Chatlog 2011-07-14

From Provenance WG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

See original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.

14:53:39 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:53:39 <RRSAgent> logging to
14:53:41 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:53:41 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:53:43 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
14:53:43 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:53:44 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:53:44 <trackbot> Date: 14 July 2011
14:54:00 <pgroth> scribe: jcheney
14:54:05 <pgroth> scribe: Paul Groth
14:54:20 <pgroth> agenda:
14:54:35 <ericstephan> ericstephan has joined #prov
14:55:32 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
14:56:19 <Luc> Luc has joined #prov
14:56:21 <pgroth> Zakim, who is on the call?
14:56:21 <Zakim> sorry, pgroth, I don't know what conference this is
14:56:22 <Zakim> On IRC I see Luc, Paolo, ericstephan, Zakim, RRSAgent, stain, pgroth, GK, GK1, edsu, ericP, sandro, trackbot
14:56:36 <ericstephan> I haven't called in yet
14:57:03 <pgroth> zakim, this will be #prov
14:57:03 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, pgroth
14:57:19 <pgroth> zakim, this will be  Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:57:19 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, pgroth
14:57:22 <khalidbelhajjame> khalidbelhajjame has joined #prov
14:57:40 <Luc> zakim, who is here?
14:57:42 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be Provenance
14:57:45 <Zakim> sorry, Luc, I don't know what conference this is
14:57:48 <Zakim> On IRC I see khalidbelhajjame, Luc, Paolo, ericstephan, Zakim, RRSAgent, stain, pgroth, GK, GK1, edsu, ericP, sandro, trackbot
14:57:48 <ericstephan> I am on the call now (muted)
14:57:53 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, pgroth
14:58:22 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV
14:58:22 <Zakim> ok, Luc, I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM already started
14:58:22 <pgroth> chair: Paul Groth
14:58:35 <Zakim> +??P21
14:58:37 <Zakim> +??P25
14:58:44 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
14:58:44 <Yogesh> Yogesh has joined #prov
14:58:46 <pgroth> scribe: jcheney
14:58:47 <GK> zakim, ??P21 is me
14:58:47 <Zakim> +GK; got it
14:59:00 <pgroth> Zakim, who is on the call?
14:59:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P7, ??P14, +1.509.554.aaaa, Luc, GK, ??P25
14:59:03 <khalidbelhajjame> zakim, ??P25 is me
14:59:04 <Zakim> +khalidbelhajjame; got it
14:59:07 <pgroth> Zakim, ??P7 is me
14:59:08 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
14:59:08 <olaf> olaf has joined #prov
14:59:16 <ericstephan> I am 509.554
14:59:30 <Zakim> +tlebo
14:59:49 <Zakim> +Yogesh
15:00:22 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
15:00:30 <tlebo> Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:00:30 <pgroth> Regrets: Stephan Zednik
15:01:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, ??P14, +1.509.554.aaaa, Luc, GK, khalidbelhajjame, tlebo, Yogesh
15:01:08 <Zakim> +olaf
15:01:12 <MacTed> MacTed has joined #prov
15:01:16 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:01:20 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
15:01:22 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov
15:01:29 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:01:34 <Zakim> +??P10
15:01:39 <StephenCresswell> StephenCresswell has joined #prov
15:01:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, ??P14, +1.509.554.aaaa, Luc, GK, khalidbelhajjame, tlebo, Yogesh, olaf, OpenLink_Software, ??P10
15:01:47 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:01:47 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:01:49 <jorn> jorn has joined #prov
15:01:50 <jcheney> jcheney has joined #prov
15:01:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see StephenCresswell, smiles, MacTed, tlebo, olaf, Yogesh, khalidbelhajjame, Luc, Paolo, ericstephan, Zakim, RRSAgent, stain, pgroth, GK, GK1, edsu, ericP, sandro,
15:02:01 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has joined #prov
15:02:02 <Zakim> ... trackbot
15:02:04 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:02:24 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:02:44 <Zakim> +??P22
15:02:44 <jorn> zakim, who is on the call?
