Chatlog 2011-09-08

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.

14:34:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:34:25 <RRSAgent> logging to
14:34:27 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:34:27 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:34:29 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
14:34:29 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:34:30 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:34:30 <trackbot> Date: 08 September 2011
14:34:35 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV 
14:34:36 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 26 minutes
14:34:49 <Luc> Agenda:
14:34:57 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
14:35:02 <Luc> Scribe: Paolo Missier
14:35:16 <Luc> Topic: Admin
<Luc>Summary: Minutes of last week's telecon were approved, and action on Simon is now closed.
14:41:54 <satya> satya has joined #prov
14:48:43 <paolo> paolo has joined #prov
14:53:51 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
14:53:58 <Zakim> +??P3
14:54:05 <paolo> zakim, ??P3 is me
14:54:05 <Zakim> +paolo; got it
14:55:32 <Curt> Curt has joined #prov
14:55:55 <Zakim> + +1.443.987.aaaa
14:56:12 <Curt> zakim, +1.443.987.aaaa is me
14:56:12 <Zakim> +Curt; got it
14:56:17 <Yogesh> Yogesh has joined #prov
14:56:22 <Zakim> +Luc
14:57:40 <Zakim> + +1.540.449.aabb
14:58:01 <Yogesh> zakim, +1.540 is me
14:58:03 <Zakim> +Yogesh; got it
14:58:06 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aacc
14:58:07 <Luc> @paolo, everything is set up for you, thanks for scribing
14:58:16 <paolo> ok
14:58:18 <stain> Zakim, +44.789.470.aacc is me
14:58:18 <Zakim> +stain; got it
14:58:25 <stain> (as I told you last week)
14:59:37 <Vinh> Vinh has joined #prov
15:00:11 <Zakim> + +1.315.723.aadd
15:00:19 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
15:00:31 <Zakim> + +1.937.343.aaee
15:00:35 <tlebo> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:00:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see paolo, Curt, Luc, Yogesh, stain, +1.315.723.aadd, +1.937.343.aaee
15:00:45 <Vinh> zakim, +1.937.343.aaee is me
15:00:48 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov
15:00:51 <tlebo> zakim, I am aadd
15:00:54 <Zakim> +Vinh; got it
15:00:59 <stain> perhaps wait 1 more minute, I was thrown off the conference bridge twice 
15:01:08 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
15:01:19 <tlebo> zakim, +1.315.723.aadd is me
15:01:25 <stain> Zakim, who is noisy?
15:01:46 <Zakim> sorry, tlebo, I do not recognize a party named '+1.315.723.aadd'
15:01:48 <Zakim> +Kingsley_Idehen
15:01:56 <MacTed> Zakim, Kingsley_Idehen is OpenLink_Software
15:01:58 <Zakim> +??P5
15:02:00 <paolo> Stian, how about sip? works fine for me
15:02:04 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:02:05 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:02:08 <Zakim> stain, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: paolo (34%), Kingsley_Idehen (15%), Luc (43%)
15:02:22 <Edoardo> Edoardo has joined #prov
15:02:32 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software; got it
15:02:33 <stain> paolo: I got in the third time nicely. :-) Using Skype. It threw me out after saying hello..
15:02:37 <MacTed> MacTed has changed the topic to: Provenance WG -- -- 2011-09-08 telecon agenda: (MacTed)
15:02:38 <Zakim> +??P34
15:02:39 <YolandaGil> YolandaGil has joined #prov
15:02:55 <Lena> Lena has joined #prov
15:02:56 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:03:02 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:03:09 <Zakim> +??P55
15:03:23 <Luc>
15:03:28 <Zakim> +[ISI]
15:03:28 <Luc> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Sep 01 telecon
#15:03:28 <paolo> topic: admin
15:03:32 <jcheney> jcheney has joined #prov
15:03:34 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:03:42 <stain> +1
15:03:43 <Curt> +1
15:03:45 <paolo> +1
15:03:47 <Edoardo> +1
15:03:48 <Lena> +1
15:03:53 <tlebo> +1
15:03:59 <smiles> +1
15:04:00 <Zakim> +??P0
15:04:11 <Luc> RESOLVED: the minutes of Sep 01 telecon
15:04:14 <jcheney> zakim, ??P0 is me
15:04:24 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov
15:04:30 <Luc> TOPIC: Named graphs requirements  
<Luc>Summary: Yolanda is going to add requirements identified by the PROV-Incubator to the list of requirements. Otherwise the list is complete. The teleconference with RDF-WG is confirmed for next week.
15:04:30 <dcorsar> dcorsar has joined #prov
#15:04:38 <paolo> topic: Named graphs requirements
15:04:40 <Luc>
15:04:48 <Zakim> +??P9
15:04:56 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
15:04:58 <Zakim> +??P10
15:05:29 <Luc> satya?
