Chatlog 2011-07-28

See original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

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

14:51:53 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:51:53 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/07/28-prov-irc
14:51:55 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:51:55 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:51:57 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
14:51:57 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:51:58 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:51:58 <trackbot> Date: 28 July 2011
14:52:20 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
14:52:33 <pgroth> Regrets: Helena Deus
14:53:18 <pgroth> zakim, who is on the call?
14:53:18 <Zakim> sorry, pgroth, I don't know what conference this is
14:53:19 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, edsu, sandro, trackbot
14:53:33 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
14:53:33 <Zakim> ok, pgroth, I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM already started
14:53:40 <pgroth> zakim, who is on the call?
14:53:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P33
14:53:49 <pgroth> Zakim, ??P33 is me
14:53:49 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
14:53:52 <Luc> Luc has joined #prov
14:54:04 <pgroth> can anyone on the call scribe today?
14:55:25 <pgroth> Regrets: Helena Deus, Reza B'Far
14:56:00 <Zakim> + +44.238.059.aaaa
14:56:19 <Luc> zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me
14:56:19 <Zakim> +Luc; got it
14:56:40 <Curt> Curt has joined #prov
14:57:15 <Zakim> + +1.443.987.aabb
14:57:25 <Edoardo> Edoardo has joined #prov
14:57:57 <Zakim> + +1.858.210.aacc
14:58:13 <Zakim> +??P41
14:58:33 <Curt> zakim, +1.443.987.aabb is me
14:58:33 <Zakim> +Curt; got it
14:58:40 <pgroth> can anyone scribe today?
14:58:48 <Zakim> +??P44
14:58:56 <GK1> GK1 has joined #prov
14:59:59 <JimMyers> JimMyers has joined #prov
15:00:23 <khalidbelhajjame> khalidbelhajjame has joined #prov
15:00:32 <dcorsar> dcorsar has joined #prov
15:00:33 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov
15:00:34 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov
15:00:35 <StephenCresswell> StephenCresswell has joined #prov
15:00:48 <Zakim> + +1.540.449.aadd
15:01:15 <Zakim> +??P54
15:01:19 <pgroth> can someone scribe today?
15:01:56 <Zakim> +??P63
15:02:04 <Zakim> + +1.518.633.aaee
15:02:07 <smiles> zakim, ??P63 is me
15:02:17 <Zakim> +smiles; got it
15:02:46 <pgroth> Scribe: smiles
15:02:46 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has joined #prov
15:02:50 <Zakim> +??P68
15:02:52 <Christine> Christine has joined #prov
15:02:58 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aaff
15:03:03 <khalidbelhajjame> zakim, ??P54 is me
15:03:03 <Zakim> +khalidbelhajjame; got it
15:03:13 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
15:03:51 <Zakim> +Kingsley_Idehen
15:03:55 <smiles> pgroth: describes agenda
15:04:00 <pgroth>    http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-07-21
15:04:01 <MacTed> Zakim, Kingsley_Idehen is OpenLink_Software
15:04:07 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:04:09 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software; got it
15:04:09 <pgroth> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of 21 Jul telecon and F2F1
15:04:15 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:04:20 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
15:04:22 <tlebo> +1
15:04:22 <Curt> +1
15:04:25 <smiles> 0 (was not present)
15:04:25 <zednik> +1
15:04:29 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:04:38 <Zakim> + +329331aagg
15:04:41 <StephenCresswell> +1
15:04:42 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:04:46 <Zakim> +??P28
15:04:47 <Edoardo> +1
15:04:48 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
15:04:53 <dcorsar> =+1
15:04:53 <GK> GK has joined #prov
15:05:03 <SamCoppens> zakim, +329331aagg is me
15:05:04 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it
15:05:08 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:05:14 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open
15:05:16 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Curt, +1.858.210.aacc, ??P41, ??P44, +1.540.449.aadd, khalidbelhajjame, smiles, +1.518.633.aaee, ??P68, +1.518.276.aaff, MacTed (muted), SamCoppens,
15:05:23 <Zakim> ... ??P28
15:05:27 <Zakim> On IRC I see GK, dgarijo, tlebo, Christine, SamCoppens, StephenCresswell, zednik, smiles, dcorsar, khalidbelhajjame, JimMyers, GK1, Edoardo, Curt, Luc, Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed,
15:05:27 <smiles> Topic: Action items
<smiles> Summary: All prior actions, except one ongoing, were considered completed or superceded, so have been closed.