15:02:48 <Zakim> -Sandro
15:02:52 <Zakim> +??P34
15:03:12 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, ??P14, +1.509.554.aaaa, Luc, GK, khalidbelhajjame, tlebo, Yogesh, olaf, MacTed (muted), ??P10, ??P22, ??P34
15:03:43 <jcheney> Zakim, ??P34 is me
15:03:49 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
15:03:55 <Satya> Satya has joined #prov
15:04:00 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:04:01 <Zakim> +SamCoppens
15:04:05 <Zakim> +??P42
15:04:17 <Zakim> +Reza
15:04:23 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
15:04:31 <Zakim> + +1.512.524.aabb
<jcheney> TOPIC: Admin
<jcheney> SUMMARY: The minutes for the F2F are still in progress.  Many action items agreed at the F2F are still incomplete; some are subject of mailing list discussion; some are waiting on W3C to set up a Mercurial repository.
15:04:31 <jcheney> pgroth: still working on minutes for F2F
15:04:52 <jcheney> pgroth: actions from F2F due today
15:05:09 <ericstephan> %22 
15:05:16 <Zakim> + +1.216.368.aacc
15:05:16 <jcheney>
15:05:24 <Zakim> +??P35
15:05:30 <Zakim> +??P44
15:05:53 <jcheney> eric: action "Create a plan to deliver a connection report. Plan will include a timetable, a list of connections, and individuals who will deliver to the connection." is done
15:06:06 <jcheney> eric: still need contributions
15:06:08 <dcorsar> dcorsar has joined #prov
15:06:17 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P35 is me
15:06:17 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
15:06:23 <rgolden> rgolden has joined #prov
15:06:25 <jcheney> pgroth: stephan is still working on actions
15:06:38 <jcheney> pgroth: paulo is not here
15:06:49 <jcheney> pgroth: simon's action?
15:06:52 <jcheney> smiles: not done
15:06:54 <ericstephan>
15:07:12 <jcheney> smiles: action-21 also not done
15:07:24 <jcheney> pgroth: james mccusker action-22 - not here
15:07:31 <Zakim> -jcheney
15:07:39 <jcheney> smiles: action 24 not done
15:07:57 <Zakim> +??P34
15:08:03 <jcheney> pgroth: action-28 assigned to paul not done
15:08:03 <jorn> zakim, ??p34 is me
15:08:03 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:08:16 <jcheney> pgroth: action-26 to satya 
15:08:27 <jcheney> satya: not done
15:08:50 <jcheney> khalid: action-27 has sent email to discuss ivp of
15:09:13 <jcheney> pgroth: action-28 to james myers - not here
15:09:15 <Zakim> +Yolanda
15:09:33 <Luc> q+
15:09:33 <jcheney> pgroth: graham action-30 to move PAQ document to site
15:09:38 <jcheney> graham: working on it
15:09:51 <jcheney> pgroth: simon action-31 to enact PAQ plan
15:09:54 <jcheney> smiles: done
15:10:17 <jcheney> pgroth: action-32 to paolo to update concepts + updates into w3c style
15:10:33 <Luc> q?
15:10:35 <jcheney> paolo: done, depends partly on graham's action for place to publish
15:10:46 <jcheney> pgroth: many actions still open
15:11:07 <jcheney> pgroth: scribes needed
15:11:33 <Zakim> +??P51
15:11:50 <pgroth> q?
15:11:53 <Christine> Christine has joined #prov
15:11:57 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:11:57 <Luc> q-
15:12:02 <jcheney> luc: once minutes available please contribute & work on actions by end of month
15:12:05 <jcheney> (??)
15:12:23 <jcheney> TOPIC: Brief overview of working group plan
<jcheney> SUMMARY: We plan to deliver two working drafts by the end of September: the conceptual model and the OWL ontology.  We also want to deliver a draft of the provenance access document.  The strategy is to write drafts against we can raise and resolve issues.
15:12:50 <jcheney> pgroth: expected to deliver 2 working drafts: conceptual model & ontology
15:12:58 <jcheney> pgroth: also want to deliver access document
15:13:10 <jcheney> pgroth: strategy: produce drafts, then raise issues
15:13:58 <GK> I think it will be helpful to proceed with working drafts to work/discuss against
15:14:00 <jcheney> pgroth: reports from connection & implementation TFs
15:14:30 <jcheney> TOPIC: Discuss Plans for Connection Task Force 
<jcheney> SUMMARY: The connection task force agreed at the F2F to create an informal report to focus and identify communities where provenance will have impact.  The report is drafted and contributions are welcome.  WG members may be recruited to provide contacts to specific communities.  Commercial compliance scenarios were mentioned as one area where some work should be done.
