Minutes of the Sept 27, 2012 telco were approved. Paul showed a set of overview slides for the WG. Group agreed that long standing actions from Paulo should be closed with a comment.
Paul went over the existing exit criteria. He went through a proposal from the chairs on extending the exit criteria in particular for the constraints. The group agreed that there are three types of implementations: usage of prov in a dataset, vocabularies that extend prov, software that generates/consumes PROV. The group agreed with the principle that for prov-constraints we would produce test cases that were tied to only the constraints but these test cases would also exercise the inferences. Furthermore, the group recommended looking at more automatic mechanisms for gathering results of test cases for constraints. Additionally, the exit criteria should be specific about which documents are tested. Paul was actioned to take this input and present a revised version of the exit criteria by the next telcon. Dong, Luc, Daniel all agreed to contribute to the development of test cases for prov-contstraints. Paolo agreed to help check test cases for correctness.
A set of issues were agreed to have been resolved. See the resolution.
The group discussed the upper/lowercase naming of property names and the inconsistency between UML diagrams and the syntaxes. This is an issue with the use of UML. To resolve, this issue the group agreed that a modified version of the starting points diagram from prov-o should be used in the primer to avoid confusion
14:56:31 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-irc ←
14:56:33 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:56:35 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be ←
14:56:36 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:56:36 <trackbot> Date: 04 October 2012
14:56:36 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot ←
14:56:43 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
Paul Groth: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
14:56:43 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes ←
14:56:55 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.10.03
14:57:02 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
14:57:08 <pgroth> Scribe: Paolo Missier
(Scribe set to Paolo Missier)
14:57:14 <pgroth> Regrets: Tom De Nies
14:57:21 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, make logs public ←
14:57:33 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started ←
14:57:40 <Zakim> + +1.818.415.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.415.aaaa ←
14:57:59 <ivan> zakim, code?
Ivan Herman: zakim, code? ←
14:57:59 <Zakim> the conference code is 7768 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 7768 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), ivan ←
14:58:12 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:58:26 <Zakim> +ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +ivan ←
14:59:03 <Zakim> +??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←
14:59:41 <Paolo> zakim, ??P11 is me
zakim, ??P11 is me ←
14:59:44 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Paolo; got it ←
14:59:46 <Zakim> +??P56
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P56 ←
15:00:01 <Luc> zakim, +??P56 is me
Luc Moreau: zakim, +??P56 is me ←
15:00:01 <Zakim> sorry, Luc, I do not recognize a party named '+??P56'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Luc, I do not recognize a party named '+??P56' ←
15:00:06 <Luc> zakim, ??P56 is me
Luc Moreau: zakim, ??P56 is me ←
15:00:06 <Zakim> +Luc; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc; got it ←
15:00:09 <pgroth> Topic: Admin
Summary: Minutes of the Sept 27, 2012 telco were approved. Paul showed a set of overview slides for the WG. Group agreed that long standing actions from Paulo should be closed with a comment.
<pgroth> Summary: Minutes of the Sept 27, 2012 telco were approved. Paul showed a set of overview slides for the WG. Group agreed that long standing actions from Paulo should be closed with a comment.
15:00:13 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt_Tilmes ←
15:00:13 <CraigTrim> zakim, +1.818.415.aaaa is me
Craig Trim: zakim, +1.818.415.aaaa is me ←
15:00:14 <Zakim> +CraigTrim; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +CraigTrim; got it ←
15:00:51 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-09-27
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-09-27 ←
15:00:58 <pgroth> Minutes of the September 27, 2012 Telecon
Paul Groth: Minutes of the September 27, 2012 Telecon ←
15:01:01 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
15:01:08 <CraigTrim> +1
Craig Trim: +1 ←
15:01:14 <Paolo> +1
+1 ←
15:01:16 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
15:01:21 <tlebo> zakim, who is on the phone?