15:05:32 <Zakim> ... edsu, sandro, trackbot
15:05:46 <smiles> pgroth: Actions have been cleaned up, as sometimes completed, sometimes superceded
15:05:49 <Zakim> -??P28
15:06:05 <smiles> pgroth: One action left on Stephan regarding 2nd iteration of use case questionnaire
15:06:30 <Zakim> +??P13
15:06:40 <smiles> Topic: Deadline for issues submission
<smiles> Summary: Any issues that should be addressed in the drafts should be raised by next Thursday. Issues can be raised after this, but will not be open, and will be dealt with after the first set of issues.
15:06:47 <Luc> q?
15:06:49 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P13 is me
15:06:58 <pgroth> q?
15:07:02 <smiles> pgroth: would be good to have a deadline for issue submission, suggest next week's telecon
15:07:03 <Zakim> +??P10
15:07:07 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
15:07:12 <GK> zakim, ??P10 is me
15:07:13 <Zakim> +GK; got it
15:07:15 <khalidbelhajjame> q?
15:07:19 <pgroth> q?
15:07:22 <khalidbelhajjame> q+
15:07:38 <Zakim> - +1.518.276.aaff
15:07:50 <smiles> khalid: with respect to all drafts or just model and paq?
15:07:55 <smiles> pgroth: should be all documents
15:08:00 <khalidbelhajjame> q-
15:08:08 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aahh
15:08:25 <smiles> ... if we feel the need to later open up for further issues on a document, we can do so, e.g. we may need to do so for the ontology
15:08:29 <smiles> q+
15:08:41 <GK> q+ to say I don't think its reasonable to close documents to issue submission, if that's being proposed
15:08:42 <pgroth> ack simon
15:09:20 <smiles> smiles: what do we do if we think of more issues after deadline
15:09:20 <pgroth> ack smiles
15:09:26 <pgroth> ack GK
15:09:26 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I don't think its reasonable to close documents to issue submission, if that's being proposed
15:09:29 <jcheney> jcheney has joined #prov
15:09:35 <Zakim> +??P12
15:09:46 <jcheney> zakim, ??p12 is me
15:09:46 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
15:09:46 <smiles> pgroth: should leave until after first draft, so we have a set we will resolve for that draft
15:10:18 <smiles> GK: not reasonable to close the issue list, but end which issues will be in first draft
15:10:31 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aaii
15:10:50 <smiles> pgroth: issues can be raised, but no more open issues for first draft after next week
15:11:09 <pgroth> q?
15:11:09 <smiles> ... editor can say issue is closed pending review
15:11:47 <smiles> pgroth: Please sign up to scribe! especially for next week
<smiles> Topic: Name suggestions for standard (model/language)
<smiles> Summary: All should look at the suggested names for the model/language, and add any new suggestions. We will have a poll in next week's telecon.
15:11:59 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/NameSuggestions
15:12:09 <satya> satya has joined #prov
15:12:31 <smiles> pgroth: Please go to site above to look at suggestions
15:12:55 <smiles> ... add suggestions, next week we will have a straw poll on what the group likes
15:13:12 <smiles> Topic: W3C Privacy Interest Group
<smiles> Summary: W3C is setting up two privacy-related interest groups, which may be relevant connections for encouraging adoption of the W3C provenance group's standards and/or as an influence on the requirements we have to consider.
15:13:44 <smiles> Christine: W3C is proposing two new privacy-related groups
15:13:57 <Christine> http://www.w3.org/2011/07/privacy-ig-charter
15:14:20 <smiles> ... Privacy Interest Group (URL above) and Tracking Protection Group (URL below)
15:14:38 <Christine> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/charter-draft
15:15:11 <smiles> ... the privacy community may be one we are interested in talking to
15:15:54 <Zakim> +wcandillon
15:15:59 <pgroth> q?
