> yes, I think it is reasonable

15:15:43 <Paolo> tlebo: agree

15:15:58 <khalidbelhajjame> I agree

15:16:18 <Paolo> pgroth: need not be a question to reviewers -- it will be addressed if it does come up during review

15:16:37 <pgroth> ack pgroth

15:17:02 <pgroth> +q

15:17:26 <Paolo> Luc: Graham has raised an issue on contextualization so he will have an opportunity to respond to that

15:17:30 <pgroth> ack pgroth

15:17:31 <Luc> ack pg

15:17:32 <khalidbelhajjame> I guess here we are talking about internal reviewing. A more important opinion w.r.t. contextualization is that of external reviewers

15:17:52 <Paolo> tlebo: state of prov-o

15:18:00 <pgroth> @khalidbelhajjame it's important that the group is good with it

15:18:21 <Paolo> tlebo: focus on resolving dependencies on DM

15:19:03 <Paolo> tlebo: ... on getting DM settled. DM is becoming the blocker on prov-o. once dm is through, it will be easier to release prov-o

15:19:14 <Luc> q?

15:19:31 <Paolo> smiles: primer is ready to review

15:19:42 <dgarijo> @Tim: Thanks for putting all toghether in the doc, Tim.

15:20:12 <Luc> q?

15:20:19 <Paolo> Luc: no progress on Constraints, will meet at IPAW to agree on how to proceed (Luc, James, Paolo)

15:20:23 <pgroth> +q

15:20:37 <Luc> topic: Schedule for internal release and review

<Luc>Summary: Prov-dm, prov-n, and prov-primer are now released for internal review. Reviewers were assigned to each document, and deadline set to next week, before F2F3. It is anticipated that Prov-o technical aspects will be addressed shortly, and a document ready for review by June 21.  PROV-constraints editors will meet next week, and propose a schedule for release.  The Working Group is reminded how important this review is, since the WG has to decide whether these documents will be last call working drafts.  Any review, even partial, is welcome. See agenda for details of documents and questions to address.

15:20:38 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:21:56 <dgarijo> yes

Daniel Garijo: yes ←

15:21:58 <Paolo> Luc: DM; released today, all outstanding issues addressed AFA editors are concerned

Luc Moreau: DM; released today, all outstanding issues addressed AFA editors are concerned ←

15:22:00 <TomDN> yes :)

Tom De Nies: yes :) ←

15:22:04 <dgarijo> I'll review it for next week.

Daniel Garijo: I'll review it for next week. ←

15:22:10 <khalidbelhajjame> yes, I will review it

Khalid Belhajjame: yes, I will review it ←

15:22:11 <Paolo> Luc: can reviewers confirm availability

Luc Moreau: can reviewers confirm availability ←

15:22:36 <khalidbelhajjame> I will review the dm in the weekend

Khalid Belhajjame: I will review the dm in the weekend ←

15:22:42 <dgarijo> next wednesday?

Daniel Garijo: next wednesday? ←

15:22:46 <TomDN> I'm planning to review it this weekend

Tom De Nies: I'm planning to review it this weekend ←

15:22:51 <TomDN> (in the air)

Tom De Nies: (in the air) ←

15:23:24 <Paolo> Luc: propose DM review deadline by Wed June 20th

Luc Moreau: propose DM review deadline by Wed June 20th ←

15:23:24 <TomDN> sounds good to me

Tom De Nies: sounds good to me ←

15:23:25 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q ←

15:23:55 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←

15:24:19 <Paolo> pgroth: additional informal reviews welcome by F2F or sooner

Paul Groth: additional informal reviews welcome by F2F or sooner ←

15:24:56 <Paolo> Luc: prov-n also released today. reviewers please confirm?