Timothy Lebo: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
15:01:21 <Zakim> +tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo ←
15:01:24 <Zakim> +Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc ←
15:01:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see CraigTrim, [IPcaller], ivan, Paolo, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, tlebo, Luc.a
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see CraigTrim, [IPcaller], ivan, Paolo, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, tlebo, Luc.a ←
15:01:27 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
15:01:47 <pgroth> accepted: Minutes of the September 27, 2012 Telecon
RESOLVED: Minutes of the September 27, 2012 Telecon ←
15:02:03 <Dong> zakim, ??P2 is me
Trung Huynh: zakim, ??P2 is me ←
15:02:22 <Paolo> pgroth: what to do about long-lasting open actions
Paul Groth: what to do about long-lasting open actions ←
15:02:29 <Zakim> +Dong; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Dong; got it ←
15:02:43 <Zakim> +stain
Zakim IRC Bot: +stain ←
15:02:46 <Zakim> +jcheney
Zakim IRC Bot: +jcheney ←
15:03:01 <Paolo> ivan: it's ok to time out on them and close them, noting that no reply was received
Ivan Herman: it's ok to time out on them and close them, noting that no reply was received ←
15:03:45 <pgroth> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/dedddeedd578/presentations/wg-overview/overview/index.html
Paul Groth: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/dedddeedd578/presentations/wg-overview/overview/index.html ←
15:04:20 <Paolo> pgroth: finally completed his action, see link above
Paul Groth: finally completed his action, see link above ←
15:04:54 <Paolo> action 118 (?) also taken care of
ACTION-118 (?) also taken care of ←
15:04:54 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find 118. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find 118. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>. ←
15:05:27 <Paolo> action-113 done (issue 446)
ACTION-113 done (ISSUE-446) ←
15:05:37 <Paolo> action-116 still ongoing
ACTION-116 still ongoing ←
15:05:45 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:06:08 <pgroth> - Topic PROV Exit Criteria
Paul Groth: - Topic PROV Exit Criteria ←
15:06:21 <Paolo> TOPIC: PROV Exit Criteria
Summary: Paul went over the existing exit criteria. He went through a proposal from the chairs on extending the exit criteria in particular for the constraints. The group agreed that there are three types of implementations: usage of prov in a dataset, vocabularies that extend prov, software that generates/consumes PROV. The group agreed with the principle that for prov-constraints we would produce test cases that were tied to only the constraints but these test cases would also exercise the inferences. Furthermore, the group recommended looking at more automatic mechanisms for gathering results of test cases for constraints. Additionally, the exit criteria should be specific about which documents are tested. Paul was actioned to take this input and present a revised version of the exit criteria by the next telcon. Dong, Luc, Daniel all agreed to contribute to the development of test cases for prov-contstraints. Paolo agreed to help check test cases for correctness.
<pgroth> Summary: Paul went over the existing exit criteria. He went through a proposal from the chairs on extending the exit criteria in particular for the constraints. The group agreed that there are three types of implementations: usage of prov in a dataset, vocabularies that extend prov, software that generates/consumes PROV. The group agreed with the principle that for prov-constraints we would produce test cases that were tied to only the constraints but these test cases would also exercise the inferences. Furthermore, the group recommended looking at more automatic mechanisms for gathering results of test cases for constraints. Additionally, the exit criteria should be specific about which documents are tested. Paul was actioned to take this input and present a revised version of the exit criteria by the next telcon. Dong, Luc, Daniel all agreed to contribute to the development of test cases for prov-contstraints. Paolo agreed to help check test cases for correctness.
15:06:39 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria ←
15:06:57 <Paolo> pgroth: exit criteria were discussed at the latest F2F meeting
Paul Groth: exit criteria were discussed at the latest F2F meeting ←
15:07:27 <pgroth> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/reports/prov-implementations.html
Paul Groth: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/reports/prov-implementations.html ←
15:07:47 <Zakim> + +1.818.393.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.393.aabb ←
15:07:48 <Paolo> exit criteria are here: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria
exit criteria are here: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria ←
15:08:38 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:08:42 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:08:47 <Paolo> pgroth: these criteria apply to the DM and ontology
Paul Groth: these criteria apply to the DM and ontology ←
15:08:47 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
15:09:07 <Paolo> ivan: what is an "implementation" in this context
Ivan Herman: what is an "implementation" in this context ←
15:09:22 <Zakim> -Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←
15:09:37 <Paolo> pgroth: using PROV in a dataset, e.g. markung up a web page
Paul Groth: using PROV in a dataset, e.g. markung up a web page ←
15:09:51 <Paolo> pgroth: a vocabulayr for ontologies that extend prov
Paul Groth: a vocabulayr for ontologies that extend prov ←
15:10:14 <Paolo> pgroth: SW that generates and consumes PROV models
Paul Groth: SW that generates and consumes PROV models ←
15:10:47 <Paolo> ivan: fine, suggest adding this phrasing to the wiki page containing the exit criteria
Ivan Herman: fine, suggest adding this phrasing to the wiki page containing the exit criteria ←
15:11:11 <Dong> @Paul: Sure
Trung Huynh: @Paul: Sure ←
15:11:17 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:11:17 <Paolo> ivan: also, when implementations are collected, tag them according to the category where they belong
Ivan Herman: also, when implementations are collected, tag them according to the category where they belong ←
15:11:29 <Paolo> pgroth: are people happy with those 3 categories?
