15:21:58 <smiles> Paul: We have noticed that there is discussion around implementing constraints using SW tech

Paul Groth: We have noticed that there is discussion around implementing constraints using SW tech ←

15:22:08 <smiles> ... great, but not part of the WG's responsibility

... great, but not part of the WG's responsibility ←

15:22:50 <smiles> ... should be done by individuals if interested, but implementation should not be done in WG time, cannot respond to all questions

... should be done by individuals if interested, but implementation should not be done in WG time, cannot respond to all questions ←

15:22:56 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+ ←

15:23:00 <smiles> ... encouraged but outside WG

... encouraged but outside WG ←

15:23:37 <zednik> q+

Stephan Zednik: q+ ←

15:23:45 <ivan> ack ivan

Ivan Herman: ack ivan ←

15:23:46 <GK> I agree with Paul here, but I also note that we'll need interoperable implementations for REC track progress?

Graham Klyne: I agree with Paul here, but I also note that we'll need interoperable implementations for REC track progress? ←

15:23:58 <smiles> Ivan: Agreed that deliverables need to be delivered, but if work is done WG might decide to publish in W3C Notes and could be valuable

Ivan Herman: Agreed that deliverables need to be delivered, but if work is done WG might decide to publish in W3C Notes and could be valuable ←

15:24:15 <khalidBelhajjame> @Paul, agreed. With Jun and Stian, we decided to specify the constraints (that are speciable within OWL), outside the context of the working group

Khalid Belhajjame: @Paul, agreed. With Jun and Stian, we decided to specify the constraints (that are speciable within OWL), outside the context of the working group ←

15:24:35 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:24:39 <smiles> Luc: Yes, are very keen for implementation of constraints using SW tech, but concerned about using WG bandwidth and mission creep

Luc Moreau: Yes, are very keen for implementation of constraints using SW tech, but concerned about using WG bandwidth and mission creep ←

15:24:49 <zednik> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGM4cXZYMk0xaFBDT2VyRV92YkY5WkE6MQ

Stephan Zednik: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGM4cXZYMk0xaFBDT2VyRV92YkY5WkE6MQ ←

15:24:59 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:25:01 <smiles> zednik: Added constraints implementation section to implementation questionanire

Stephan Zednik: Added constraints implementation section to implementation questionanire ←

15:25:07 <ivan> ack zednik

Ivan Herman: ack zednik ←

15:25:27 <smiles> .. not intended to be saying we will be creating these implementation, but part of implementation report

.. not intended to be saying we will be creating these implementation, but part of implementation report ←

15:26:33 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q ←

15:26:33 <smiles> Paolo: Agree not done on WG time, but cannot claim have reference implementation without compliance validator

Paolo Missier: Agree not done on WG time, but cannot claim have reference implementation without compliance validator ←

15:26:39 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:26:42 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+ ←

15:26:42 <Luc> ack pao

Luc Moreau: ack pao ←

15:26:56 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

15:27:13 <pgroth> mute paolo

Paul Groth: mute paolo ←

15:27:18 <MacTed> Zakim, mute pa

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute pa ←

15:27:18 <Zakim> Paolo should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Paolo should now be muted ←

15:27:51 <smiles> Paul: Implement both specs, and if don't have implementations then spec can't be approved as recommendation

Paul Groth: Implement both specs, and if don't have implementations then spec can't be approved as recommendation ←

15:27:51 <stainPhone> @paolo, yes, our (khalid/jun) intent is to do what can practically be done in owl

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @paolo, yes, our (khalid/jun) intent is to do what can practically be done in owl ←

15:27:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:27:57 <Paolo> agree -- and that's why Khalid's qualification worried me

Paolo Missier: agree -- and that's why Khalid's qualification worried me ←

15:28:28 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+ ←

15:28:33 <stainPhone> As owl is not a constraint language

Stian Soiland-Reyes: As owl is not a constraint language ←

15:28:34 <ivan> ack satya

Ivan Herman: ack satya ←

15:28:37 <smiles> satya: When talking about implementations/validators, are we talking about conforming to PROV-O or to constraints?

Satya Sahoo: When talking about implementations/validators, are we talking about conforming to PROV-O or to constraints? ←

15:28:39 <GK> Hmmm... I thought we needed (interoperable) implementations of each feature rather than a "reference implementation"

Graham Klyne: Hmmm... I thought we needed (interoperable) implementations of each feature rather than a "reference implementation" ←

15:28:41 <khalidBelhajjame> Just to clarify, within OWL, we will not aim to implement all constraints but only the one that are easy to express within OWL

Khalid Belhajjame: Just to clarify, within OWL, we will not aim to implement all constraints but only the one that are easy to express within OWL ←

15:28:56 <stainPhone> @gk +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @gk +1 ←

15:29:00 <smiles> Luc: We are talking about conforming to constraints, validity is not in scope of WG

