16:06:55 <tlebo> luc: paul went through surveys recently.

Luc Moreau: paul went through surveys recently. ←

16:07:01 <pgroth> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2013Jan/0073.html

Paul Groth: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2013Jan/0073.html ←

16:07:02 <dgarijo> I've added all the remaining implementations that I had added in the wiki. Some of them today

Daniel Garijo: I've added all the remaining implementations that I had added in the wiki. Some of them today ←

16:07:09 <tlebo> pgroth: announced it via email

Paul Groth: announced it via email ←

16:07:32 <tlebo> ... reports from 9 organizations

... reports from 9 organizations ←

16:07:58 <tlebo> ... southampton has 7 implementations.

... southampton has 7 implementations. ←

16:08:01 <Zakim> +Ruben

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ruben ←

16:08:13 <TomDN> Zakim, +Ruben is me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, +Ruben is me ←

16:08:13 <Zakim> sorry, TomDN, I do not recognize a party named '+Ruben'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, TomDN, I do not recognize a party named '+Ruben' ←

16:08:14 <tlebo> ... provo is good track; all constructs supported by 2 sep implementations.

... provo is good track; all constructs supported by 2 sep implementations. ←

16:08:21 <TomDN> Zakim, Ruben is me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, Ruben is me ←

16:08:21 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +TomDN; got it ←

16:08:33 <tlebo> ... provo needs a pair of implmeentations to exchange.

... provo needs a pair of implmeentations to exchange. ←

16:08:39 <TomDN> Zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN

Tom De Nies: Zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN ←

16:08:39 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SamCoppens; got it ←

16:08:44 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, mute me ←

16:08:44 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should now be muted ←

16:08:55 <tlebo> ... it's easy to hit that min by having SH and Kings to exchange prov.

... it's easy to hit that min by having SH and Kings to exchange prov. ←

16:08:58 <GK_> Zakim, ??p13 is me

Graham Klyne: Zakim, ??p13 is me ←

16:08:58 <Zakim> +GK_; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +GK_; got it ←

16:09:11 <tlebo> ... for prov-n it is less satisfying. only 2 orgs: SH and weblab.

... for prov-n it is less satisfying. only 2 orgs: SH and weblab. ←

16:09:22 <tlebo> ... tom and sam have prov-n implementations.

... tom and sam have prov-n implementations. ←

16:09:32 <tlebo> ... but do weblab actually support it?

... but do weblab actually support it? ←

16:09:42 <tlebo> ... they say openRDF sesame as the library (implies prov-o)

... they say openRDF sesame as the library (implies prov-o) ←

16:09:50 <Paolo> I am going to add implementation with prov-n support

Paolo Missier: I am going to add implementation with prov-n support ←

16:09:52 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+ ←

16:09:55 <tlebo> ... need to rely on tom/sam implementation

... need to rely on tom/sam implementation ←

16:09:55 <Paolo> (applications)

Paolo Missier: (applications) ←

16:10:13 <tlebo> ... constraints: luc's implementation, but we need one more impl.

... constraints: luc's implementation, but we need one more impl. ←

16:10:31 <pgroth> it's a good thing!

Paul Groth: it's a good thing! ←

16:10:44 <tlebo> luc: # implementations on southampton, some on different languages.

Luc Moreau: # implementations on southampton, some on different languages. ←

16:11:00 <tlebo> ... we can demonstrate language independence if not org independence.

... we can demonstrate language independence if not org independence. ←

16:11:15 <TomDN> Zakim, unmute me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, unmute me ←

16:11:15 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should no longer be muted ←

16:11:18 <tlebo> ... TomDN implementing? isn't he using the provtoolbox?

... TomDN implementing? isn't he using the provtoolbox? ←

16:11:46 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

16:11:50 <tlebo> TomDN: not really using the toolbox.

Tom De Nies: not really using the toolbox. ←

16:12:09 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc ←

16:12:15 <pgroth> ace paolo

Paul Groth: ace paolo ←

16:12:18 <pgroth> ack paolo

Paul Groth: ack paolo ←

16:12:27 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, mute me ←

16:12:27 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should now be muted ←

16:12:31 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+ ←

16:12:35 <tlebo> Paolo: Tom's note, if I produce prov-n w/o provtoolbox then it counts as a new implementation.