Luc Moreau: prov-n also released today. reviewers please confirm? ←

15:24:56 <TomDN> +q

Tom De Nies: +q ←

15:25:03 <TomDN> zakim, unmute me

Tom De Nies: zakim, unmute me ←

15:25:03 <Zakim> TomDN was not muted, TomDN

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN was not muted, TomDN ←

15:25:42 <Paolo> TomDN: stephen on hols but still planning to do the review

Tom De Nies: Sam on hols but still planning to do the review ←

15:25:44 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:25:47 <Luc> ack tom

Luc Moreau: ack tom ←

15:25:55 <TomDN> s/stephen/Sam

15:26:25 <Paolo> Luc: propose PROV-N review deadline by Thu June 21st

Luc Moreau: propose PROV-N review deadline by Thu June 21st ←

15:26:55 <Paolo> Luc: PROV-O?

Luc Moreau: PROV-O? ←

15:27:01 <dgarijo> @Luc: Khalid is not on the phone. He has told me to say that he will possibly review PROV-N as well

Daniel Garijo: @Luc: Khalid is not on the phone. He has told me to say that he will possibly review PROV-N as well ←

15:27:16 <TomDN> same here for Sam. (not available right now, but will still review the document, probable after f2f3)

Tom De Nies: same here for Sam. (not available right now, but will still review the document, probable after f2f3) ←

15:27:37 <Paolo> tlebo: propose PROV-O ready for review July 13th

Timothy Lebo: propose PROV-O ready for review July 13th ←

15:28:16 <Paolo> Luc: what are the outstanding issues?

Luc Moreau: what are the outstanding issues? ←

15:28:57 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q ←

15:29:01 <Paolo> tlebo:  contextualization, collections, working through examples, additional narrative for a variety of terms, existing narrative needs editing, harmonizing

Timothy Lebo: contextualization, collections, working through examples, additional narrative for a variety of terms, existing narrative needs editing, harmonizing ←

15:29:13 <Luc> ack pgro

Luc Moreau: ack pgro ←

15:30:00 <Paolo> pgroth: key issue for last call is tech features are frozen. List of issues here are only contextualization and collections. the latter have not changed very much

Paul Groth: key issue for last call is tech features are frozen. List of issues here are only contextualization and collections. the latter have not changed very much ←

15:30:16 <Paolo> pgroth: so what are the remaining /tech/ issues?

Paul Groth: so what are the remaining /tech/ issues? ←

15:30:23 <Paolo> tlebo: contextualization and final review of collections

Timothy Lebo: contextualization and final review of collections ←

15:30:37 <Paolo> q+

q+ ←

15:30:50 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+ ←

15:31:00 <pgroth> he's on vacation

Paul Groth: he's on vacation ←

15:31:59 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo ←

15:32:51 <Paolo> pgroth: main issue with Last Call is tech issues, editing can happen afterwards

Paul Groth: main issue with Last Call is tech issues, editing can happen afterwards ←

15:32:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:33:01 <Luc> ack pgr

Luc Moreau: ack pgr ←

15:33:14 <Paolo> pgroth: can review ontology to help separate out tech vs editorial

Paul Groth: can review ontology to help separate out tech vs editorial ←

15:34:24 <Paolo> tlebo: technically, close to being done -- provo html needs more work. so if all that matters is technical completeness, it can be done faster

Timothy Lebo: technically, close to being done -- provo html needs more work. so if all that matters is technical completeness, it can be done faster ←

15:35:10 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q ←

15:35:21 <Paolo> Luc: sandro and Ivan confirm that it is about technical content, i.e. frozen ontology is enough. then we get a chance to clarify and explain things better

Luc Moreau: sandro and Ivan confirm that it is about technical content, i.e. frozen ontology is enough. then we get a chance to clarify and explain things better ←

15:36:08 <Paolo> tlebo: ontology can be finalized by mid next week, and whatever falls out of it into html (examples of terms etc.)

Timothy Lebo: ontology can be finalized by mid next week, and whatever falls out of it into html (examples of terms etc.) ←

15:36:34 <Paolo> tlebo: to be released on June 14th

Timothy Lebo: to be released on June 14th ←

15:36:43 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:37:16 <Paolo> pgroth: process calls for >= 3 wks of last call feedback.