Paul Groth: are people happy with those 3 categories? ←
15:11:33 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:12:27 <Paolo> pgroth: these work for DM and O primarily. What would the criteria look like for CONSTRAINTS?
Paul Groth: these work for DM and O primarily. What would the criteria look like for CONSTRAINTS? ←
15:13:05 <Paolo> pgroth: need to demonstrate interoperability.
Paul Groth: need to demonstrate interoperability. ←
15:14:07 <Paolo> pgroth: proposed criteria: multiple implementations, and show that they support each of the constraints defined in the doc. This is done through a catalog of reference test cases that the implementation must be able to pass
Paul Groth: proposed criteria: multiple implementations, and show that they support each of the constraints defined in the doc. This is done through a catalog of reference test cases that the implementation must be able to pass ←
15:14:28 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
15:14:36 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
15:14:45 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
15:14:49 <Paolo> pgroth: the implementation must correctly evaluate the test case against the constraints it is meant to exercise
Paul Groth: the implementation must correctly evaluate the test case against the constraints it is meant to exercise ←
15:15:01 <Luc> zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me
Luc Moreau: zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me ←
15:15:01 <Zakim> +Luc; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc; got it ←
15:15:47 <stain> stainNexus7 has joined #prov
Stian Soiland-Reyes: stainNexus7 has joined #prov ←
15:15:48 <Paolo> jcheney: clarification: the criteria include the constraints but exclude the inferences
James Cheney: clarification: the criteria include the constraints but exclude the inferences ←
15:16:07 <Paolo> pgroth: yes, but you probably need to do inferences as well as part of the implementation
Paul Groth: yes, but you probably need to do inferences as well as part of the implementation ←
15:16:11 <stain> Who would build those test cases? The wg?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Who would build those test cases? The wg? ←
15:16:46 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:16:52 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
15:16:57 <Paolo> jcheney: are the test cases based on 'validity' which requires inferencing? or is inferencing one possible way to do the implementation
James Cheney: are the test cases based on 'validity' which requires inferencing? or is inferencing one possible way to do the implementation ←
15:17:21 <jcheney> so perhaps the test cases should try to *exercise* the inferences
James Cheney: so perhaps the test cases should try to *exercise* the inferences ←
15:17:44 <Luc> +q
Luc Moreau: +q ←
15:17:48 <Paolo> ivan: the constr doc contains inference rules, not just constraints. So are there inferences that will not be tested by the test cases?
Ivan Herman: the constr doc contains inference rules, not just constraints. So are there inferences that will not be tested by the test cases? ←
15:18:54 <Paolo> jcheney: inferences are a mechanism to define validity, however in the doc we specify that other mechanisms to check validity are fine as well
James Cheney: inferences are a mechanism to define validity, however in the doc we specify that other mechanisms to check validity are fine as well ←
15:19:31 <Paolo> ivan: that's fine then
Ivan Herman: that's fine then ←
15:20:14 <Paolo> Luc: to confirm what jcheney wrote above -- but the test case won't check that inferences have been applied
Luc Moreau: to confirm what jcheney wrote above -- but the test case won't check that inferences have been applied ←
15:20:41 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:21:02 <hook> q+
15:22:10 <Paolo> hook: interoperability should show that producers and consumers of provenance actually can use the spec to exchange prov
Hook Hua: interoperability should show that producers and consumers of provenance actually can use the spec to exchange prov ←
15:22:12 <Zakim> +??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P28 ←
15:22:21 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P28 is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P28 is me ←
15:22:21 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it ←
15:22:30 <Paolo> hook: the current interpretation of interop does not address that
Hook Hua: the current interpretation of interop does not address that ←
15:23:04 <Paolo> pgroth: true for CONSTR, however prov DM and prov O do require demonstration of interop according to the exit criteria
Paul Groth: true for CONSTR, however prov DM and prov O do require demonstration of interop according to the exit criteria ←
15:23:05 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:23:27 <pgroth> ack hook
Paul Groth: ack hook ←
15:24:12 <Paolo> Luc: are we try to gain evidence for each prov-* individually, or collectively as a whole?