Paolo Missier: Tom's note, if I produce prov-n w/o provtoolbox then it counts as a new implementation. ←

16:12:44 <pgroth> ack luc

Paul Groth: ack luc ←

16:13:02 <tlebo> luc: ideally, we want full independence.

Luc Moreau: ideally, we want full independence. ←

16:13:13 <tlebo> ... but we made the case that prov-n is aimed at human consumption.

... but we made the case that prov-n is aimed at human consumption. ←

16:13:19 <tlebo> ... so no need for interoperability.

... so no need for interoperability. ←

16:13:46 <TomDN> Zakim, unmute me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, unmute me ←

16:13:46 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should no longer be muted ←

16:13:49 <tlebo> pgroth: for prov-n, does TomDN consume prov info as prov-n?

Paul Groth: for prov-n, does TomDN consume prov info as prov-n? ←

16:13:50 <Luc> prov-dm contains examples of prov-dm, consumable by prov toolbox. So it's a pair!

Luc Moreau: prov-dm contains examples of prov-dm, consumable by prov toolbox. So it's a pair! ←

16:14:01 <Luc> prov-dm contains examples of PROV-N, consumable by prov toolbox. So it's a pair!

Luc Moreau: prov-dm contains examples of PROV-N, consumable by prov toolbox. So it's a pair! ←

16:14:19 <tlebo> TomDN: I read it == I evaluate. It generates it == write.

Tom De Nies: I read it == I evaluate. It generates it == write. ←

16:14:23 <GK> A precedent we might look at is the "human" syntax(es) for OWL - what do they do?

Graham Klyne: A precedent we might look at is the "human" syntax(es) for OWL - what do they do? ←

16:14:39 <Luc> @TomDN, can you validate your prov-n with my validator?

Luc Moreau: @TomDN, can you validate your prov-n with my validator? ←

16:15:12 <tlebo> TomDN: I can produce a file from my tool as prov-n.

Tom De Nies: I can produce a file from my tool as prov-n. ←

16:15:18 <Luc> @TomDN, can you paste your prov-n into http://openprovenance.org/prov/validator.html

Luc Moreau: @TomDN, can you paste your prov-n into http://openprovenance.org/prov/validator.html ←

16:15:25 <tlebo> pgroth: we want to give TomDN's prov-n to luc's validator.

Paul Groth: we want to give TomDN's prov-n to luc's validator. ←

16:15:33 <tlebo> ... then we have a pair.

... then we have a pair. ←

16:15:41 <Luc> or  http://openprovenance.org/prov/translator.html

Luc Moreau: or http://openprovenance.org/prov/translator.html ←

16:16:00 <tlebo> pgroth: tom doens't use all of the constructs.

Paul Groth: tom doens't use all of the constructs. ←

16:16:05 <tlebo> TomDN: no.

Tom De Nies: no. ←

16:16:11 <tlebo> pgroth: extend to use other constructs?

Paul Groth: extend to use other constructs? ←

16:16:14 <tlebo> TomDN: not easy.

Tom De Nies: not easy. ←

16:16:27 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+ ←

16:16:32 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc ←

16:16:47 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, mute me ←

16:16:47 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should now be muted ←

16:16:58 <tlebo> Luc: prov-dm doc is an example of prov-n generation. so all statements can be validated by toolbox.