15:15:10 <Zakim> -SamCoppens
15:15:22 <jcheney> eric: at F2F tasked to create informal report to provide focus & identify impact in conecting provenance to other communities
15:15:44 <pgroth>
15:15:52 <jcheney> eric: yolanda made group priority suggestions, which has been circulated on IRC (email?)
15:16:15 <jcheney> eric: connection timeline proposed, and some WG members may be proposed as contributors
15:16:47 <Lena> Lena has joined #prov
15:17:01 <jcheney> eric: edits welcome, plan to publish draft by end of august for review by end of september
15:17:09 <smiles> q+
15:17:30 <jcheney> smiles: what does it mean to be a "source"?
15:18:38 <pgroth> ack smiles
15:18:59 <jcheney> eric: proposed outline for collecting use cases, identifying needs
15:19:12 <GK> q+ to note that I don't see any reference to commercial compliance requirements in the document
15:19:23 <Zakim> +??P41
15:19:32 <Zakim> -??P14
15:19:43 <Paolo> zakim, ??P41 is me
15:19:43 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it
15:19:43 <jcheney> graham: no reference to commercial compliance
15:20:09 <StephenCresswell> That was me
15:20:15 <jcheney> graham: has come up from oracle, e-government/legislative information publication
15:20:17 <rgolden> q+
15:20:29 <pgroth> ack GK
15:20:29 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to note that I don't see any reference to commercial compliance requirements in the document
15:20:34 <pgroth> ack rgolden
15:20:52 <jcheney> ryan: we have been talking about that on mailing list, will take a look at connection TF pages
15:21:16 <ericstephan> q+
15:21:51 <jcheney> yolanda: remember that compliance was discussed in incubator group and covered in report and roadmap
15:22:10 <pgroth> ack ericstephan
15:22:40 <jcheney> eric: want to make sure that we capture previous work including XG report
15:23:10 <jcheney> yolanda: could just point to report for some of this, no other sources come to mind
15:23:16 <Zakim> -jorn
15:23:30 <Zakim> +??P14
15:23:39 <jorn> zakim, ??p14 is me
15:23:39 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:23:46 <jcheney> yolanda: compliance also captured in third, business contract scenario
15:24:08 <Zakim> +SamCoppens
15:24:26 <jcheney> yolanda: if there are groups to articulate compliance then it is relevant
15:24:44 <ericstephan> thank you Yolanda!
15:25:21 <jcheney> TOPIC: Discuss Plans for Implementation Task Force 
<jcheney> SUMMARY: Neither Lena nor Steven was able to connect to report at this point.  They will report on progress towards a larger survey of potential users/implementers next week.
15:25:24 <pgroth> lena?
15:25:41 <Reza_BFar_> Reza_BFar_ has joined #prov
15:25:55 <Lena> I am having sound problems
15:26:09 <jcheney> pgroth: lena seems to be unavailable, steven not available
15:26:38 <jcheney> pgroth: Impl TF needs help identifying audience for larger survey, should report next week.
15:26:48 <jcheney> TOPIC: Discuss Plans for Provenance Access and Query Task Force 
<jcheney> SUMMARY: A draft of the Access document based on Graham's strawman is in progress.  It will be available for comment as soon as W3C creates a mercurial repository for it.  Satya, Khalid, Olaf, Tim, Graham, Ted, Daniel, Ryan, Simon, Yogesh and Sam expressed interest in contributing.
15:27:01 <jcheney>
15:27:07 <Zakim> +Lena
15:27:40 <jcheney> smiles: working on uploading/revising access draft
15:27:51 <jcheney> smiles: will be driven by alternative proposals discussed at F2F
15:28:22 <jcheney> smiles: issues to be raised against draft and discussed
15:28:27 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
15:28:44 <jcheney> khalid: what date will document be available for comment
15:28:47 <Yogesh> +q
15:29:19 <jorn> zakim, who is talking?
15:29:30 <Zakim> jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Reza (59%), khalidbelhajjame (15%), Sandro (5%), Lena (51%)
15:29:32 <GK> It's currently online at, but due to be moved to w3C site real soon now (we hope)
15:29:34 <jcheney> smiles: depends on when W3C version control is set up
15:29:42 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame
15:29:46 <pgroth> ack Yogesh
15:29:46 <khalidbelhajjame> @graham, thanks
15:30:08 <jcheney> yogesh: action to include scenario, commens on concrete proposal (? noisy line)
15:30:09 <pgroth> q?