15:16:00 <smiles> ... might ask them to add our group to their charter, perhaps with regard to the agreed use of private data
15:16:36 <smiles> pgroth: always useful to have connections to other WGs, just restricted by bandwidth of people in the group
15:16:50 <smiles> ... anyone in privacy groups involved in our WG?
15:17:09 <GK> q+ to say I think the importance of connecting may have more to do with social/policy implications, less well defined than technical issues just implied
15:17:17 <smiles> Christine: privacy groups not formed yet, but am considering asking to join
15:17:20 <pgroth> ack GK
15:17:20 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think the importance of connecting may have more to do with social/policy implications, less well defined than technical issues just implied
15:17:59 <smiles> GK: is benefit of interaction of groups at technical level, or maybe better at policy level, reinforcing user trust in systems?
15:19:14 <smiles> Christine: TP group will be very technical, but what is interesting about PIG for W3C is people with interest in both user and technical areas
15:19:40 <jorn> jorn has joined #prov
15:19:50 <Yogesh> Yogesh has joined #prov
15:20:01 <smiles> pgroth: if group gets formed, useful to know what we can do to advertise provenance WG work as it can help them
15:20:04 <Zakim> +??P17
15:20:27 <GK> (What's to object to?)
15:20:48 <smiles> Topic: Update on provenance access document
<smiles> Summary: The provenance access document is now in the version control system, some issues have been raised, and resolving them is ongoing.
15:21:07 <Zakim> -wcandillon
15:21:15 <smiles> GK: document now in version control repository
15:21:32 <Zakim> +wcandillon
15:21:34 <smiles> ... some issues raised, GK responding
15:21:41 <jorn> zakim, ??p17 is me
15:21:41 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:22:17 <smiles> ... several editorial issues dealt with, but other issues require more discussion, including interaction of access mechanism and model
15:22:38 <khalidbelhajjame> q+
15:22:44 <tlebo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/bc0bbf26efab/paq/provenance-access.html, right?
15:22:48 <pgroth> ack khalid
15:23:05 <smiles> khalid: is version on main page of WG Wiki the one circulated this morning?
15:23:37 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/WorkingDrafts
15:23:39 <smiles> GK: yes, should be the latest one
15:23:47 <tlebo> refers to the "always latest" http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/paq/provenance-access.html
15:23:58 <khalidbelhajjame> q-
15:24:23 <Zakim> -wcandillon
15:24:31 <smiles> Topic: Provenance ontology
<smiles> Summary: A draft ontology (OWL file) and accompanying description (HTML document) have been made available. There are currently discrepancies due to unresolved issues with the conceptual model. Someone from RPI will join Satya in editing the document.
15:24:45 <pgroth> Satya?
15:25:14 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:25:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Curt, +1.858.210.aacc, ??P41, ??P44, +1.540.449.aadd, khalidbelhajjame, smiles, +1.518.633.aaee, ??P68, MacTed (muted), SamCoppens, dgarijo, GK,
15:25:17 <Zakim> ... +1.518.276.aahh, jcheney, +1.518.276.aaii, jorn
15:25:18 <Zakim> On IRC I see Yogesh, jorn, satya, jcheney, GK, dgarijo, tlebo, Christine, SamCoppens, StephenCresswell, zednik, smiles, dcorsar, khalidbelhajjame, JimMyers, GK1, Edoardo, Curt, Luc,
15:25:20 <Zakim> ... Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, edsu, sandro, trackbot
15:25:31 <satya> a couple of mins - just joing again
15:25:46 <smiles> pgroth: first draft of ontology, available on version control, plus brief document describing class hierarchy
15:26:03 <pgroth> q?
15:26:12 <pgroth> q?