Luc Moreau: prov-dm doc is an example of prov-n generation. so all statements can be validated by toolbox. ←

16:17:02 <tlebo> .. thus an interop pair

.. thus an interop pair ←

16:17:27 <tlebo> pgroth: we need to add it to the quesionnaire

Paul Groth: we need to add it to the quesionnaire ←

16:17:33 <TomDN> (I will provide some rationale on my questionaire answers to explain the read/write answers

Tom De Nies: (I will provide some rationale on my questionaire answers to explain the read/write answers ←

16:17:48 <tlebo> pgroth: we should do it as the WG

Paul Groth: we should do it as the WG ←

16:17:49 <GK> q+ to suggest looking in to how http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-syntax-20121211/ was handled

Graham Klyne: q+ to suggest looking in to how http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-syntax-20121211/ was handled ←

16:18:01 <Zakim> -GK_

Zakim IRC Bot: -GK_ ←

16:18:06 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.aa]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.aa] ←

16:18:07 <GK> Losrt my client

Graham Klyne: Losrt my client ←

16:18:08 <tlebo> pgroth: we seem to have coverage on prov-n (with these steps)

Paul Groth: we seem to have coverage on prov-n (with these steps) ←

16:18:23 <GK> Sorry lost connection

Graham Klyne: Sorry lost connection ←

16:18:23 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:18:37 <Zakim> +??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13 ←

16:18:46 <pgroth> q+ to say we need a pair for prov-o

Paul Groth: q+ to say we need a pair for prov-o ←

16:18:46 <GK> zakim, ??p13 is me

Graham Klyne: zakim, ??p13 is me ←

16:18:47 <Zakim> +GK; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +GK; got it ←

16:18:51 <tlebo> Luc: please submit the implementation reports.

Luc Moreau: please submit the implementation reports. ←

16:18:58 <stain> Zakim, ??P13 is me

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, ??P13 is me ←

16:18:58 <Zakim> I already had ??P13 as GK, stain

Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P13 as GK, stain ←

16:19:08 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.aa]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller.aa] ←

16:19:19 <tlebo> GK: prov-n and interop -- find out what OWL WG did with their functional syntax.

Graham Klyne: prov-n and interop -- find out what OWL WG did with their functional syntax. ←

16:19:25 <tlebo> ... it's similar role.

... it's similar role. ←

16:19:28 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:19:32 <ivan> unmute ivan

Ivan Herman: unmute ivan ←

16:19:34 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk ←

16:19:34 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to suggest looking in to how http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-syntax-20121211/ was handled

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to suggest looking in to how http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-syntax-20121211/ was handled ←

16:19:39 <ivan> zakim, unmute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute me ←

16:19:39 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should no longer be muted ←

16:20:15 <pgroth> i think we have a solution now for prov-n

Paul Groth: i think we have a solution now for prov-n ←

16:20:15 <tlebo> ivan: i don't remember how function syntax was handled. it was just a specification language - not a cand rec requiement to parse it.

Ivan Herman: i don't remember how function syntax was handled. it was just a specification language - not a cand rec requiement to parse it. ←

16:20:16 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:20:38 <tlebo> ... for OWL systems, they needed to exchange RDF/XML. the ONLY one.

... for OWL systems, they needed to exchange RDF/XML. the ONLY one. ←

16:20:39 <GK> That was my guess - I think PROV-N might be presented similarly?

Graham Klyne: That was my guess - I think PROV-N might be presented similarly? ←

16:20:45 <pgroth> Tom's implementation + validator  and prov-dm docs + validator

Paul Groth: Tom's implementation + validator and prov-dm docs + validator ←

16:20:45 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:20:48 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

16:20:48 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say we need a pair for prov-o

Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to say we need a pair for prov-o ←

16:21:03 <tlebo> pgroth: provo coverage is fine, we need some pairs.

Paul Groth: provo coverage is fine, we need some pairs. ←

16:21:09 <Zakim> +??P44

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P44 ←

16:21:15 <tlebo> ... could simon and luc make that pair?

... could simon and luc make that pair? ←

16:21:48 <tlebo> Luc: the service is available online. anyone can paste them in to validator or translator.

Luc Moreau: the service is available online. anyone can paste them in to validator or translator. ←

16:21:52 <tlebo> ... they can just report it.

... they can just report it. ←

16:21:56 <smiles> Luc - Can you give the URL again?

Simon Miles: Luc - Can you give the URL again? ←

16:22:07 <stain> Zakim: ??P44 is me

16:22:11 <stain> Zakim, ??P44 is me

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, ??P44 is me ←

16:22:11 <Zakim> +stain; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +stain; got it ←

16:22:11 <tlebo> pgroth: a pair isn't one directional?

