Paul updated the group on implementation surveys. We are now meeting the CR exit criteria set for prov-o. For prov-n, all features but six are exchanged by an interoperability pair in which the two implementations are software systems; all features are exchanged by an interoperability pair in which the "producer" is a document, and the consumer a software system. All prov-constraint test cases except one are passed by two independent applications. The last test case, using bnodes in turtle, will be rewritten with explicit URIs. While the group welcomes further implementation surveys, the group considers that it has met the CR exit criteria: Paul and Dong will begin drafting the implementation report.
We discussed the contents of the implementation report. Dong will try to generate table from WBS data; Paul will draft the prose introducing the tables. We reviewed outstanding tasks on the recommendation track documents. No outstanding issue for prov-dm and prov-n. Formal issues on prov-o have been addressed, but minor editorial issues (concerning examples) remain to be addressed. A few explanatory remarks are planned to be added to prov-constraints. Plan is to complete changes by next teleconference, or shortly afterwards. We also discussed the note-track documents: prov-dc are planning a revised version for internal review next week. The group is invited to submit issues if they want changes addressed to the remaining documents. All documents will have to add prov-dictionary to the "status of this document" paragraph.
The group endorsed the response as to why some constraints are not implemented in PROV-O. Paul will feedback to reviewers.
Editors are still working through the reviewer's feedback. They are invited to initiate debate by email on outstanding issues, with a view to vote on some of them shortly.
Luc left the call at that point. The group discussed outstanding issues informally.
15:53:14 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/31-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/31-prov-irc ←
15:53:16 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
15:53:18 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be PROV
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
15:53:18 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes ←
15:53:19 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
15:53:19 <trackbot> Date: 31 January 2013
15:53:19 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV
Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
15:53:20 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes ←
15:53:34 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.01.31
15:53:43 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
15:53:49 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public ←
15:54:02 <Luc> Regrets: Simon Miles, Tom De Nies
15:57:30 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started ←
15:57:37 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
15:57:40 <pgroth> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Paul Groth: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
15:57:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [IPcaller] ←
15:57:48 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Paul Groth: Zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
15:57:48 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgroth; got it ←
15:57:57 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
15:59:13 <Paolo> do you still need a scribe
Paolo Missier: do you still need a scribe ←
15:59:19 <Zakim> +Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc ←
15:59:38 <Luc> yes paolo
Luc Moreau: yes paolo ←
15:59:42 <Paolo> ok
Paolo Missier: ok ←
15:59:45 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
15:59:54 <Luc> can you do it? it's all set up
Luc Moreau: can you do it? it's all set up ←
16:00:03 <Luc> scribe: Paolo Missier
(Scribe set to Paolo Missier)
16:00:05 <stain> Zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me ←
16:00:07 <Zakim> +stain; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +stain; got it ←
16:00:18 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
16:00:19 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
16:00:19 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
16:00:24 <Zakim> + +44.131.651.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.131.651.aaaa ←
16:00:28 <stain> I didn't know it could do outgoing!