15:26:14 <Luc> q+
15:26:20 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:27:13 <smiles> Luc: some differences between ontology file and specification document, e.g. most concepts subclass of Bob in one document but not the other
15:27:14 <Zakim> + +1.706.461.aajj
15:27:33 <smiles> ... also, some differences with conceptual model, not sure how group should address these
15:28:16 <khalidbelhajjame> Probably we can wait a bit until the model is stable, and most issues are resolved, before trying to check the consistency between the model and the OWL ontology
15:29:04 <smiles> satya: HTML is most consistent version, OWL is under development taking into account capabilities of OWL
15:29:53 <smiles> ... by definitions in conceptual model, process execution and agent are subclasses of BOB, so in HTML document, but am to raise this issue with conceptual model
15:30:23 <dgarijo> q+
15:30:54 <smiles> ... please fire issues regarding discrepancies of HTML specification of formal model and conceptual model
15:31:52 <dgarijo> @Satya: I would like to help you in this task
15:31:54 <tlebo> q+
15:31:59 <smiles> ... met RPI people, to get help with editing document, ontology, visualising schema
15:32:03 <tlebo> q+ I've volunteered
15:32:29 <khalidbelhajjame> yes, I would like to help. I am not expert in OWL, but am ready to give it a go
15:32:34 <Zakim> + +1.512.524.aakk
15:32:41 <smiles> Luc: Paul and I will find co-editor for this document, probably from RPI
15:32:45 <pgroth> ack dgarijo
15:32:59 <rgolden> rgolden has joined #prov
15:33:29 <smiles> dgarijo: sent issues by email about document, will raise
15:33:39 <smiles> ... volunteers to help on formal semantics
15:33:47 <pgroth> ack tlebo
15:33:48 <Luc> Regrets: Helena Deus, Reza B'Far, Paolo Missier
15:33:49 <khalidbelhajjame> Thanks Satya
15:33:53 <smiles> satya: will contact those interested in helping on formal semantics
15:34:07 <pgroth> Regrets: Helena Deus, Reza B'Far, Paolo Missier, James McCusker
15:34:15 <smiles> tlebo: will help out in defining ontology, Deborah sent some guidance by email
15:34:16 <pgroth> q?
15:34:18 <Yogesh> zakim, +1.540 is me
15:34:18 <Zakim> +Yogesh; got it
15:34:22 <tlebo> q-
15:34:27 <pgroth> ack sees I've
15:34:42 <pgroth> q?
15:34:45 <smiles> ack I've
15:34:50 <smiles> ack volun
15:35:00 <smiles> Topic: Conceptual model
<smiles> Summary: The conceptual model has been put into the version control and many issues are under discussion. Due to holidays, everyone should aim to raise any new issues by early in the coming week.
15:35:25 <smiles> Luc: document released by Paolo and I, many issues raised, lots of discussion
15:35:31 <Zakim> -jorn
15:35:38 <smiles> ... some issues dealt with, hope to be able to close soon
15:35:55 <smiles> ... over next week deal with others, then Paolo and I away for two weeks
15:36:12 <Zakim> +??P17
15:36:16 <smiles> pgroth: possible to get some core issues done, so satya can proceed?
15:36:46 <smiles> Luc: by the time Paolo and I go away, hope to have reasonable set of concepts defined, possibly up to Role in the document
15:37:08 <smiles> ... have these sections in a decent state
15:37:11 <GK> I regret I haven't had time to review the provenance model doc properly yet, but when I do I'd like to draft a proposal to eliminate the Entity/BOB distinction.
15:37:31 <smiles> ... not sure whether people have more issues to raise
15:38:13 <smiles> Luc: need to decide on Entity/BOB soon
15:38:33 <smiles> pgroth: get issues in my early next week, to ensure get somewhere before Luc, Paolo away
15:38:36 <pgroth> issues up to 5.11
15:38:46 <smiles> Topic: BOB
<smiles> Summary: The BOB (previously 'thing') concept was discussed. It was agreed that there exists only a single concept pil:BOB (name TBD) as opposed to two concepts (pil:Entity/pil:BOB). The group was polled on different names for this concept.
15:38:58 <ilkayaltintas> ilkayaltintas has joined #prov
15:39:18 <pgroth> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#bob
15:39:29 <smiles> Luc: In Section 5.1, we have BOB concept, which is a construct of the language
15:39:42 <smiles> ... no term called 'entity'
15:40:18 <smiles> ... in text of document use term entity with natural language meaning, not defined as part of model
15:40:33 <satya> satya has joined #prov
15:40:44 <smiles> ... Need to decide on two issues. (1) Have we got only one concept in the model?