Paul Groth: a pair isn't one directional? ←

16:22:22 <stain> Zakim, ??P44 is also khalidBelhajjame

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, ??P44 is also khalidBelhajjame ←

16:22:22 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P44 is also khalidBelhajjame', stain

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '??P44 is also khalidBelhajjame', stain ←

16:22:25 <tlebo> pgroth: simon, dump out provo and validate it?

Paul Groth: simon, dump out provo and validate it? ←

16:22:34 <tlebo> smiles: yes, if it takes turtle

Simon Miles: yes, if it takes turtle ←

16:22:36 <ivan> zakim, mute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←

16:22:36 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←

16:22:50 <Luc> http://openprovenance.org/prov/validator.html

Luc Moreau: http://openprovenance.org/prov/validator.html ←

16:23:01 <tlebo> Luc: anybody can do that.

Luc Moreau: anybody can do that. ←

16:23:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:23:04 <pgroth> constraints

Paul Groth: constraints ←

16:23:04 <GK> I think producer -> consumer (one way) is OK - it shoews two developers read spec and had some common understanding

Graham Klyne: I think producer -> consumer (one way) is OK - it shoews two developers read spec and had some common understanding ←

16:23:11 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+ ←

16:23:30 <tlebo> pgroth: constraints. luc did them, pgroth is slowing working them.

Paul Groth: constraints. luc did them, pgroth is slowing working them. ←

16:23:41 <tlebo> ... obviously good to have more than 2

... obviously good to have more than 2 ←

16:23:47 <tlebo> ... or even if other parts of implementations.

... or even if other parts of implementations. ←

16:23:59 <tlebo> ... 47 unit tests away from full coverage.

... 47 unit tests away from full coverage. ←

16:24:16 <tlebo> ... shoiuld be able to do it.

... shoiuld be able to do it. ←

16:24:21 <tlebo> +1 :-)

+1 :-) ←

16:24:35 <tlebo> luc: Paolo was working on partial constriants

Luc Moreau: Paolo was working on partial constriants ←

16:24:44 <Luc> Regrets: jcheney

16:24:53 <TomDN> Does your implementation need to be completely finished by Jan. 31st?

Tom De Nies: Does your implementation need to be completely finished by Jan. 31st? ←

16:24:57 <tlebo> Paolo: jun and I havent' worked on it.

Paolo Missier: jun and I havent' worked on it. ←

16:25:07 <pgroth> @TomDN it's about the report really

Paul Groth: @TomDN it's about the report really ←

16:25:17 <tlebo> Luc: when? by end of month?

Luc Moreau: when? by end of month? ←

16:25:20 <tlebo> Paolo: not by then.

Paolo Missier: not by then. ←

16:25:26 <pgroth> +q to ask about stardog

Paul Groth: +q to ask about stardog ←

16:25:29 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:25:31 <TomDN> @pgroth, thanks, that's what i thought

Tom De Nies: @pgroth, thanks, that's what i thought ←

16:25:55 <tlebo> pgroth: we knwo there are implementations out there than what is reported.

Paul Groth: we knwo there are implementations out there than what is reported. ←

16:26:04 <tlebo> ... we should all sign up to report implementations.

... we should all sign up to report implementations. ←

16:26:22 <tlebo> ... e.g. stardog is doing it.

... e.g. stardog is doing it. ←

16:26:27 <tlebo> ... approach individually.

... approach individually. ←

16:26:50 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:26:52 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg ←

16:26:52 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask about stardog

Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to ask about stardog ←

16:26:54 <tlebo> (I tried to poke the LInkedTV via twitter yesterday -- it's not coming out till Feb)

(I tried to poke the LInkedTV via twitter yesterday -- it's not coming out till Feb) ←

16:27:01 <pgroth> but there's also dbpedia, and qudt, etc

Paul Groth: but there's also dbpedia, and qudt, etc ←

16:27:04 <Luc> topic: Response to public comments

<luc>Summary: the drafted response were approved. Reviewers will be contacted by Paul with the Group responses. Outstanding issues will be tackled in the coming week.