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I didn't know it could do outgoing! ←
16:00:29 <jcheney> zakim, aaaa is me
James Cheney: zakim, aaaa is me ←
16:00:29 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +jcheney; got it ←
16:01:06 <Zakim> + +1.315.941.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.315.941.aabb ←
16:01:13 <lebot> zakim, I am aabb
Timothy Lebo: zakim, I am aabb ←
16:01:13 <Zakim> +lebot; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +lebot; got it ←
16:01:19 <Luc> topic: Admin
16:01:33 <Zakim> +??P5
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P5 ←
16:01:34 <Zakim> +??P27
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P27 ←
16:01:42 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P5 is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P5 is me ←
16:01:42 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it ←
16:02:10 <Luc> Proposed: To approve the Minutes of Jan. 24, 2013
PROPOSED: To approve the Minutes of Jan. 24, 2013 ←
16:02:12 <lebot> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:02:13 <stain> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17
Stian Soiland-Reyes: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17 ←
16:02:18 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:02:20 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt_Tilmes ←
16:02:23 <Paolo> +1
+1 ←
16:02:23 <GK1> +0 (not present)
Graham Klyne: +0 (not present) ←
16:02:24 <hook> +1
16:02:27 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
16:02:29 <stain> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
16:02:29 <ivan> 0 (not present)
Ivan Herman: 0 (not present) ←
16:02:38 <jcheney> that link is from 2 weeks ago
James Cheney: that link is from 2 weeks ago ←
16:02:47 <GK1> zakim, ??p27 is me
Graham Klyne: zakim, ??p27 is me ←
16:02:47 <Zakim> +GK1; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +GK1; got it ←
16:02:48 <Curt> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-24
Curt Tilmes: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-24 ←
16:02:49 <stain> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-24
Stian Soiland-Reyes: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-24 ←
16:02:56 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
16:02:58 <Luc> Accepted: the Minutes of Jan. 24, 2013
RESOLVED: the Minutes of Jan. 24, 2013 ←
16:03:05 <stain> I clicked Agendwa in topic you see
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I clicked Agendwa in topic you see ←
16:03:17 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aacc ←
16:03:39 <pgroth> done
Paul Groth: done ←
16:03:40 <stain> stain has changed the topic to: /topic *
Stian Soiland-Reyes: stain has changed the topic to: /topic * ←
16:03:49 <stain> stain has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.01.31
Stian Soiland-Reyes: stain has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.01.31 ←
16:04:02 <Luc> Topic: WG Implementations
Summary: Paul updated the group on implementation surveys. We are now meeting the CR exit criteria set for prov-o. For prov-n, all features but six are exchanged by an interoperability pair in which the two implementations are software systems; all features are exchanged by an interoperability pair in which the "producer" is a document, and the consumer a software system. All prov-constraint test cases except one are passed by two independent applications. The last test case, using bnodes in turtle, will be rewritten with explicit URIs. While the group welcomes further implementation surveys, the group considers that it has met the CR exit criteria: Paul and Dong will begin drafting the implementation report.
<Luc> Summary: Paul updated the group on implementation surveys. We are now meeting the CR exit criteria set for prov-o. For prov-n, all features but six are exchanged by an interoperability pair in which the two implementations are software systems; all features are exchanged by an interoperability pair in which the "producer" is a document, and the consumer a software system. All prov-constraint test cases except one are passed by two independent applications. The last test case, using bnodes in turtle, will be rewritten with explicit URIs. While the group welcomes further implementation surveys, the group considers that it has met the CR exit criteria: Paul and Dong will begin drafting the implementation report.
16:04:04 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:04:13 <Paolo> action 162 to be closed
ACTION-162 to be closed ←
16:04:13 <trackbot> Error finding '162'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Error finding '162'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>. ←
16:04:22 <Paolo> (oops sorry)
(oops sorry) ←
16:04:39 <pgroth> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2013Jan/0153.html
Paul Groth: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2013Jan/0153.html ←
16:04:56 <Paolo> pgroth: deeper analysis of current implementations
Paul Groth: deeper analysis of current implementations ←
16:05:18 <Paolo> pgroth: do we meet out exit criteria?