Luc Moreau: are we try to gain evidence for each prov-* individually, or collectively as a whole? ←
15:24:32 <Paolo> Luc: for example, what does it mean for DM to interop "on its own"?
Luc Moreau: for example, what does it mean for DM to interop "on its own"? ←
15:25:06 <Paolo> pgroth: for DM, you do have to go through prov-N or prov-O. the impl. should specify which encoding it supports
Paul Groth: for DM, you do have to go through prov-N or prov-O. the impl. should specify which encoding it supports ←
15:25:14 <Paolo> pgroth: incl. XML
Paul Groth: incl. XML ←
15:25:19 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
15:25:25 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:27:03 <Paolo> ivan: do we really need an implementation for prov-n which is meant for human consumption? it's not meant to be a machine-exchangeable format
Ivan Herman: do we really need an implementation for prov-n which is meant for human consumption? it's not meant to be a machine-exchangeable format ←
15:27:28 <Paolo> Luc: indeed machine processing initially not the primary goal
Luc Moreau: indeed machine processing initially not the primary goal ←
15:27:47 <Dong> @Luc, when you mentioned evidence, did you mean that we need to gather proofs beyond submitted answers to the implementation questionnaire?
Trung Huynh: @Luc, when you mentioned evidence, did you mean that we need to gather proofs beyond submitted answers to the implementation questionnaire? ←
15:28:16 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:28:20 <Paolo> pgroth: this is good feedback to produce the next version of the exit criteria. we need to be more specific
Paul Groth: this is good feedback to produce the next version of the exit criteria. we need to be more specific ←
15:28:22 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
15:28:23 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/CR_Exit_Criteria ←
15:28:33 <Luc> @dong, submitted answers is what I think we have agreed
Luc Moreau: @dong, submitted answers is what I think we have agreed ←
15:28:53 <Zakim> - +1.818.393.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.393.aabb ←
15:28:58 <Dong> @luc, thanks, that's good.
Trung Huynh: @luc, thanks, that's good. ←
15:29:02 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aacc ←
15:29:25 <Luc> was the functional syntax document a rec?
Luc Moreau: was the functional syntax document a rec? ←
15:29:27 <Paolo> ivan: the EC for OWL2 is relevant because it's got an analog in a functional syntax, which is not even mentioned in the EC
Ivan Herman: the EC for OWL2 is relevant because it's got an analog in a functional syntax, which is not even mentioned in the EC ←
15:29:39 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.731.aacc ←
15:29:54 <Paolo> ivan: because the functional syntax can be mapped to one of the serializations
Ivan Herman: because the functional syntax can be mapped to one of the serializations ←
15:30:23 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-syntax-20091027/
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-syntax-20091027/ ←
15:31:04 <Paolo> ivan: the doc above is analogous to prov-n in our case
Ivan Herman: the doc above is analogous to prov-n in our case ←
15:31:43 <Luc> +q
Luc Moreau: +q ←
15:31:47 <Paolo> ivan: so the EC should really apply to prov-o and prov-constr
Ivan Herman: so the EC should really apply to prov-o and prov-constr ←
15:31:58 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:32:01 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aadd ←
15:32:26 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.731.aadd ←
15:32:26 <Paolo> Luc: should different implementations come from different institutions?
Luc Moreau: should different implementations come from different institutions? ←
15:32:56 <Paolo> ivan: if EC call for two impl, then yes they should come from different institutions
Ivan Herman: if EC call for two impl, then yes they should come from different institutions ←
15:33:13 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:33:16 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:33:19 <Paolo> pgroth: plan to vote on EC next week
Paul Groth: plan to vote on EC next week ←
15:33:44 <pgroth> action: pgroth to revise exit criteria for next week
ACTION: pgroth to revise exit criteria for next week ←
15:33:44 <trackbot> Created ACTION-119 - Revise exit criteria for next week [on Paul Groth - due 2012-10-11].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-119 - Revise exit criteria for next week [on Paul Groth - due 2012-10-11]. ←
15:34:54 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:34:56 <Paolo> ivan: EC should be fully completed by the time we leave CR, not when we enter CR
Ivan Herman: EC should be fully completed by the time we leave CR, not when we enter CR ←
15:35:22 <dgarijo> and how do we add an application to the implementation catalog?