15:40:51 <GK> AH, OK, "BOB" is the new "Entity"
15:40:52 <smiles> ... (2) What should we call it?
15:40:56 <pgroth> q?
15:41:18 <smiles> q+
15:41:31 <rgolden> +1
15:41:34 <smiles> Luc: question (1) may translate to: is there only one class in the ontology?
15:41:36 <GK> +1 for only one [formal class] construct in the language
15:41:43 <pgroth> ack smiles
15:41:57 <JimMyers> +1
<smiles> smiles: agree that there is only one concept in the model
15:42:23 <smiles> +1
15:42:29 <satya> +1 agree with one concept and proposal for calling it entity
15:43:00 <tlebo> +1 for Entity not a class in the model, Concept is a class.
15:43:00 <zednik> +1 agree with one concept and call it entity
15:43:03 <smiles> Luc: Jim McCusker has argued for two distinct concepts
15:43:13 <satya> Jim McCusker  is in a conference - may not be on the call
15:44:06 <smiles> khalid: I believe the idea Jim was to allow us to be able to express that two BOBs characterise same entity
15:44:10 <JimMyers> q+
15:44:14 <GK> q+ to suggest a clear statement of this change is announced to the list so WG members can comment 
15:44:38 <smiles> ... I was supporting same but not include entity as a concept in the model
15:44:38 <Luc> @GK, the draft makes this clear
15:45:10 <pgroth> ack JimMyers
15:45:46 <smiles> JimMyers: I think Jim McCusker is trying to distinguish between a thing and the document describing it
15:46:10 <smiles> ... e.g. a URI for him, one for document describing him
15:46:17 <GK> @Luc, I'm sure it does, but lacking time to do a proper review I haven't been aware of the change
15:46:50 <JimMyers> q-
15:46:53 <pgroth> ack GK
15:46:53 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to suggest a clear statement of this change is announced to the list so WG members can comment
15:47:12 <Luc> q+
15:47:19 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:47:52 <smiles> Luc: never had both BOB and entity, so having one will not be a change
15:47:52 <tlebo> Entity vs. BOB - We can't write Entities down, we can only write down BOBs that can only scratch at describing the real physical or conceptual Entity
15:48:13 <pgroth> q?
15:48:34 <rgolden> the whiteboard was the source of my confusion
15:48:37 <smiles> GK: recollects whiteboard with two columns
15:48:55 <StephenCresswell> +1 for bobs only in model, if there's a way to identify the "top bob"
15:48:57 <rgolden> but now realize that the left column on the whiteboard was not a first-class concept
15:49:12 <smiles> Luc: right column was constructs in the language, left was term used informally
15:49:51 <smiles> GK: when you say "represent" do you mean "denote"?
15:50:04 <khalidbelhajjame> Stuff became Entity and Thing became Bob
15:50:06 <smiles> Luc: please go back to document to see exact wording
15:50:15 <satya> q+
15:50:35 <pgroth> ack satya
15:51:22 <smiles> satya: when considering provenance, we should not distinguish between what is in real world and our representation in an information system
15:51:26 <tlebo> the whiteboard from F2F1 distinguishing Entities from BOBs http://twitpic.com/5x7oen/full
15:51:39 <Zakim> -??P17
15:51:43 <smiles> ... we should only be concerned with our constructs, so only one concept
15:51:45 <pgroth> q?