16:27:08 <tlebo> zakim, who is making noise?

16:27:09 <pgroth> simon can you mute

16:27:12 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR

16:27:18 <Zakim> tlebo, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (83%), ??P41 (28%)

16:27:30 <pgroth> zakim, mute ??P41

16:27:30 <Zakim> ??P41 should now be muted

16:27:30 <GK> (There's also the possibility of submitting "third party" reports for public implemenbtations)

16:27:43 <Luc> q?

16:27:47 <pgroth> @GK i didn't no that

16:27:52 <pgroth> s/no/know

16:28:00 <Luc> q?

16:28:09 <Luc> Proposed: the group endorses the responses to issues 611 and 612

16:28:14 <TomDN> +1

16:28:17 <ivan> +1

16:28:18 <khalidBelhajjame> +1

16:28:18 <tlebo> +1

16:28:19 <satya> +1

16:28:21 <zednik> +1

16:28:23 <stain> +1

16:28:26 <Dong> +q

16:28:26 <TallTed> +1

16:28:27 <GK> @paul - I don't *know* that, but I can't see any reason why now

16:28:34 <SamCoppens> +1

16:28:36 <Luc> q?

16:28:36 <dgarijo> +0 (I haven't reviewed them yet)

16:28:38 <hook> +1

16:28:39 <smiles> +1 (noting that I sent a suggestion just before this call)

16:28:41 <GK> +0

16:28:50 <Paolo> 0 haven't reviewed in detail

16:28:53 <Luc> Resolved: the group endorses the responses to issues 611 and 612

16:28:54 <Curt> +0 (haven't reviewed)

16:29:04 <stain> @TallTed what happened to McTed over New Year? :)

16:29:13 <tlebo> luc: who to respond to reviewers?

16:29:15 <Dong> q-

16:29:15 <pgroth> sure

16:29:17 <Luc> q?

16:29:21 <tlebo> Luc: : is it paul?

16:29:25 <tlebo> pgroth: I can do that.

16:29:33 <tlebo> ... we had a question about derivation.

16:29:57 <tlebo> ... wasQUotedFrom, not derivation.

16:30:08 <dgarijo> I think it was about the name of wasQuotedFrom.

16:30:12 <tlebo> (I think it's the same mix-up that "Tim vs. Stian+Daniel" had.

16:30:13 <stain> it was about the directionality - as I originally complained about it

16:30:23 <stain> he suggested hadQuoteFrom

16:30:27 <dgarijo> yep

16:30:35 <Luc> q?

16:30:57 <pgroth> action: pgroth to respond to public comments

16:30:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-162 - Respond to public comments [on Paul Groth - due 2013-01-24].

16:30:58 <Dong> @Luc and Tim: I've just remember that some PROV-O examples might need to be revised in ISSUE-611

16:31:02 <tlebo> luc: wasquotedFrom, can't recall.

16:31:17 <TomDN> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2013Jan/0006.html

16:31:29 <stain> I think we need another WG discussion on email about it

16:31:57 <TallTed> stain - just unifying my nick across a few spaces (Twitter, a couple of IRC nets, etc.) ...

16:32:03 <stain> if the term was confusing in the primer.. then it's confusing all over

16:32:04 <tlebo> q+ to note that we couldn't converge last time on the naming.

16:32:15 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aacc

16:32:44 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aadd

16:32:56 <tlebo> ECHO

16:32:57 <pgroth> echo madness

16:33:02 <stain> zakim, who is noisy?

16:33:06 <pgroth> simon

16:33:07 <Luc> q?

16:33:13 <Zakim> stain, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: tlebo (31%)

16:33:14 <pgroth> ack tlebo

16:33:16 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to note that we couldn't converge last time on the naming.

16:33:38 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]

16:34:00 <smiles> @tlebo - Do you have a link to that email conversation?

16:34:01 <Luc> q?

16:34:10 <stain> but this email was from Chuck Norris - which sounds like a native speaker

16:34:11 <Luc> q?