Paul Groth: do we meet out exit criteria? ←
16:05:27 <Paolo> pgroth: PROV-O no problem
Paul Groth: PROV-O no problem ←
16:05:27 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria ←
16:06:07 <Paolo> pgroth: PROV-N: we do meet our exit criteria, 2 kinds of apps implementation, have a vocabulary usage that covers the additional features
Paul Groth: PROV-N: we do meet our exit criteria, 2 kinds of apps implementation, have a vocabulary usage that covers the additional features ←
16:06:12 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:06:16 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
16:06:18 <Paolo> pgroth: so we can conclude we do have impl. that interoperate with PROV-N
Paul Groth: so we can conclude we do have impl. that interoperate with PROV-N ←
16:06:43 <Paolo> pgroth: PROV-CONSTRAINTS: we meet the criteria here too, with caveats:
Paul Groth: PROV-CONSTRAINTS: we meet the criteria here too, with caveats: ←
16:07:18 <jcheney> stephen and I are working on a prolog impl, hoping to have something ready to go today or tomorrow
James Cheney: stephen and I are working on a prolog impl, hoping to have something ready to go today or tomorrow ←
16:07:19 <Paolo> pgroth: one implementation has one test case not passing. That is one short of the total required
Paul Groth: one implementation has one test case not passing. That is one short of the total required ←
16:07:27 <Paolo> pgroth: Ivan to look at it, probably ok
Paul Groth: Ivan to look at it, probably ok ←
16:07:31 <jcheney> but need xml-valid prov-xml examples
James Cheney: but need xml-valid prov-xml examples ←
16:07:39 <jcheney> (stephen cresswell)
James Cheney: (stephen cresswell) ←
16:07:50 <Paolo> pgroth: it would look better if we had one more implementation
Paul Groth: it would look better if we had one more implementation ←
16:07:54 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
16:07:55 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.aa]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.aa] ←
16:08:06 <Paolo> pgroth: on the other hand, it's the hardest of the docs to implement
Paul Groth: on the other hand, it's the hardest of the docs to implement ←
16:08:07 <Zakim> +??P17
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←
16:08:09 <khalidBelhajjame> zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me
Khalid Belhajjame: zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me ←
16:08:09 <Zakim> +khalidBelhajjame; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +khalidBelhajjame; got it ←
16:08:44 <Luc> which one is failing?
Luc Moreau: which one is failing? ←
16:09:03 <Paolo> ivan: what is the issue with the one failing test case?
Ivan Herman: what is the issue with the one failing test case? ←
16:09:16 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
16:09:28 <Paolo> pgroth: has to do with bnodes, could probably be fixed
Paul Groth: has to do with bnodes, could probably be fixed ←
16:09:39 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
16:09:41 <Zakim> +??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P31 ←
16:10:02 <Paolo> ivan: there will be a need to explain as to why we don't pass all tests
Ivan Herman: there will be a need to explain as to why we don't pass all tests ←
16:10:03 <lebot> q+ to propose that pgroth bangs head :-)
Timothy Lebo: q+ to propose that pgroth bangs head :-) ←
16:10:06 <lebot> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:10:08 <TomDN> Zakim, +??P31 is probably me
Tom De Nies: Zakim, +??P31 is probably me ←
16:10:09 <Zakim> sorry, TomDN, I do not understand your question
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, TomDN, I do not understand your question ←
16:10:12 <jcheney> heh heh
James Cheney: heh heh ←
16:10:20 <Paolo> Luc: the exit criteria don't define the tests -- we are free to define the test set
Luc Moreau: the exit criteria don't define the tests -- we are free to define the test set ←
16:10:25 <TomDN> Zakim, P31 is me
Tom De Nies: Zakim, P31 is me ←
16:10:25 <Zakim> sorry, TomDN, I do not recognize a party named 'P31'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, TomDN, I do not recognize a party named 'P31' ←
16:10:33 <TomDN> Zakim, +??P31 is me
Tom De Nies: Zakim, +??P31 is me ←
16:10:33 <Zakim> sorry, TomDN, I do not recognize a party named '+??P31'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, TomDN, I do not recognize a party named '+??P31' ←
16:10:51 <Paolo> Luc: can the test itself be rephrased?