15:30:23 <jorn> zakim, who is talking?
15:30:29 <MacTed> Zakim, who's noisy?
15:30:34 <Zakim> jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: pgroth (55%), Sandro (31%), Lena (8%)
15:30:42 <MacTed> Zakim, mute sandro
15:30:42 <Zakim> Sandro should now be muted
15:30:44 <Zakim> MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Reza (46%), pgroth (64%), Sandro (24%), Lena (46%)
15:30:45 <Yogesh>
15:30:54 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute sandro
15:30:54 <Zakim> Sandro should no longer be muted
15:30:59 <jorn> zakim, please mute lena
15:30:59 <Zakim> Lena should now be muted
15:31:00 <jcheney> pgroth: wanted to identify possible contributors to task force for document due in september
15:31:02 <Satya> +1
15:31:03 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
15:31:06 <olaf> +1
15:31:09 <tlebo> +1
15:31:14 <jcheney> pgroth: Anyone interested in contributing please say +1
15:31:32 <GK> +1 (kinda by default, I think)
15:31:36 <MacTed> +1
15:31:39 <dgarijo> +1
15:31:41 <rgolden> +1
15:31:44 <dcorsar> +1
15:31:48 <smiles> +1
15:31:50 <Yogesh> +1
15:31:52 <jcheney> pgroth: (meaning the access document)
15:31:57 <Zakim> -??P51
15:32:02 <SamCoppens> +1
15:32:28 <tlebo>
15:32:30 <jcheney> pgroth: Contributors please put names in task force / access document wiki page so that we know who is signed up (nonbinding)
15:32:35 <jorn> zakim, who is noisy?
15:32:46 <pgroth> q?
15:32:47 <Zakim> jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: pgroth (29%), Sandro (24%)
15:32:56 <jcheney> TOPIC: Discuss Plans for Model Task Force 
<jcheney> SUMMARY: Paolo has editied the notes from the F2F meeting to produce a W3C-style draft, rephrasing without altering. This will be available for comment/editing once the Mergurial repository is available.  Graham, Satya, Khalid, Simon, James, Ted, Sam, Ryan, David volunteered to contribute or comment on this draft.  An OWL ontology will be drafted by Satya and others in the repository also when available.  Paolo, Khalid, Jim McCusker, Ted, Daniel, and James volunteered to contribute or comment on the ontology.
15:33:05 <Zakim> -Reza
15:33:45 <jcheney> paolo: has edited the F2F meeting wiki page to produce a W3C style document
15:33:55 <jcheney> paolo: tried to rephrase without altering semantics
15:34:01 <jcheney> paolo: baseline for proper document
15:34:02 <Zakim> +??P0
15:34:03 <Satya> @Paolo: can you please paste the link to this W3C note in IRC?
15:34:24 <jcheney> paolo: threads evolving on list
15:34:44 <jcheney> paolo: plan for Luc and Paolo to complete version for discussion with natural language for conceptual model
15:35:09 <jcheney> luc: requested Mercurial repository from W3C on monday, still not ready.
15:35:36 <jcheney> luc: thoughts about structure of document: need illustration, exposition.  Will discuss with paolo next week
15:35:43 <Luc> q?
15:35:45 <Satya> q+
15:36:00 <jcheney> satya: where is the new consolidated document?
15:36:27 <jcheney> paolo: We do not have a W3C place for it yet, currently parked on dropbox
15:36:49 <Luc> q+
15:36:53 <Satya> q-
15:36:53 <jcheney> paolo: Probably should wait until we have a repository to work on it
15:37:01 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:37:03 <pgroth> q?
15:37:16 <jcheney> luc: Suggest we wait for mercurial repository
15:37:42 <jcheney> luc: Instructions will be posted soon
15:38:26 <khalidbelhajjame> +1 for Paolo's plan
15:38:46 <jcheney> pgroth: sandro, why is repository taking so long?
15:38:50 <jcheney> sandro: don't know
15:38:56 <Zakim> -jorn
15:39:13 <Zakim> +??P14
15:39:21 <jorn> zakim, ??p14 is me
15:39:21 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:39:45 <GK> @luc: creating the repo's easy enough, but setting up access control less so
15:39:46 <Satya> +1
15:39:47 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
15:39:50 <smiles> +1
15:39:51 <jcheney> pgroth: contributors to conceptual model document (september time frame) please say +1
15:39:53 <jcheney> +1
15:39:54 <MacTed> +1
15:39:57 <SamCoppens> +1
15:40:00 <rgolden> +1 (me or reza)
15:40:08 <dcorsar> +1
15:40:17 <pgroth> q?