Luc Moreau: We are talking about conforming to constraints, validity is not in scope of WG ←

15:29:04 <jun> @paolo, my understanding that exploring OWL for the implementation is our first step, to see what can be implemented in OWL and what can't

Jun Zhao: @paolo, my understanding that exploring OWL for the implementation is our first step, to see what can be implemented in OWL and what can't ←

15:29:16 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:29:33 <Luc> ack ivan

Luc Moreau: ack ivan ←

15:29:50 <smiles> Ivan: What we in general need is not a reference implementation of everything, but interoperable implementation for each feature

Ivan Herman: What we in general need is not a reference implementation of everything, but interoperable implementation for each feature ←

15:30:22 <Paolo> @ khalidBelhajjame, jun I am doing the same in the deductive programming space, but there are unknown -- hence the difficulty to committing to a deliverable

Paolo Missier: @ khalidBelhajjame, jun I am doing the same in the deductive programming space, but there are unknown -- hence the difficulty to committing to a deliverable ←

15:30:27 <smiles> ... but more general point, what do we really mean by the implementation of the particular document or the whole PROV enivronment?

... but more general point, what do we really mean by the implementation of the particular document or the whole PROV enivronment? ←

15:30:46 <smiles> ... no fixed rules, but need to show world this is not just a paper exercise and can be put into practice

... no fixed rules, but need to show world this is not just a paper exercise and can be put into practice ←

15:31:05 <smiles> ... not clear what this means for constraints document in relation to other documents

... not clear what this means for constraints document in relation to other documents ←

15:31:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:31:16 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+ ←

15:31:25 <smiles> ... will need to be clear when we present to the management

... will need to be clear when we present to the management ←

15:31:57 <smiles> Luc: Not discussed yet, and may be an item of discussion of implementation report skeleton

Luc Moreau: Not discussed yet, and may be an item of discussion of implementation report skeleton ←

15:32:15 <smiles> ... WG will have to identify features to implement in constraints document (e.g. type checking)

... WG will have to identify features to implement in constraints document (e.g. type checking) ←

15:32:35 <smiles> ... Question is then how we demonstrate whether this is implemented properly

... Question is then how we demonstrate whether this is implemented properly ←

15:32:45 <smiles> ... In my own implementation, am using test cases

... In my own implementation, am using test cases ←

15:32:53 <Luc> q-

Luc Moreau: q- ←

15:33:07 <smiles> Ivan: For me, test cases is very much what I would like to see

Ivan Herman: For me, test cases is very much what I would like to see ←

15:33:15 <smiles> Luc: Discussion of test cases are in scope of WG

Luc Moreau: Discussion of test cases are in scope of WG ←

15:33:16 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:33:58 <smiles> Luc: We want to come up with an agreement that we will not spend WG time defining constraints in SW technologies

Luc Moreau: We want to come up with an agreement that we will not spend WG time defining constraints in SW technologies ←

15:34:00 <pgroth> @stefan can I get edit access to the implementation questionnaire?

Paul Groth: @stefan can I get edit access to the implementation questionnaire? ←

15:34:00 <Luc> PROPOSED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed

PROPOSED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed ←

15:34:03 <GK> (Test cases are a good way to illustrate the consequences of specified features.)

Graham Klyne: (Test cases are a good way to illustrate the consequences of specified features.) ←

15:34:30 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:34:38 <GK> +1

Graham Klyne: +1 ←

15:34:39 <Zakim> -stainPhone

Zakim IRC Bot: -stainPhone ←

15:34:46 <jun> +1

Jun Zhao: +1 ←

15:34:49 <satya> seems reasonable

Satya Sahoo: seems reasonable ←

15:34:49 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1 ←

15:34:52 <smiles> +1

+1 ←

15:34:52 <satya> +1

Satya Sahoo: +1 ←

15:34:52 <TomDN> +1

Tom De Nies: +1 ←

15:34:55 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1 ←

15:34:58 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1 ←

15:34:58 <khalidBelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←

15:34:59 <hook> +1

Hook Hua: +1 ←

15:34:59 <Curt> +1

Curt Tilmes: +1 ←

15:34:59 <MacTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←

15:35:13 <Paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1 ←

15:35:22 <Luc> ACCEPTED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed

RESOLVED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed ←

15:35:49 <Luc> topic: Public Comments

<Luc>Summary: We are still hoping for further feedback on the specifications recently released. The release of prov-constraints as LCWD presents us with a good opportunity to send kind reminders to our various contacts.  Editors have now to tackle public comments and initiate discussions by email.

15:36:09 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/

15:36:49 <smiles> Paul: We had a number of public comments, one needs cutting up, some we've started discussing

15:37:19 <smiles> ... All can be handled, but maybe we should readvertise to get more comments

15:37:30 <Luc> should we take the opportunity to ask for feedback as we release prov-constraints?