Luc Moreau: can the test itself be rephrased? ←
16:10:53 <pgroth> prov-dm-ex23_start-PASS.ttl
Paul Groth: prov-dm-ex23_start-PASS.ttl ←
16:11:24 <TomDN> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Tom De Nies: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
16:11:24 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, [IPcaller], Luc, stain, Ivan, jcheney, lebot, dgarijo, GK1, Curt_Tilmes, +1.818.731.aacc, khalidBelhajjame, [IPcaller.aa], ??P17, Satya_Sahoo, ??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see pgroth, [IPcaller], Luc, stain, Ivan, jcheney, lebot, dgarijo, GK1, Curt_Tilmes, +1.818.731.aacc, khalidBelhajjame, [IPcaller.aa], ??P17, Satya_Sahoo, ??P31 ←
16:11:38 <TomDN> Zakim, ??P31 is me
Tom De Nies: Zakim, ??P31 is me ←
16:11:38 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TomDN; got it ←
16:12:00 <Paolo> Luc: this has been discussed elsewhere and there seems to be an easy way to fix the problem in the test case
Luc Moreau: this has been discussed elsewhere and there seems to be an easy way to fix the problem in the test case ←
16:12:21 <lebot> +1000 to using URIs over bnodes.
Timothy Lebo: +1000 to using URIs over bnodes. ←
16:12:52 <Paolo> Luc: propose to change the ttl example to use explicit URIs, that will take care of it
Luc Moreau: propose to change the ttl example to use explicit URIs, that will take care of it ←
16:13:35 <Paolo> Luc: pgroth has indicated 6-7 features that are not exchanged using the prov representation. this is about prov-n
Luc Moreau: pgroth has indicated 6-7 features that are not exchanged using the prov representation. this is about prov-n ←
16:13:48 <Paolo> Luc: how do we know that all features have been exchanged in prov-o?
Luc Moreau: how do we know that all features have been exchanged in prov-o? ←
16:14:12 <Paolo> pgroth: two implementations have reported that -- simon's and Luc's.
Paul Groth: two implementations have reported that -- simon's and Luc's. ←
16:15:06 <Paolo> Luc: then propose to use the same example for prov-n -- one produces prov-n, the other consumes prov-n
Luc Moreau: then propose to use the same example for prov-n -- one produces prov-n, the other consumes prov-n ←
16:15:19 <TomDN> neither do I
Tom De Nies: neither do I ←
16:16:14 <Paolo> pgroth: the two impl, should be independent so using two from soton won't work
Paul Groth: the two impl, should be independent so using two from soton won't work ←
16:16:42 <Paolo> Luc: are we fine then wrt prov-n?
Luc Moreau: are we fine then wrt prov-n? ←
16:17:05 <TomDN> The problem is: if I want to support all of prov-n, I could just use the ProvToolbox
Tom De Nies: The problem is: if I want to support all of prov-n, I could just use the ProvToolbox ←
16:17:52 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:18:00 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
16:18:42 <Paolo> pgroth: majority of prov-n is consumed by two independent impl., but not all features are coverd by each implementation -- does that have a bearing on interop?
Paul Groth: majority of prov-n is consumed by two independent impl., but not all features are coverd by each implementation -- does that have a bearing on interop? ←
16:19:12 <Paolo> pgroth: different people use different combinations of features
Paul Groth: different people use different combinations of features ←
16:19:58 <Paolo> pgroth: so comfortable that they are interchangeable, but do we need to be stricter than that about the exit criteria?
Paul Groth: so comfortable that they are interchangeable, but do we need to be stricter than that about the exit criteria? ←
16:20:01 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:20:17 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
16:20:48 <GK> I don't think there should be a requirement for single implementation that does everything. Each feature should be implementable (interoperably) by some pair of implementations.
Graham Klyne: I don't think there should be a requirement for single implementation that does everything. Each feature should be implementable (interoperably) by some pair of implementations. ←
16:21:01 <stain> I was hacking together a PROV-DM "API" in Clojure, but struggled with PROV-N parsing as EBNF is so many things and not something you can just throw at a parser library without massaging first
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I was hacking together a PROV-DM "API" in Clojure, but struggled with PROV-N parsing as EBNF is so many things and not something you can just throw at a parser library without massaging first ←
16:22:26 <Paolo> Luc: TomDN can you export more features than you do now?