Paul Groth: process calls for >= 3 wks of last call feedback. ←

15:38:02 <Paolo> Luc: Sam, pgroth, Luc to review prov-o

Luc Moreau: Sam, pgroth, Luc to review prov-o ←

15:38:17 <Paolo> pgroth: confirms

Paul Groth: confirms ←

15:38:30 <CraigTrim> sure

Craig Trim: sure ←

15:38:54 <Paolo> Craig  added to list of reviewers

Craig added to list of reviewers ←

15:39:21 <Paolo> Luc: constraints doc: not sure when it will be ready. Will report back to group at F2F with an estimate

Luc Moreau: constraints doc: not sure when it will be ready. Will report back to group at F2F with an estimate ←

15:39:22 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:39:24 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q ←

15:40:08 <Paolo> pgroth: the constraints doc "falls out" of the DM -- is it on rec track?

Paul Groth: the constraints doc "falls out" of the DM -- is it on rec track? ←

15:40:16 <Paolo> Luc: it is on Rec track

Luc Moreau: it is on Rec track ←

15:40:43 <Paolo> Luc: we can pull it out and possibly make it a note

Luc Moreau: we can pull it out and possibly make it a note ←

15:41:12 <Paolo> pgroth: concerned about timing -- lagging considerably behind and it's a complicated doc

Paul Groth: concerned about timing -- lagging considerably behind and it's a complicated doc ←

15:41:50 <Paolo> Luc: yes, but it has been simplified. Also, no need to release all docs at the same time

Luc Moreau: yes, but it has been simplified. Also, no need to release all docs at the same time ←

15:42:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:42:06 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:42:29 <Paolo> Luc: primer doc

Luc Moreau: primer doc ←

15:42:45 <Paolo> smiles: ready for review

Simon Miles: ready for review ←

15:42:53 <Paolo> Luc: reviewers?

Luc Moreau: reviewers? ←

15:43:06 <TomDN> I'll review it

Tom De Nies: I'll review it ←

15:43:07 <pgroth> volunteer

Paul Groth: volunteer ←

15:43:22 <pgroth> +q to ask craig

Paul Groth: +q to ask craig ←

15:43:32 <stephenc> OK, I volunteer

Stephen Cresswell: OK, I volunteer ←

15:43:39 <CraigTrim> I've already been reviewing it, so go ahead and me in too

Craig Trim: I've already been reviewing it, so go ahead and me in too ←

15:43:57 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:43:57 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask craig

Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to ask craig ←

15:44:16 <Paolo> smiles: familiarity with prov-n desirable... (Paolo)

Simon Miles: familiarity with prov-n desirable... (Paolo) ←

15:44:16 <CraigTrim> agreed - it's been a good doc so far back to IBM

Craig Trim: agreed - it's been a good doc so far back to IBM ←

15:44:33 <Luc> prov-primer reviewers: paolo, paul, stephenc, craig, luc

Luc Moreau: prov-primer reviewers: paolo, paul, stephenc, craig, luc ←

15:45:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:45:22 <Paolo> Luc: update to prov-aq to be addressed later

Luc Moreau: update to prov-aq to be addressed later ←

15:45:51 <Paolo> Luc: questions for reviewers:  can the doc be released as a /regular/ WD? if not, what are the blocking issues

Luc Moreau: questions for reviewers: can the doc be released as a /regular/ WD? if not, what are the blocking issues ←

15:46:21 <Paolo> Luc: can the doc be pub as last call WD? see link to LC def by W3C

Luc Moreau: can the doc be pub as last call WD? see link to LC def by W3C ←

15:47:01 <Paolo> Luc: in particular, reviewers who have raised issues, can they be closed?

Luc Moreau: in particular, reviewers who have raised issues, can they be closed? ←

15:47:48 <Paolo> Luc: proposal wasREvisionOf -> wasRevisedFrom:  no consensus, so can reviewers look at that

Luc Moreau: proposal wasREvisionOf -> wasRevisedFrom: no consensus, so can reviewers look at that ←

15:48:37 <Paolo> Luc: also in DM: "primitive data types" that are in RDF. However RDF is changing, so which version are we referring to? RDF 1.1 WD data types are different

Luc Moreau: also in DM: "primitive data types" that are in RDF. However RDF is changing, so which version are we referring to? RDF 1.1 WD data types are different ←

15:49:15 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:49:18 <Paolo> Luc: worked with Ivan to make us robust wrt changes in RDF 1.1 -- should we list all data types as 1.1? reviewers should look into this

Luc Moreau: worked with Ivan to make us robust wrt changes in RDF 1.1 -- should we list all data types as 1.1? reviewers should look into this ←

15:49:35 <Paolo> q+

q+ ←

15:49:58 <tlebo> paolo: what if someone says "no"?