15:37:51 <Luc> q?

15:38:01 <smiles> Luc: comments?

15:38:04 <pgroth> in particular on advertising?

15:38:34 <pgroth> +q

15:38:36 <smiles> Luc: Now we've released constraints document, we can take the opportunity to go back to groups and individuals to get feedback on that

15:38:52 <Luc> q?

15:38:59 <smiles> ... then editors need to go through comments one by one and address

15:39:00 <pgroth> ack pgroth

15:39:16 <smiles> ... Ivan, you said RDF group would give us feedback but not received yet

15:39:41 <smiles> Ivan: Will prompt again, have discussion paper but not yet dealt with

15:39:51 <Luc> q?

15:39:51 <pgroth> talking to guus is difficult

15:40:18 <smiles> Luc: Once constraints document out, easy to get back to them

15:40:27 <pgroth> sure

15:40:29 <Luc> q?

15:40:37 <pgroth> zakim, who is noisy?

15:40:40 <Luc> topic: Implementation Report Skeleton

<Luc>Summary: Stephan updated us on the form to be completed by implementers. The group is invited to send comments on the mailing list. Paul, Stephan, and Dong are going to produce a first version of the implementation report skeleton by the next teleconference.

15:40:48 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (30%)

15:40:57 <smiles> Luc: Now time to think about structure of this report

15:41:15 <smiles> ... identifying kinds of feedback expected from implementors

15:41:56 <smiles> zednik: Have gone through and updated skeleton, Paolo will update actual questionairres

15:42:11 <smiles> s/Paolo/Paul

15:42:11 <Luc> s/Paolo/Paul

15:42:47 <smiles> Paul: Currently based on SKOS, If we decide we need to test cases that might change this

15:42:51 <Luc> q?

15:43:21 <smiles> Luc: Have you received feedback on questionnaire?

15:43:31 <smiles> zednik: Not yet, but good opportunity to now re-ask

15:43:51 <Dong> @Paul: I can help with the implementation report as well

15:43:57 <smiles> Luc: Will make clear in minutes summary, please send an email again with link to questionnaire

15:44:09 <Luc> q?

15:44:44 <Luc> action on Paul to draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires

15:44:44 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - on

15:44:49 <pgroth> +q

15:44:55 <Luc> action on pgroth to draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires

15:44:55 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - on

15:45:08 <pgroth> action: pgroth draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires

15:45:08 <trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - Draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires [on Paul Groth - due 2012-09-13].

15:45:28 <Luc> q?

15:45:40 <smiles> Paul: Ivan, have Google questionnaire, does it need to be a W3C poll?

15:45:40 <Luc> ack pgr

15:46:01 <smiles> Ivan: Questionnaire is just for activity of group, not deliverable?

15:46:28 <smiles> Paul: Yes. Easy to collect by web poll

15:46:49 <pgroth> ok

15:46:51 <smiles> ... Will copy part of result of poll into implementation report

15:46:55 <Luc> q?

15:47:03 <smiles> Ivan: Yes, that's OK. How you collected data is your business

15:47:13 <pgroth> ok

15:47:58 <smiles> Ivan: RDFa had many tests, running on site outside of W3C, but results collected into static page on W3C as implementation report

15:48:06 <pgroth> yes

15:48:13 <Luc> q?

15:48:26 <Luc> q?

15:48:40 <Luc> Topic:PROV-XML

<Luc>Summary: The prov-xml subgroup has been writing examples according to the draft schema and has been raising issues on the tracker.  The issues are mostly about aligning the prov-xml schema with the latest prov-dm. In line with the resolution on constraints, implementation of constraints for prov-xml is left to individual members.  Version 1 of the XML schema is planned to be released by the next teleconference.  The issue of prov:type (ISSUE-493) was briefly mentioned at the end of the call. More email discussion is required.

15:49:03 <smiles> Luc: Some emails sent, issues raised, what is the progess?

15:49:30 <smiles> zednik: Split up DM terms and encoded in XML schema, published and raised issues

15:49:42 <smiles> ... Reza has been working on implementation at Oracle

15:50:38 <smiles> ... also interested in constraints, and had a side discussion on this, decided not to pursue as part of WG but instead side-activity at Oracle or NASA for implementation report

15:51:00 <smiles> ... looked into Schematron and XSD inadequate for expressing constraints

15:51:16 <hook> Schematrons have been used by ISO working groups for constraints checks

15:51:23 <smiles> ... For schema, implemented almost all terms and should not be too many issues raised

15:51:27 <Curt> q+

15:51:28 <Luc> q?

15:51:53 <Luc> ack cur

15:52:06 <Luc> @curt +1

15:52:09 <smiles> Curt: Most of the issues are minor inconsistencies, and inclined to take from DM and make XML match, even copying non-normative language

15:52:40 <Luc> q?