Luc Moreau: TomDN can you export more features than you do now? ←
16:22:52 <Paolo> TomDN: not much sense because the app is about reconstructing provenance --
Tom De Nies: not much sense because the app is about reconstructing provenance -- ←
16:22:55 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:23:12 <Luc> topic: cr exit
Summary: We discussed the contents of the implementation report. Dong will try to generate table from WBS data; Paul will draft the prose introducing the tables. We reviewed outstanding tasks on the recommendation track documents. No outstanding issue for prov-dm and prov-n. Formal issues on prov-o have been addressed, but minor editorial issues (concerning examples) remain to be addressed. A few explanatory remarks are planned to be added to prov-constraints. Plan is to complete changes by next teleconference, or shortly afterwards. We also discussed the note-track documents: prov-dc are planning a revised version for internal review next week. The group is invited to submit issues if they want changes addressed to the remaining documents. All documents will have to add prov-dictionary to the "status of this document" paragraph.
<Luc>Summary: We discussed the contents of the implementation report. Dong will try to generate table from WBS data; Paul will draft the prose introducing the tables. We reviewed outstanding tasks on the recommendation track documents. No outstanding issue for prov-dm and prov-n. Formal issues on prov-o have been addressed, but minor editorial issues (concerning examples) remain to be addressed. A few explanatory remarks are planned to be added to prov-constraints. Plan is to complete changes by next teleconference, or shortly afterwards. We also discussed the note-track documents: prov-dc are planning a revised version for internal review next week. The group is invited to submit issues if they want changes addressed to the remaining documents. All documents will have to add prov-dictionary to the "status of this document" paragraph.
16:23:29 <Paolo> Luc: time to writing up the implementation report
Luc Moreau: time to writing up the implementation report ←
16:23:29 <pgroth> that's me
Paul Groth: that's me ←
16:23:47 <Dong> yes
Trung Huynh: yes ←
16:23:56 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
16:23:59 <Paolo> Luc: proposed authors: Dong zednik pgroth
Luc Moreau: proposed authors: Dong zednik pgroth ←
16:24:32 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:24:34 <Paolo> jcheney: XML test cases: xml examples not all valid, so not all can be parsed
James Cheney: XML test cases: xml examples not all valid, so not all can be parsed ←
16:24:43 <Dong> I can fix those
Trung Huynh: I can fix those ←
16:24:55 <Paolo> Luc: it should be possible to fix them
Luc Moreau: it should be possible to fix them ←
16:25:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:25:17 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
<luc>Topic: PROV-O
Summary: The group endorsed the response as to why some constraints are not implemented in PROV-O. Paul will feedback to reviewers.
<luc> log missing
Luc Moreau: log missing ←
<luc>Resolved: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-617 as a Working Group Response
RESOLVED: ISSUE-617">http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-617 as a Working Group Response ←
<luc>Summary: The group endorsed the response as to why some constraints are not implemented in PROV-O. Paul will feedback to reviewers.
<luc>Topic: PROV-AQ
Summary: Editors are still working through the reviewer's feedback. They are invited to initiate debate by email on outstanding issues, with a view to vote on some of them shortly.
<luc> log missing
Luc Moreau: log missing ←
<luc>Summary: Editors are still working through the reviewer's feedback. They are invited to initiate debate by email on outstanding issues, with a view to vote on some of them shortly.
<luc>Topic: PROV-XML
Summary: Luc left the call at that point. The group discussed outstanding issues informally.
<luc> log missing
Luc Moreau: log missing ←
<luc>Summary: Luc left the call at that point. The group discussed outstanding issues informally.
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#3) generated 2013-02-05 16:43:34 UTC by 'lmoreau', comments: None