16:34:15 <tlebo> smiles: I can dig up the ISSUE.

16:34:17 <stain> MORRIS

16:34:19 <stain> hihi

16:34:26 <smiles> OK

16:34:26 <dgarijo> @stian:lol

16:34:56 <Zakim> +??P32

16:35:15 <Luc> q?

16:35:17 <Paolo> zakim, ??P32 is me

16:35:17 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it

16:35:25 <Luc> topic: prov-dictionary

<luc>Summary: As the editor's draft was just released, it was agreed that reviewers have till Wednesday to complete their review.

16:35:27 <tlebo> tlebo: I'll dig through them. thanks for the reminder

16:35:44 <TomDN> no

16:35:54 <TomDN> Zakim, unmute me

16:35:54 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted

16:36:03 <tlebo> smiles: https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/352 is the wasQuotedFrom naming discussion

16:36:13 <Paolo> deadline is 23rd, right?

16:36:31 <pgroth> fine with me

16:36:35 <tlebo> Luc: reviewers should give feedback by next wed.

16:36:41 <pgroth> paul

16:36:49 <smiles> @tlebo Thanks!

16:36:59 <TomDN> Paolo, Stian, James (maybe), Luc, and Paul,

16:37:02 <Luc> q?

16:37:11 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me

16:37:11 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted

16:37:12 <Luc> topic: prov-aq

<luc>Summary: All reviewers have submitted their report.   The editors will produced a revised version for the next teleconference (or the following one) and vote for release will then take place.

16:37:38 <Luc> q?

16:37:41 <tlebo> GK: I've seen 4 reviews in

16:37:57 <tlebo> pgroth: tim, simon, luc, dong, stian

16:38:18 <tlebo> h!

16:38:22 <pgroth> your back

16:38:46 <tlebo> pgroth: all have reviewed.

16:38:54 <pgroth> shall i go

16:39:08 <pgroth> q+

16:39:11 <tlebo> GK: through 1.5 sets of comments.

16:39:15 <tlebo> ... most are editorial.

16:39:25 <tlebo> ... hoping to pick out those that are more than editorial.

16:39:42 <pgroth> that's not the main issue

16:39:45 <tlebo> ... issue on REST interface vs. simple convention for URI to retrieve prov.

16:40:04 <tlebo> pgroth: everyone but stian said doc can go LC

16:40:10 <stain> q+

16:40:17 <tlebo> ... stian has 8-9 blocking issues.

16:40:39 <Luc> q+

16:40:44 <Luc> ack pg

16:40:46 <tlebo> ... we should concentrate on blocking issues from stian.

16:40:46 <GK> Ah, I hadn't yet looked at those blocking issues from Stian

16:41:07 <tlebo> stain: my issues: it was heavy.

16:41:16 <Luc> q?

16:41:20 <Luc> ack sta

16:41:24 <tlebo> ... as a draft, fine. but not as final technical.

16:41:25 <stain> @GK sorry about that..

16:41:27 <Luc> ack luc

16:41:40 <tlebo> Luc: i'm fine wiht doc released as next WD.

16:41:58 <tlebo> ... I felt that feedback required changes, and so not last call.

16:42:02 <pgroth> q+

16:42:04 <tlebo> ... we don't have notion of last call in Note.

16:42:09 <tlebo> ... we're abusing that name.

16:42:20 <Luc> q?

16:42:21 <tlebo> ... as next draft, fine.

16:42:44 <tlebo> pgroth: we should distinguish between release and not wanting to do any more to it.

16:43:08 <tlebo> ... address all comments, release a WD at a minimum. OR when we go PRec with other docs.

16:43:17 <tlebo> ... but can we get another iteration?

16:43:17 <Luc> q?

16:43:22 <tlebo> ... before PR

16:43:25 <GK> @paul +1 review/revise as much as possible

16:43:32 <Luc> q?

16:43:32 <tlebo> ... we need two more itnerations on PAQ

16:43:55 <tlebo> Luc: we should be pragmatic about Notes and making it too perfect.

16:44:00 <GK> If the issues are substantive, I don't think they should be "offline"

16:44:09 <Luc> q?