15:52:06 <Zakim> +??P17
15:52:24 <pgroth> proposed: this is the Existence of a single concept pil:BOB (name TBD) as opposed to two concepts (pil:Entity/pil:BOB)
15:52:28 <satya> +1
15:52:32 <smiles> +1
15:52:37 <StephenCresswell> +1
15:52:39 <dgarijo> +1
15:52:40 <GK> +1
15:52:40 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
15:52:41 <jcheney> 0
15:52:42 <JimMyers> +1
15:52:44 <Edoardo> +1
15:52:50 <rgolden> Phrased a bit oddly, but +1
15:52:53 <dcorsar> +1
15:53:04 <Curt> +1
15:53:07 <rgolden> sure
15:53:10 <ilkayaltintas> +1
15:53:20 <SamCoppens> +1
15:53:22 <tlebo> q+
15:53:33 <Luc> q+
15:53:41 <rgolden> proposed: That there exists only a single concept pil:BOB (name TBD) as opposed to two concepts (pil:Entity/pil:BOB)
15:53:43 <Luc> ack luc
15:53:49 <zednik> +1
15:53:59 <tlebo> +1 (as long as "entity" is part of the description of pil:BOB
15:54:07 <satya> +1
15:54:10 <smiles> +1
15:54:10 <rgolden> +1
15:54:12 <Curt> +1
15:54:12 <GK> +1
15:54:15 <Yogesh> +1
15:54:19 <StephenCresswell> +1
15:54:21 <khalidbelhajjame> +1 (for both proposals :-)
15:54:29 <SamCoppens> +1
15:54:38 <Edoardo> +1
15:54:41 <dcorsar> +1
15:54:56 <smiles> Accepted: That there exists only a single concept pil:BOB (name TBD) as opposed to two concepts (pil:Entity/pil:BOB)
15:54:59 <dgarijo> @tlebo: yes, it is used: "A BOB represents an identifiable characterized entity"
15:55:30 <smiles> pgroth: What should we call BOB?
15:55:43 <pgroth> Entity,
15:55:44 <pgroth> Snapshot
15:55:44 <pgroth> View
15:55:44 <pgroth> Perspective
15:55:44 <pgroth> InstantiatedEntity/EntityInstance
15:55:59 <khalidbelhajjame> EntitySnapshot
15:56:01 <rgolden> Identifiable
15:56:04 <StephenCresswell> Bounded OBservation (or BOB for short)
15:56:07 <JimMyers> resource :-)
15:56:12 <smiles> Thing
15:56:13 <dgarijo> EntityDescription?
15:56:17 <GK> q+ to ask now we've talked around this, does anything distinguish this from rdf:Resource or owl:Thing?
15:56:29 <StephenCresswell> Appearance
15:56:29 <pgroth> ack tlebo
15:56:43 <pgroth> ack GK
15:56:43 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask now we've talked around this, does anything distinguish this from rdf:Resource or owl:Thing?
15:56:44 <Luc> q+
15:56:48 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:56:52 <smiles> GK: is there anything to distinguish the concept from an RDF resource or OWL Thing?
15:56:55 <smiles> Luc: yes and no
15:57:20 <smiles> ... BOB's should be identifiable as with resource/Thing, but also list attributes and their values
15:57:20 <satya> q+ to GK for clarifying his que
15:57:45 <tlebo> BOBs are a very small subset of rdfs:Resource/owl:Thing; BOBs are only the things we've written down to describe entities.
15:57:47 <smiles> ... Thing can be extended to have attributes, values
15:57:47 <JimMyers> teh difference is by degree - we might want to look in more detail/shorter lived things, but I don't see a difference in kind
15:58:13 <smiles> GK: resources and Things have attributes, just not required attributes
15:58:20 <pgroth> ack satya
15:58:20 <Zakim> satya, you wanted to GK for clarifying his que
15:58:24 <tlebo> q+
15:58:47 <smiles> satya: RDF resource and OWL Thing are different from each other
15:58:54 <GK> My proposal is owl:Thing or rdf:Resource (areen't they the same in OWL full?)
15:59:26 <smiles> tlebo: BOB's are only things we are writing down to describe entities in the real world
15:59:29 <GK> I thoughts BOBs could be anything too
15:59:52 <smiles> Luc: agree that BOB is subclass of RDF resource or OWL Thing
16:00:02 <smiles> ... but can postpone this debate (use sameAs)
16:00:08 <pgroth> Entity,
16:00:09 <pgroth> Snapshot
16:00:09 <pgroth> View
16:00:09 <pgroth> Perspective
16:00:10 <pgroth> InstantiatedEntity/EntityInstance
16:00:10 <pgroth> EntitySnapshot
16:00:11 <pgroth> Bounded OBservation (or BOB for short)
16:00:13 <pgroth> resource
16:00:15 <pgroth> Thing
16:00:17 <pgroth> EntityDescription
16:00:19 <pgroth> Appearance
16:00:31 <tlebo> "writing down" in a very general sense. BOBs must exist in space time.