15:40:20 <GK> +1 (to review, comment, propose changes)
15:40:50 <jcheney> pgroth: OWL ontology representing conceptual model, led by Satya
15:41:03 <jcheney> satya: still planning, need to get together with others, depends on conceptual model
15:41:22 <jcheney> satya: try to use minimal OWL to keep things simple and avoid dependence on reasoners
15:41:52 <jcheney> satya: simon raised points on model vs representation; initial OWL ontology may help clarify these points
15:41:59 <pgroth> q?
15:42:22 <jcheney> graham: assume that ontology will be version controlled?
15:43:03 <tlebo> q+
15:43:15 <jcheney> luc: yes, will all be in one repository with subdirectories for documents/schemas
15:43:19 <pgroth> ack tlebo
15:43:29 <tlebo> Jim McCusker is speaking
15:43:45 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: cost of versioning an OWL file is negligible
15:44:14 <pgroth> q?
15:44:23 <Paolo> +1
15:44:24 <khalidbelhajjame> +1 (not really an expert in OWL, but would like to contribute)
15:44:31 <tlebo> +1
15:44:32 <MacTed> +1
15:44:33 <dgarijo> +1 to help with the owl file
15:44:39 <tlebo> +1 for Jim McCusker
15:44:42 <jcheney> pgroth: Contributors to OWL ontology, please say +1 (for september)
15:44:44 <JimMcCusker> JimMcCusker has joined #prov
15:44:49 <JimMcCusker> +1
15:45:02 <jcheney> +1 (but don't know much about OWL, so questionable how much I can help)
15:45:11 <tlebo> -= my vote for Jim McCusker
15:45:18 <jcheney> TOPIC: Discussion of Agent 
<jcheney> SUMMARY: We did not reach consensus on Agent at the F2F, and since then there has been email discussion.  Ryan proposed merging Agent with Process Execution (i.e. Software Agent), while introducing a new concept for "person or organization".  The need for an explicit Agent concept was debated, as was the issue of whether to import one from an existing ontology or allow reuse of any suitable Agent-like concept.  The issue will be discussed on the mailing list through examples.
15:45:29 <jcheney> pgroth: Did not reach consensus at F2F
15:45:33 <tlebo>
15:45:41 <jcheney> pgroth: More discission of agent has been on mailing list
15:45:58 <Paolo>
15:46:44 <pgroth> An agent is a SOMETHING (TBD) capable of activity.  It can be asserted to be an agent or can be inferred 
15:46:44 <pgroth> to be an agent by involvement in a process execution.
15:46:46 <jcheney> pgroth: We had a number of definitions of the form "an agent is <something> capable of activity"
15:46:53 <Zakim> +??P67
15:47:08 <Zakim> - +1.509.554.aaaa
15:47:32 <pgroth> q?
15:47:32 <rgolden> q+
15:47:33 <jcheney> pgroth: Disagreement over whether involvement is necessary/sufficient and relation to process execution
15:47:35 <pgroth> q?
15:47:40 <ericstephan> sorry have to leave early today
15:47:44 <ericstephan> ericstephan has left #prov
15:48:03 <GK1> GK1 has joined #prov
15:48:09 <JimMcCusker> +q
15:48:15 <pgroth> ack rgolden
15:48:19 <jcheney> ryan: Terminology is confusing since agent usually means the execution of a program or instantiation
15:48:28 <jcheney> ryan: Suggest renaming process execution to agent
15:48:45 <jcheney> ryan: Concept of agent at F2F tied more closely to role or function
15:49:26 <jcheney> ryan: See need to tie process execution to new concept: "person or organization"
15:49:43 <Luc> q?
15:49:50 <pgroth> ack JimMcCusker
15:49:58 <Paolo> zakim, please mute me
15:49:58 <Zakim> Paolo was already muted, Paolo
15:50:06 <pgroth> q?
15:50:17 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: Don't see wy process execution (event in the past) is the same as agent (something able to do something)
15:50:34 <dgarijo> I agree with Jim.
15:50:44 <Satya> agree with @Jim
15:50:49 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: agent can be a role (something that does something) but is rarely an event (something that occurs)
15:50:51 <pgroth> q?