16:44:30 <pgroth> @gk i was talking about scheduling

16:44:44 <GK> @paul Ah, OK.

16:44:46 <tlebo> Luc: do we vote? or do work and editors cycle?

16:44:57 <tlebo> pgroth: next week or following for WD.

16:45:01 <Luc> ack pg

16:45:11 <TomDN> (can be synced with dictionary then)

16:45:18 <tlebo> ... take off "final" terminology"

16:45:28 <Luc> q?

16:45:45 <tlebo> topic: prov-xml

<luc>Summary: Stephan updated the group on recent changes made by editors. He is going to summarise these by email, on the tracker. We then discussed the namespace convention to adopted. The ideal is to align with the conventions we have adapted for the ontology, while still being compatible with the xml approach. Stephan was tasked to come up with a proposal for next teleconference.

16:46:02 <GK> Next week is likely busy for me.  I'll try to complete my pass through the reviews today.

16:46:25 <tlebo> luc: namespace, schema management, etc.

16:46:44 <tlebo> zednik: some feedback on original note. extended types was confusing with prov:type.

16:46:52 <tlebo> ... made native XML type for those.

16:47:30 <tlebo> ... identifiers: work natively for XML

16:47:33 <tlebo> ... id and idref

16:47:40 <tlebo> id uses xsi:id

16:47:54 <tlebo> ... base type of idRef -- xml tooling is familiar.

16:48:12 <tlebo> .. cannot start with numbers, other constraints.

16:48:24 <tlebo> ... it's native but doesn't work with our examples or URIs.

16:48:33 <tlebo> ... alternative: anyURI or QNames

16:48:34 <pgroth> @gk see where you can get and see what needs to be debated

16:48:44 <tlebo> ... not sure which would be better.

16:48:50 <tlebo> ... also xlinks and xpointers.

16:49:06 <GK> @paul - that's my plan - I'm making notes as I go.  I'll email you a copy when done.

16:49:13 <pgroth> @gk awesome

16:49:16 <ivan> q+

16:49:23 <tlebo> ... xpointers and xlinks might let us verify references existing.

16:49:28 <ivan> ack ivan

16:49:32 <tlebo> ... the group needs to read up on xlinks/xpointers.

16:49:35 <Luc> ack iv

16:49:46 <tlebo> ivan: how widely is xlink implemented?

16:50:03 <tlebo> ... do tools really do it? xlink is an unlucky standard.

16:50:10 <Luc> q?

16:50:23 <hook> q+

16:50:32 <tlebo> ... might not be worth adopting, could be more harm than good.

16:50:48 <tlebo> hook: xlinks ISO community uses them to reference external XML traces.

16:50:59 <tlebo> ... in bundles, can reference across bundles.

16:51:09 <tlebo> ... but good point on how much it's used.

16:51:15 <Luc> q?

16:51:22 <Luc> ack ho

16:51:31 <tlebo> ... we still need to look into xlinks.

16:51:50 <tlebo> Luc: have your changes surfaced to the WG?

16:52:00 <tlebo> ... some may want to get insight into your changes.

16:52:20 <tlebo> ... (are you using issue tracker?)

16:52:30 <Luc> q?

16:52:54 <tlebo> zednik: announced, but did not tag into ISSUE.

16:53:12 <Luc> q?

16:53:37 <tlebo> zednik: last modeling was valid.

16:53:55 <tlebo> Luc: namespace management issue

16:54:08 <tlebo> ... the namespace HTML is waiting on it.

16:54:30 <tlebo> zednik: seems like we're misusing xml namesapces.

16:54:49 <tlebo> ... the extension should have a different namespace.

16:54:58 <tlebo> ... including dictionary in new namespace

16:55:24 <tlebo> ... stian proposed an organization, but not ideal.

16:55:37 <tlebo> ... the xml schema should have different namespaces.

16:55:58 <TomDN> (didn't we vote on this a few months ago?)

16:56:03 <Luc> q?