16:00:38 <rgolden> Identifiable
16:00:41 <satya> +1 for Entity
16:00:44 <pgroth> Entity
16:00:47 <GK> +1
16:00:48 <satya> +1
16:00:48 <JimMyers> +1
16:00:49 <smiles> +1
16:00:49 <jcheney> +1
16:00:49 <rgolden> +1
16:00:50 <Curt> +1
16:00:53 <Edoardo> +1
16:00:54 <zednik> +1
16:00:57 <dcorsar> +1
16:00:58 <dgarijo> +1
16:00:58 <Yogesh> +1
16:00:59 <khalidbelhajjame> 0 for Entity
16:01:05 <pgroth> Snapshot
16:01:06 <ilkayaltintas> +1
16:01:06 <jcheney> (+1 for simoninireland who is here)
16:01:08 <GK> -1
16:01:08 <satya> -1
16:01:09 <JimMyers> -1
16:01:10 <khalidbelhajjame> +1 
16:01:11 <Yogesh> +1
16:01:12 <Luc> @rgolden, process executions are also identifiable but are not BOBs
16:01:14 <smiles> -1
16:01:16 <SamCoppens> +1
16:01:18 <dgarijo> 0
16:01:18 <jcheney> -1
16:01:22 <pgroth> View
16:01:24 <satya> -1
16:01:25 <GK> -1
16:01:25 <smiles> -1
16:01:26 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
16:01:26 <Yogesh> -1
16:01:26 <Curt> -1
16:01:27 <JimMyers> -1
16:01:29 <zednik> -1
16:01:30 <StephenCresswell> +1
16:01:32 <dgarijo> -1
16:01:32 <tlebo> +1
16:01:38 <jcheney> -1
16:01:40 <pgroth> Perspective
16:01:42 <satya> -1
16:01:43 <GK> -1
16:01:43 <smiles> -1
16:01:43 <Curt> -1
16:01:43 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
16:01:43 <JimMyers> -1
16:01:43 <jcheney> -1
16:01:45 <Yogesh> 0
16:01:46 <rgolden> -1
16:01:49 <ilkayaltintas> 0
16:01:50 <dgarijo> 0
16:01:54 <SamCoppens> 0
16:01:57 <dcorsar> -1
16:01:59 <Edoardo> -1
16:02:03 <pgroth> InstantiatedEntity/EntityInstance
16:02:05 <satya> -1
16:02:05 <zednik> -1
16:02:06 <GK> -1
16:02:06 <JimMyers> 0
16:02:07 <rgolden> -1
16:02:08 <SamCoppens> -1
16:02:08 <khalidbelhajjame> -1
16:02:09 <smiles> 0
16:02:09 <jcheney> -1
16:02:11 <Edoardo> -1
16:02:13 <dgarijo> 0
16:02:13 <dcorsar> -1
16:02:15 <Curt> 0
16:02:17 <Yogesh> 0
16:02:20 <pgroth> EntitySnapshot
16:02:21 <satya> -1
16:02:22 <GK> -1
16:02:24 <smiles> -1
16:02:24 <JimMyers> -1
16:02:24 <Curt> -1
16:02:24 <Yogesh> +1
16:02:25 <ilkayaltintas> -1
16:02:26 <rgolden> -1
16:02:27 <jcheney> -1
16:02:27 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
16:02:30 <Edoardo> -1
16:02:31 <SamCoppens> -1
16:02:34 <dcorsar> -1
16:02:40 <pgroth> Bounded OBservation (or BOB for short)
16:02:42 <satya> -1
16:02:45 <GK> -1
16:02:47 <khalidbelhajjame> -1
16:02:47 <rgolden> :) -1
16:02:47 <smiles> -1
16:02:47 <Yogesh> -1
16:02:49 <Curt> -1
16:02:50 <ilkayaltintas> -1  :)
16:02:52 <dgarijo> -1
16:02:53 <jcheney> -1
16:02:53 <Edoardo> -1
16:02:54 <zednik> :) -1
16:02:56 <dcorsar> -1
16:02:56 <JimMyers> :-), but -1
16:02:57 <SamCoppens> -1
16:03:02 <pgroth> resource
16:03:05 <satya> -1
16:03:05 <GK> +1
16:03:07 <smiles> 0
16:03:08 <Curt> +1
16:03:08 <Yogesh> -1