15:51:41 <jcheney> ryan:this may be similar to meta-distinction between entity and entitystate/bob
15:51:44 <Zakim> -Sandro
15:52:03 <Luc> q?
15:52:08 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:52:12 <pgroth> q?
15:52:27 <Satya> @Ryan - we can make provenance assertions about the agent, e.g. if a sensor is an agent, its manufacturer, it date of manufacture etc.
15:52:32 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: can ryan point us to references where "agent" is used this way?
15:52:42 <jcheney> ryan: wikipedia for "software agent"
15:52:58 <Satya> q+
15:53:05 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: "agent" is more general than "software agent" (e.g. people, computers, animals)
15:53:30 <jcheney> ryan: key is not name "agent" but establishing an owner or that process execution is acting on behalf of person or organization
15:53:40 <pgroth> ack Satya
15:53:46 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: yes, an agent is something that is controlling an event
15:54:05 <jcheney> satya: jim myers pointed out that we should be able to make assertions about the provenance itself
15:54:17 <jcheney> satya: owner of an agent can be an agent; sensor could be a type of agent
15:54:30 <jcheney> satya: deborah mentioned two things about agent:
15:54:38 <jcheney> satya: 1. making assertion that something is an agent
15:54:39 <Zakim> -Yolanda
15:54:40 <Zakim> -jorn
15:54:45 <pgroth> q?
15:54:55 <Zakim> +??P14
15:54:57 <jcheney> satya: 2.  is something an agent only if it is involved in a process?
15:55:02 <JimMcCusker> Conversely, see the philosophical definition of Agent here:
15:55:15 <jorn> zakim, ??p14 is me
15:55:15 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:55:29 <Luc> q+
15:55:32 <jcheney> pgroth: Do we want to subclass "agent" within a provenance model?  there may be a need for distinction between people, organization, responsible party
15:55:52 <jcheney> luc: ryan also pointed to issue of confusion between recipe (process) and agent (process execution)
15:56:12 <jcheney> luc: if agent is a piece of software, what is difference between agent and recipe
15:56:30 <pgroth> q?
15:56:31 <jcheney> luc: came up in OPM, and a lot of OPM graphs may have this confusion (??)
15:56:33 <Satya> recipe is a specification in my view
15:57:09 <jcheney> pgroth: there is a need for "responsible <someone or something>" and for "process specification"
15:57:18 <Luc> @satya: a program is a specification for an execution
15:57:18 <GK> volitional vs computational?
15:57:20 <jcheney> pgroth: Is agent more or less than responsible entity?
15:57:24 <JimMcCusker> Responsibility is a role of an entity
15:57:27 <pgroth> q?
15:57:27 <dgarijo> @Satya specification or a template stating the steps of the process, for example?
15:57:27 <smiles> q+
15:57:32 <JimMcCusker> a participatory role
15:57:37 <JimMcCusker> q+
15:57:39 <Luc> q-
15:57:42 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:58:03 <jcheney> pgroth: If we have responsible entity, maybe we don't need "agent"
15:58:36 <pgroth> ack smiles
15:58:38 <jcheney> smiles: We will want to talk about people in provenance, sometimes software agent is responsible entity, sometimes not
15:59:10 <pgroth> ack JimMcCusker
15:59:11 <jcheney> smiles: Shouldn't be part of provenance model, but should allow use of notions of agent etc. from other models/ontologies
15:59:12 <pgroth> q?
15:59:44 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: If we are just saying that an agent is an entity that can participate in some active way in a process
16:00:05 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: we can define this relationally in terms of a role and offload ontology of agents to other ontologies
16:00:24 <Satya> q+
16:00:28 <jcheney> JimMcCusker: Other ontologies can use notion of agent appropriate to the context
16:00:42 <pgroth> ack Satya
16:01:02 <jcheney> satya: When we say we are not going to define agent in provenance model but reuse, what does that mean?  Subscribing to semantics of other model?
16:01:26 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
16:01:42 <Lena> +q
16:01:43 <smiles> q+
16:01:45 <jcheney> satya: Secondly, when we use responsibility/participation to stand in for agency, we lose ability to express assertions about agents
16:02:22 <jcheney> khalid: If we define agent as a role, it is a relation between something and process execution, so we need placeholder for agents that we can make assertions about
16:02:25 <Luc> q?
16:02:25 <Lena> can you hear me?