15:52:42 <hook> We also tried to sync the XML examples with the PROV-DM examples.

15:52:45 <smiles> Luc: Schema was still a bit behind DM, and issues raised are good

15:53:14 <smiles> hook: We also tried to make XML examples match one-to-one those in DM document

15:53:31 <pgroth> +q to ask about prove xml html

15:53:33 <Luc> q?

15:53:39 <smiles> ... this forces us to make sure DM is  in sync with XSD (and PROV-O)

15:54:03 <smiles> Paul: Is editors draft of document on XML up to date, can be looked at? Or just XSD?

15:54:09 <pgroth> ok

15:54:13 <Curt> agreed -- not ready

15:54:15 <smiles> zednik: XSD up to date, not the document

15:54:15 <Luc> ack pg

15:54:16 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask about prove xml html

15:54:48 <smiles> Luc: When can say have version 1 of XML schema?

15:54:57 <Curt> I'll address the issues I've raised by this weekend

15:55:02 <smiles> zednik: Need to ensure no open issues, but pretty close

15:55:20 <smiles> ... aim for Tuesday/Wednesday next week

15:55:25 <Luc> action stephan to produce version 1 of xml schema

15:55:25 <trackbot> Sorry, ambiguous username (more than one match) - stephan

15:55:25 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. estephan, szednik)

15:55:36 <Luc> action zednik to produce version 1 of xml schema

15:55:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Produce version 1 of xml schema  [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-09-13].

15:56:10 <smiles> Luc: Can come back to at next week's telecon

15:56:51 <smiles> ... PROV-O spent long time looking at tools to convert their schema into HTML document

15:57:19 <pgroth> +q

15:58:01 <smiles> Paul: On the editors draft, there is an XSD/HTML document, who created?

15:58:12 <smiles> Luc: I created

15:58:18 <Luc> q?

15:58:57 <Curt> q+

15:58:57 <pgroth> ack pgroth

15:59:01 <smiles> Paul: We said that for the XML, we wouldnt worry about the verbiage around the schema, right? Just need schema

15:59:25 <smiles> Luc: Want to minimise work, but need something readable. Can extract lots of text from DM document

15:59:53 <pgroth> sure

16:00:00 <smiles> Luc: Paul and I will identify editor(s) for this document

16:00:00 <Luc> q?

16:00:23 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo

16:00:27 <Luc> ack cur

16:00:40 <smiles> Curt: Considered adding links to anchors in XSD HTML document to link to DM, rather than copy

16:00:54 <Luc> q?

16:01:28 <smiles> Luc: XML schema editors, are there specific issues you want to discuss?

16:01:32 <Zakim> -??P3

16:01:37 <zednik_> sorry, disconnected

16:01:59 <Zakim> +??P6

16:02:00 <Luc> q?

16:02:41 <smiles> zednik: Issue on representing prov:type

16:03:16 <smiles> ... Type of prov:type is defined as a value (effectively a literal)

16:03:26 <smiles> ... Consequence is that 42 is a prov:type, etc.

16:03:33 <smiles> ... Is that what we want?

16:03:58 <Luc> q?

16:04:06 <Curt> zednik: could discuss prov:Agent vs. prov:Person too? (or is that resolved?)

16:04:11 <smiles> ... In XSD would be xsd:anySimpleType, not constraints

16:04:22 <pgroth> +q

16:04:24 <zednik_> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/493

16:05:17 <smiles> Paul: QName would improve interop, but are there examples where you don't want than (Java package names?)

16:05:41 <smiles> Luc: DM contains examples of types that are just strings

16:06:07 <zednik_> @curt raise as an issue

16:06:28 <smiles> Luc: Will not resolve issue now, but is important as has potential impact on DM, so suggest continue over email and will revisit

16:06:37 <TomDN> bye

16:06:39 <ivan> bye everyone

16:06:39 <jun> bye

16:06:40 <Dong> Thanks, bye

16:06:41 <Zakim> -Paolo

16:06:42 <SamCoppens> bye

16:06:42 <Zakim> -TomDN

16:06:42 <pgroth> congrats - another last call

16:06:43 <Zakim> -dgarijo

16:06:43 <Zakim> -jun

16:06:44 <pgroth> bye

16:06:45 <Zakim> -Ivan

16:06:46 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes

16:06:46 <zednik_> bye

16:06:46 <khalidBelhajjame> bye

16:06:48 <Zakim> -smiles

16:06:49 <Zakim> -pgroth

16:06:49 <Zakim> -Luc

16:06:51 <Zakim> -khalidBelhajjame

16:06:51 <Zakim> -MacTed

16:06:53 <Zakim> -??P6

16:06:56 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public

16:06:59 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aacc

16:07:02 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes

16:07:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-minutes.html Luc

16:07:06 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon

16:07:06 <trackbot> Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help