16:03:09 <tlebo> -1
16:03:09 <Edoardo> 0
16:03:10 <dgarijo> -1
16:03:11 <khalidbelhajjame> -1
16:03:11 <JimMyers> +1
16:03:12 <rgolden> 0
16:03:12 <ilkayaltintas> 0
16:03:13 <MacTed> -1
16:03:13 <jcheney> 0
16:03:14 <dcorsar> -1
16:03:15 <SamCoppens> -1
16:03:18 <pgroth> Thing
16:03:20 <satya> -1
16:03:20 <GK> +1
16:03:22 <smiles> +1
16:03:22 <Yogesh> -1
16:03:22 <ilkayaltintas> -1
16:03:22 <tlebo> -1
16:03:23 <SamCoppens> -1
16:03:24 <JimMyers> +1
16:03:25 <Edoardo> 0
16:03:25 <Curt> +1
16:03:25 <dgarijo> -1
16:03:26 <khalidbelhajjame> -1
16:03:27 <rgolden> 0
16:03:30 <dcorsar> -1
16:03:32 <jcheney> +1
16:03:35 <pgroth> EntityDescription
16:03:36 <satya> -1
16:03:39 <JimMyers> -1
16:03:39 <Curt> -1
16:03:39 <smiles> -1
16:03:39 <jcheney> -1
16:03:39 <rgolden> -1
16:03:39 <SamCoppens> -1
16:03:40 <Yogesh> -1
16:03:40 <GK> -1
16:03:41 <Edoardo> -1
16:03:43 <dgarijo> -1
16:03:43 <dcorsar> -1
16:03:47 <khalidbelhajjame> 0
16:03:51 <pgroth> Appearance
16:03:55 <Yogesh> -1
16:03:55 <GK> -1
16:03:55 <JimMyers> -1
16:03:56 <Curt> -1
16:03:56 <satya> -1
16:03:56 <rgolden> -1
16:03:56 <smiles> 0
16:03:56 <Edoardo> -1
16:03:56 <dgarijo> -1
16:03:57 <jcheney> -1
16:03:57 <SamCoppens> -1
16:03:57 <khalidbelhajjame> -1
16:03:57 <ilkayaltintas> -1
16:03:59 <dcorsar> -1
16:04:04 <zednik> -1
16:04:25 <pgroth> Identifiable
16:04:27 <Yogesh> 0
16:04:27 <rgolden> +1
16:04:29 <satya> -1
16:04:29 <dgarijo> 0
16:04:31 <SamCoppens> -1
16:04:31 <khalidbelhajjame> -1
16:04:31 <Edoardo> 0
16:04:31 <Curt> 0
16:04:33 <smiles> 0
16:04:34 <tlebo> 0
16:04:35 <dcorsar> 0
16:04:35 <jcheney> 0
16:04:35 <JimMyers> 0
16:04:37 <GK> 0/+1...?
16:05:04 <smiles> pgroth: just a straw poll, but gives good indication
16:05:18 <Zakim> -khalidbelhajjame
16:05:19 <Zakim> -Yogesh
16:05:19 <Zakim> - +1.512.524.aakk
16:05:20 <Zakim> - +1.518.276.aaii
16:05:21 <Zakim> - +1.518.276.aahh
16:05:21 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
16:05:22 <Zakim> -dgarijo
16:05:24 <Zakim> -Luc
16:05:26 <Zakim> -jcheney
16:05:28 <Zakim> -??P68
16:05:30 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:05:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/07/28-prov-minutes.html pgroth
16:05:30 <Zakim> -SamCoppens
16:05:32 <Zakim> -GK
16:05:35 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
16:05:35 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:05:36 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:05:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/07/28-prov-minutes.html trackbot
16:05:36 <Zakim> -MacTed
16:05:37 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:05:37 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
16:05:38 <Zakim> -??P17
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000576