16:02:26 <Paolo> q+
16:02:27 <jorn> zakim, unmute lena
16:02:27 <Zakim> Lena should no longer be muted
16:02:31 <Luc> ack khal
16:02:36 <pgroth> ack Lena
16:02:59 <pgroth> ack smiles
16:03:02 <jcheney> lena: Is agent something we can delegate to other ontologies?
16:03:17 <Paolo> zakim, unmute me
16:03:17 <Zakim> Paolo was not muted, Paolo
16:03:34 <jcheney> smiles: was not suggesting reusing other ontology, just allowing use of any ontology for agents.
16:03:50 <jcheney> smiles: we may need to make assertions about agents 
16:04:01 <Satya> q+ to respond to simon
16:04:03 <jcheney> lena: we may need to identify agents of change
16:04:20 <pgroth> ack Paolo
16:04:29 <jcheney> paolo: happy with Jim's idea that all we need is a relation, and agents can be domain-specific
16:04:52 <GK> I think there's a tension here: needs of use cases vs desire to keep core provenance ontology minimal.  Ideally, we should be able to answer some of the use-cases by referring to other ontologies without baking them into our spec.
16:04:56 <jcheney> paolo: can still make sensible assertions without committing to a specific ontologies, have to identify boundaries of language and extension points
16:05:20 <jcheney> paolo: Should be as minimalistic as possible
16:05:24 <pgroth> q?
16:05:25 <Luc> q+
16:05:27 <Luc> q-
16:05:29 <Luc> q?
16:05:34 <jcheney> satya: Agree with paolo but may be mixing two things: 
16:05:36 <pgroth> ack Satya
16:05:36 <Zakim> Satya, you wanted to respond to simon
16:05:51 <jcheney> satya: When defining agent in provenance model, we are defining in same high level, abstract sense as other concepts
16:06:06 <jcheney> satya: some domains can have software agents, other domains can have other notions
16:06:29 <jcheney> satya: need something that stands in for this agency concept/entity/entity state
16:06:38 <Paolo> @satya: I agree that we need some /abstraction/ of one end of the relationship
16:06:40 <jcheney> satya: cannot make assertions about relationship only
16:06:53 <Paolo> but I am happy for that to be a top-level concept
16:07:16 <GK> I think there's a tension here: needs of use cases vs desire to keep core provenance ontology minimal.  Ideally, we should be able to answer some of the use-cases by referring to other ontologies without baking them into our spec.
16:07:20 <Luc> yes, can we have a few examples?
16:07:23 <Paolo> interesting discussion, but I need to switch to another call
16:07:28 <dgarijo> @Paolo as far as it can be subtyped properly..
16:07:36 <jcheney> pgroth: need examples where it is important to know agency
16:07:37 <Zakim> -??P0
16:07:39 <Zakim> -??P44
16:07:39 <Satya> @paolo and @daniel - agree
16:07:40 <Zakim> -jorn
16:07:41 <Paolo> @daniel sure!
16:07:44 <Zakim> -Lena
16:07:45 <Zakim> - +1.216.368.aacc
16:07:45 <Zakim> -khalidbelhajjame
16:07:45 <Zakim> -olaf
16:07:46 <Zakim> -tlebo
16:07:48 <Zakim> -??P22
16:07:50 <Zakim> -Paolo
16:07:52 <Zakim> - +1.512.524.aabb
16:07:54 <Zakim> -dgarijo
16:07:56 <Zakim> -Luc
16:08:00 <Zakim> -MacTed
16:08:02 <Zakim> -SamCoppens
16:08:04 <Zakim> -??P67
16:08:08 <Zakim> -Yogesh
16:08:12 <Zakim> -Sandro
16:08:16 <Zakim> -??P10
16:08:16 <pgroth>
16:08:21 <Yogesh> Yogesh has left #prov
16:08:23 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
16:08:28 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:08:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate pgroth
16:08:31 <rgolden> @GK agree to keep the ontology as simple as possible, but no simpler.  It needs to be useful.
16:08:33 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
16:08:33 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:08:33 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.509.554.aaaa, Luc, GK, khalidbelhajjame, pgroth, tlebo, Yogesh, olaf, MacTed, Sandro, Reza, jcheney, +1.512.524.aabb, +1.216.368.aacc,
16:08:34 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:08:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:08:35 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:08:35 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
16:08:36 <Zakim> ... dgarijo, jorn, Yolanda, Paolo, SamCoppens, Lena