16:56:03 <pgroth> q+

16:56:18 <Luc> ack pg

16:56:37 <tlebo> pgroth: prov dictionary etc being in different docs doesn't mean it's not in the same thing.

16:56:54 <tlebo> ... (they are in same group, it's just broken up to aid understanding).

16:56:58 <Luc> zakim. who is noisy?

16:57:07 <Luc> zakim, who is noisy?

16:57:14 <tlebo> pgroth: from practice, developers do not like separate namespaces.

16:57:17 <Zakim> Luc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: pgroth (90%)

16:57:30 <tlebo> ... PROV namespace will included in RDFa automatically.

16:57:44 <ivan> s/RDFa/RDFa 1.1/

16:57:57 <tlebo> Luc: is nice to have one ns

16:58:24 <tlebo> Luc: a prov-xml dictionary namespace?

16:58:37 <TomDN> then we need a prov-links namespace as well

16:58:55 <GK> IMO, if any of the XML namespaces are different from the corresponding RDF, then they should *all* be different

16:59:10 <stain> q+

16:59:13 <GK> .. including the "core" namespace

16:59:31 <Curt> just do 2, core, and core + all extensions

16:59:51 <Luc> q?

16:59:52 <stain> exactly.. we do a single schema with only core, and one with core-everything

16:59:53 <tlebo> q+ to ask zednik where the motivation for different namespaces comes from

16:59:59 <Luc> ack st

17:00:25 <tlebo> stain: oen for core prov xml, one that is prov-everything xml schema. If you don't like either of those, then you're on your own.

17:00:26 <zednik> q+

17:00:43 <Luc> ack tl

17:00:43 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to ask zednik where the motivation for different namespaces comes from

17:01:57 <Luc> q+

17:02:27 <Curt> I'm ok with one schema with everything

17:02:46 <pgroth> q+ prov-xml is a note

17:02:57 <pgroth> i like that

17:02:57 <tlebo> q-

17:03:02 <zednik> q-

17:04:01 <tlebo> Luc: : single schema file with all terms that use one namespace, THEN half-way house of a single schema for just the core Rec terms.

17:04:03 <pgroth> q+ to say that it is a single namespace

17:04:20 <Luc> ack luc

17:04:33 <stain> I think this is mainly an artifact of XML Schema being very strict of linking schemas and namespaces - this is not a big deal in other ways to express XML schemas like Relax NG

17:05:03 <pgroth> ack pgroth

17:05:03 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say that it is a single namespace

17:05:25 <tlebo> pgroth: everyone should be able to paste the namespace to a browser and get all serializations documented.

17:05:34 <khalidBelhajjame> bye

17:05:34 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo

17:05:36 <Zakim> -tlebo

17:05:36 <Zakim> -Paolo

17:05:37 <Zakim> -??P22

17:05:37 <Zakim> -TomDN

17:05:37 <GK> Bye

17:05:37 <SamCoppens> bye

17:05:38 <dgarijo> bbye

17:05:39 <Zakim> -stain

17:05:40 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.a]

17:05:41 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes

17:05:43 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aadd

17:05:44 <Zakim> -pgroth

17:05:46 <Zakim> -dgarijo

17:05:46 <Zakim> -Ivan

17:05:46 <tlebo> Luc: I am done scribing?

17:05:48 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public

17:05:50 <Zakim> -??P41

17:05:53 <Zakim> -TallTed

17:05:54 <Zakim> -GK

17:06:31 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes

17:06:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/17-prov-minutes.html Luc

17:06:35 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon

17:06:35 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

17:06:36 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Curt_Tilmes, Luc, dgarijo, pgroth, [IPcaller], Ivan, +1.315.330.aabb, tlebo, Satya_Sahoo, +1.818.731.aacc, TallTed, TomDN, SamCoppens, GK_,

17:06:36 <Zakim> ... GK, stain, +1.818.731.aadd, Paolo

17:06:43 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

17:06:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/17-prov-minutes.html trackbot

17:06:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

17:06:44 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2013/01/17-prov-actions.rdf :

17:06:44 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth to respond to public comments [1]

17:06:44 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/01/17-prov-irc#T16-30-57