Daniel Garijo: and how do we add an application to the implementation catalog? ←
15:35:29 <Paolo> pgroth: need volunteers to build test cases for the constraints
Paul Groth: need volunteers to build test cases for the constraints ←
15:35:47 <Luc> we can already collect all examples from our specs
Luc Moreau: we can already collect all examples from our specs ←
15:35:55 <dgarijo> me
Daniel Garijo: me ←
15:36:05 <dgarijo> I think Jun was interested as well
Daniel Garijo: I think Jun was interested as well ←
15:36:29 <Luc> dong?
Luc Moreau: dong? ←
15:36:40 <Dong> Sorry, I missed it
Trung Huynh: Sorry, I missed it ←
15:36:41 <Paolo> Paolo: I can help but can't commit time at this point
Paolo Missier: I can help but can't commit time at this point ←
15:36:44 <dgarijo> I don't see her here, so I'll contact her to see if she's interested.
Daniel Garijo: I don't see her here, so I'll contact her to see if she's interested. ←
15:37:11 <pgroth> me
Paul Groth: me ←
15:37:17 <Luc> me with Dong
Luc Moreau: me with Dong ←
15:37:25 <Dong> Yes
Trung Huynh: Yes ←
15:37:32 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:37:39 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:37:42 <tlebo> after I see a test case or two, I'll reconsider adding some.
Timothy Lebo: after I see a test case or two, I'll reconsider adding some. ←
15:38:20 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:38:22 <Paolo> Luc: once they are defined, they should be validated "by expert hand"
Luc Moreau: once they are defined, they should be validated "by expert hand" ←
15:38:24 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
15:39:08 <Dong> @Paul, I've understood that it's a part of the work I'm involved in preparing the implementation report
Trung Huynh: @Paul, I've understood that it's a part of the work I'm involved in preparing the implementation report ←
15:39:10 <Paolo> ivan: need a dynamics in place to manage the responses. What is the reporting mechanism?
Ivan Herman: need a dynamics in place to manage the responses. What is the reporting mechanism? ←
15:39:21 <Paolo> pgroth: we basically believe them
Paul Groth: we basically believe them ←
15:39:25 <Curt> believe and document their assertion
Curt Tilmes: believe and document their assertion ←
15:39:29 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:39:57 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:40:04 <Paolo> ivan: this means that responses will be managed manually, which may be problematic to scale
Ivan Herman: this means that responses will be managed manually, which may be problematic to scale ←
15:40:44 <Paolo> Luc: have 100-200 tests at the moment, we should have a simple mechanism with an ID per test...
Luc Moreau: have 100-200 tests at the moment, we should have a simple mechanism with an ID per test... ←
15:41:17 <Paolo> ivan: a basic mechanism should be defined, we must specify how implementors are expected to report back
Ivan Herman: a basic mechanism should be defined, we must specify how implementors are expected to report back ←
15:41:27 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:41:42 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-DM Issues
Summary: A set of issues were agreed to have been resolved. See the resolution.
<pgroth> Summary: A set of issues were agreed to have been resolved. See the resolution.
15:43:23 <Zakim> -stain
Zakim IRC Bot: -stain ←
15:43:49 <Paolo> pgroth: going through the list....