Paolo Missier: what if someone says "no"? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←

15:50:10 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q ←

15:50:28 <Luc> ack paol

Luc Moreau: ack paol ←

15:50:48 <tlebo> pgroth: we look at the issues and get to a resolution.

Paul Groth: we look at the issues and get to a resolution. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←

15:51:08 <tlebo> ... if no resolution, then we can vote.

Timothy Lebo: ... if no resolution, then we can vote. ←

15:51:12 <Paolo> pgroth: many options available -- if it is clear there is no resolution, we can vote.

Paul Groth: many options available -- if it is clear there is no resolution, we can vote. ←

15:51:44 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:51:47 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:52:12 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q ←

15:52:37 <Paolo> pgroth: is there a LC for notes (primer)?

Paul Groth: is there a LC for notes (primer)? ←

15:52:52 <Paolo> Luc: LC question does not apply to primer

Luc Moreau: LC question does not apply to primer ←

15:53:43 <Paolo> Luc: decision can be deferred, to allow for further changes to the primer

Luc Moreau: decision can be deferred, to allow for further changes to the primer ←

15:53:44 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:53:51 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:54:10 <Paolo> pgroth: state of PAQ: next WD ready by next Tue

Paul Groth: state of PAQ: next WD ready by next Tue ←

15:54:55 <Paolo> pgroth: after F2F we'll look at PAQ in detail again

Paul Groth: after F2F we'll look at PAQ in detail again ←

15:55:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:55:14 <TomDN> +q

Tom De Nies: +q ←

15:56:00 <TomDN> ack tomdn

Tom De Nies: ack tomdn ←

15:56:11 <Paolo> Luc:  call arrangements for next week?

Luc Moreau: call arrangements for next week? ←

15:56:15 <Zakim> -??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P1 ←

15:56:23 <Paolo> pgroth: call should be cancelled next week

Paul Groth: call should be cancelled next week ←

15:56:51 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:56:55 <Paolo> Luc: call cancelled

Luc Moreau: call cancelled ←

15:57:07 <Zakim> -??P2

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P2 ←

15:57:09 <Zakim> - +1.661.382.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.661.382.aabb ←

15:57:10 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←

15:57:10 <Zakim> -??P9

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P9 ←

15:57:10 <dgarijo> byee

Daniel Garijo: byee ←

15:57:16 <Zakim> -pgroth

Zakim IRC Bot: -pgroth ←

15:57:18 <TomDN> (I'll also be driving from San Francisco to SB on monday, by the way)

Tom De Nies: (I'll also be driving from San Francisco to SB on monday, by the way) ←

15:57:20 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes

Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes ←

15:57:23 <Zakim> -Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←

15:57:24 <Zakim> -dgarijo

Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo ←

15:57:26 <pgroth> trackbot, end telecon

Paul Groth: trackbot, end telecon ←

15:57:26 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←

15:57:34 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←

15:57:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/14-prov-minutes.html trackbot

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/14-prov-minutes.html trackbot ←

15:57:34 <Zakim> -??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P4 ←

15:57:35 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←

15:57:35 <RRSAgent> I see no action items

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see no action items ←

15:57:36 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +329331aaaa, TomDN, pgroth, +1.661.382.aabb, +1.518.276.aacc, tlebo, +44.238.059.aadd, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, MacTed, satya, dgarijo

Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been +329331aaaa, TomDN, pgroth, +1.661.382.aabb, +1.518.276.aacc, tlebo, +44.238.059.aadd, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, MacTed, satya, dgarijo ←

Formatted by CommonScribe Show Interleaved IRC Text

---

This revision (#3) generated 2012-06-14 21:25:56 UTC by 'lmoreau', comments: None