Paul Groth: going through the list.... ←
15:44:14 <Zakim> + +1.818.393.aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.393.aaee ←
15:44:48 <Paolo> pgroth: 520 left till next time as there was discussion
Paul Groth: 520 left till next time as there was discussion ←
15:45:40 <Paolo> pgroth: (isolating the issues that received feedback and discussion)
Paul Groth: (isolating the issues that received feedback and discussion) ←
15:47:32 <pgroth> ISSUE-531, ISSUE-528, ISSUE-517, ISSUE-501, ISSUE-516, ISSUE-514, ISSUE-513, ISSUE-511, ISSUE-510, ISSUE-512, ISSUE-497, ISSUE-515,
Paul Groth: ISSUE-531, ISSUE-528, ISSUE-517, ISSUE-501, ISSUE-516, ISSUE-514, ISSUE-513, ISSUE-511, ISSUE-510, ISSUE-512, ISSUE-497, ISSUE-515, ←
15:47:46 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:47:52 <Paolo> pgroth: the issues above have reached resolution
Paul Groth: the issues above have reached resolution ←
15:48:21 <pgroth> proposed: ISSUE-531, ISSUE-528, ISSUE-517, ISSUE-501, ISSUE-516, ISSUE-514, ISSUE-513, ISSUE-511, ISSUE-510, ISSUE-512, ISSUE-497, ISSUE-515 are confirmed to be resolved
PROPOSED: ISSUE-531, ISSUE-528, ISSUE-517, ISSUE-501, ISSUE-516, ISSUE-514, ISSUE-513, ISSUE-511, ISSUE-510, ISSUE-512, ISSUE-497, ISSUE-515 are confirmed to be resolved ←
15:48:45 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
15:48:48 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
15:48:50 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:48:57 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:49:03 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
15:49:03 <Paolo> +1
+1 ←
15:49:10 <pgroth> accepted: ISSUE-531, ISSUE-528, ISSUE-517, ISSUE-501, ISSUE-516, ISSUE-514, ISSUE-513, ISSUE-511, ISSUE-510, ISSUE-512, ISSUE-497, ISSUE-515 are confirmed to be resolved
RESOLVED: ISSUE-531, ISSUE-528, ISSUE-517, ISSUE-501, ISSUE-516, ISSUE-514, ISSUE-513, ISSUE-511, ISSUE-510, ISSUE-512, ISSUE-497, ISSUE-515 are confirmed to be resolved ←
15:50:16 <pgroth> Topic: UML and Naming
Summary: The group discussed the upper/lowercase naming of property names and the inconsistency between UML diagrams and the syntaxes. This is an issue with the use of UML. To resolve, this issue the group agreed that a modified version of the starting points diagram from prov-o should be used in the primer to avoid confusion
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the upper/lowercase naming of property names and the inconsistency between UML diagrams and the syntaxes. This is an issue with the use of UML. To resolve, this issue the group agreed that a modified version of the starting points diagram from prov-o should be used in the primer to avoid confusion
15:50:39 <ivan> issue-509?
15:50:39 <trackbot> ISSUE-509 -- Data Model Figure 5 -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-509 -- Data Model Figure 5 -- open ←
15:50:39 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/509
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/509 ←
15:50:43 <Paolo> pgroth: see issue-509
Paul Groth: see ISSUE-509 ←
15:50:55 <Zakim> +??P4
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4 ←
15:51:09 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:51:15 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:52:04 <Paolo> Luc: earlier versions of the docs show capitalized classes, and relationships not capitalized. that led to inconsistencies
Luc Moreau: earlier versions of the docs show capitalized classes, and relationships not capitalized. that led to inconsistencies ←
15:52:06 <Paolo> Luc
Luc ←
15:52:32 <Paolo> Luc: we addressed by cap "class level" elements and nocap for "instance level" elements
Luc Moreau: we addressed by cap "class level" elements and nocap for "instance level" elements ←
15:52:56 <Paolo> Luc: diff. notations use different styles. in prov-n nothing is cap
Luc Moreau: diff. notations use different styles. in prov-n nothing is cap ←
15:53:18 <Paolo> Luc: so we will be inconsistent anyway whatever change we make
Luc Moreau: so we will be inconsistent anyway whatever change we make ←
15:54:35 <Paolo> Luc: in prov-o class derivations are cap, for instance. There is no solution that works for all of them
Luc Moreau: in prov-o class derivations are cap, for instance. There is no solution that works for all of them ←
15:54:43 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:54:45 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:54:47 <Paolo> Luc: we tried to make prov-dm consistent with itself
Luc Moreau: we tried to make prov-dm consistent with itself ←
15:55:06 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
15:55:25 <Paolo> ivan: as the one reopening the issue: looking at the primer on its own. because of its role, felt that consistency was important
Ivan Herman: as the one reopening the issue: looking at the primer on its own. because of its role, felt that consistency was important ←
15:56:00 <Paolo> ivan: the primer has dual syntax for examples. in prov-n there is no cap, while turtle is also consistent with prov-o
Ivan Herman: the primer has dual syntax for examples. in prov-n there is no cap, while turtle is also consistent with prov-o ←
15:56:43 <Paolo> ivan: but fig. after sec 2 uses an inconsistent cap mode, and that is not explained. so proposed to make it consistent with prov-o
Ivan Herman: but fig. after sec 2 uses an inconsistent cap mode, and that is not explained. so proposed to make it consistent with prov-o ←
15:56:50 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:56:56 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:57:09 <Paolo> ivan: so just asking to make the figure consistent with one syntax in the text.
Ivan Herman: so just asking to make the figure consistent with one syntax in the text. ←
15:57:18 <Paolo> Luc: the figure uses the prov-dm convention
Luc Moreau: the figure uses the prov-dm convention ←
15:57:41 <Paolo> Luc: it's a class diagram, not an instance.
Luc Moreau: it's a class diagram, not an instance. ←
15:58:04 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:58:15 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:59:07 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
15:59:21 <Paolo> ivan: the figures in the primer may differ from those in the DM. because it's the primer, readers won't appreciate the alignment with prov,
Ivan Herman: the figures in the primer may differ from those in the DM. because it's the primer, readers won't appreciate the alignment with prov, ←
15:59:40 <Paolo> ivan: rather they will be confused by the change in cap style
Ivan Herman: rather they will be confused by the change in cap style ←
16:00:03 <dgarijo> +1 to what paul suggested.
Daniel Garijo: +1 to what paul suggested. ←
16:00:19 <Paolo> pgroth: we should be using the diagram in prov-o instead, it's not UML but it's "classes and properties" and may work better here
Paul Groth: we should be using the diagram in prov-o instead, it's not UML but it's "classes and properties" and may work better here ←
16:00:32 <Paolo> ivan: happy with that
Ivan Herman: happy with that ←
16:00:38 <dgarijo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/diagrams/starting-points.svg
Daniel Garijo: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/diagrams/starting-points.svg ←
16:01:14 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:01:17 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
16:01:31 <tlebo> sounds good
Timothy Lebo: sounds good ←
16:01:48 <pgroth> accepted: use a modified version of the prov-o starting points figure in the primer
RESOLVED: use a modified version of the prov-o starting points figure in the primer ←
16:04:32 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:05:18 <tlebo> bye! Thanks, Paul.
Timothy Lebo: bye! Thanks, Paul. ←
16:05:21 <Zakim> -tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←
16:05:24 <Zakim> -dgarijo
Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo ←
16:05:25 <Zakim> -jcheney
Zakim IRC Bot: -jcheney ←
16:05:27 <Zakim> -ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -ivan ←
16:05:28 <Zakim> -Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←
16:05:29 <Dong> thanks, bye all
Trung Huynh: thanks, bye all ←
16:05:30 <Zakim> -Dong
Zakim IRC Bot: -Dong ←
16:05:33 <khalidBelhajjame> bye
Khalid Belhajjame: bye ←
16:05:33 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
16:05:34 <Zakim> -Paolo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Paolo ←
16:05:40 <Zakim> - +1.818.393.aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.393.aaee ←
16:05:41 <Zakim> -??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P1 ←
16:05:43 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes ←
16:05:49 <Zakim> -??P4
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P4 ←
16:06:05 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, set log public ←
16:06:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request, pgroth
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request, pgroth ←
16:06:09 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
Paul Groth: rrsagent, draft minutes ←
16:06:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-minutes.html pgroth
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-minutes.html pgroth ←
16:06:13 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
Paul Groth: trackbot, end telcon ←
16:06:13 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←
16:06:13 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been [IPcaller], ivan, Paolo, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, CraigTrim, tlebo, Dong, stain, jcheney, +1.818.393.aabb, dgarijo, +1.818.731.aacc,
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been [IPcaller], ivan, Paolo, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, CraigTrim, tlebo, Dong, stain, jcheney, +1.818.393.aabb, dgarijo, +1.818.731.aacc, ←
16:06:17 <Zakim> ... +1.818.731.aadd, +1.818.393.aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: ... +1.818.731.aadd, +1.818.393.aaee ←
16:06:21 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←
16:06:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-minutes.html trackbot
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-minutes.html trackbot ←
16:06:22 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←
16:06:24 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-actions.rdf :
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-actions.rdf : ←
16:06:26 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth to revise exit criteria for next week [1]
ACTION: pgroth to revise exit criteria for next week [1] ←
16:06:28 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-irc#T15-33-44
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-prov-irc#T15-33-44 ←
16:25:36 <Zakim> -CraigTrim
(No events recorded for 19 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: -CraigTrim ←
16:25:37 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#2) generated 2012-10-09 16:02:23 UTC by 'pgroth', comments: 'addressed some typos'