15:05:31 <Zakim> + +1.518.633.aaff
15:05:38 <stain> Satya joined at 15:41 - but not on phone it seems
15:05:48 <Zakim> + +1.706.461.aagg
15:05:53 <YolandaGil> q+
15:05:54 <paolo> no comments on requirements
15:05:59 <JimMcCusker> JimMcCusker has joined #prov
15:06:10 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:06:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see paolo, Curt, Luc, Yogesh, stain, tlebo, Vinh, MacTed (muted), ??P5, ??P34, ??P55, [ISI], Sandro, jcheney, ??P9, ??P10, +1.518.633.aaff, +1.706.461.aagg
15:06:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see JimMcCusker, dcorsar, zednik, jcheney, Lena, YolandaGil, Edoardo, smiles, tlebo, Vinh, Yogesh, Curt, paolo, satya, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, trackbot, stain,
15:06:16 <Zakim> ... sandro
15:06:23 <Luc> q?
15:06:25 <paolo> satya: reqs are completed, wiki page updated as of yesterday
15:06:28 <YolandaGil> There are requirements from the XG that were written at:
15:07:05 <Zakim> +??P50
15:07:19 <stain> paolo, are you scribing..?
15:07:38 <paolo> yolanda: mentions reqs from the XG work, and those do not seem to have been included in the current iwki page
15:08:11 <paolo> Luc: Yolanda invited to update the reqs page with content from the XG doc
15:08:14 <Luc> q?
15:08:17 <Luc> ack yola
15:08:25 <Luc> Topic: name for the standard
<Luc> Summary: After a discussion on the four contenders, PIL, PAST, PIF and PROV, the participants massively voted in favor of PROV.  Luc is to ask the WG about formal objection to PROV as the name for the standard. WG members have to raise formal objections by email. The intent is to confirm PROV as the name of the standard at the next teleconference.
#15:08:31 <paolo> topic: Name for the standard
15:08:55 <paolo> Luc: shortlist of 3 identified last week
15:09:09 <paolo> Luc: are there negative blockers amongst those?
15:09:20 <Luc> q?
15:09:30 <jcheney> +q
15:09:37 <YolandaGil> I know PIF as The Process Interchange Format
15:09:47 <stain> that's a kind of blocker, yes
15:10:21 <tlebo> "This page was modified last by Jintae Lee on Nov. 17 '99 "
15:10:33 <stain> just realised: PAST is difficult to Google
15:10:35 <sandro> "PLEASE NOTE: The PIF Project has been merged with the PSL (Process Specification Language) Project at NIST."
15:11:05 <jorn> jorn has joined #prov
15:11:17 <paolo> tlebo: someone (Deb?) proposed avoiding names that are existing words, because it makes it harder to search for them
15:11:19 <MacTed> PIL sounds like a pill, which often has negative connotation.  has 130MM results on Google.
15:11:19 <MacTed> PIF is a scoffing sound in American English, if not elsewhere.  has 18MM results on Google.
15:11:19 <MacTed> PAST is a common word, which is itself problematic...
15:11:22 <tlebo> difficulty to search for the standard, e.g. "past" is already a word.
15:11:40 <Zakim> +??P63
15:11:48 <jorn> zakim, ??p63 is me
15:11:48 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:11:48 <JimMcCusker> PAS, then?
15:11:54 <stain> (but PASTm, PASTl etc. would be quite unique)
15:12:03 <stain> JimMcCusker: french word
15:12:12 <JimMcCusker> true.
15:12:27 <MacTed>
15:12:27 <MacTed>
15:12:27 <MacTed>
15:12:39 <stain> yes, w3 has very high google rating
15:12:42 <paolo> Tim: Deb concerned that existing words would make google searches less effective
15:12:47 <Luc> q?
15:12:50 <Luc> ack jch
15:13:15 <smiles> q+
15:13:19 <paolo> satya: neg blocker for PIL: what we have is more than just a language
15:13:19 <stain> sandro, agree, and "prov\:" is a good prefix as well
15:13:23 <stain> prov\:Entity for instance
15:13:31 <MacTed> I also prefer PROV overall...
15:13:35 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:13:35 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
15:13:37 <JimMcCusker> What does PROV expand to?
15:13:47 <sandro> "provenance"
15:13:53 <stain> JimMcCusker, that's the problem! But we could say Provenance Standard
15:14:11 <paolo> Ted: all 3 of them have overlaps with existing names/acronyms. large number of results on google for all of them
15:14:16 <zednik> I also like PROV
15:14:26 <Luc> q?
15:14:28 <paolo> Ted: name needs not be an acronym
15:14:30 <tlebo> google; Prov (TM) Exam services
15:14:30 <zednik> PROVenance standard?
15:14:33 <stain> +1 that name does not need to be an acronym
15:14:41 <paolo> +1 for Ted -- no need to agonize over acronyms
15:14:42 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:14:42 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:14:43 <JimMcCusker> PROvenance Vocabulary (with apologies to Olaf)
15:15:08 <stain> take the red PIL
15:15:12 <Luc> q?
15:15:16 <MacTed> of course... PROV gets 93MM Google results
15:15:17 <paolo> smiles: "L" can stand for smt else than 'language" if we like the acronym
15:15:22 <smiles> ack smiles
15:15:23 <JimMcCusker> q+
15:15:44 <paolo> +q
15:15:48 <JimMcCusker> q-
15:16:11 <Luc> ack pao
15:16:21 <Luc> q?
15:16:45 <stain> perhaps the problem is that we voted for both short and long name at the same time. 
15:17:30 <stain> For instane WSDL is fairly recognizable on the internets - does not mean anything on its own, and pronounciation is something you learn at conferences
15:17:59 <sandro> q+
15:18:16 <Luc> ack san
15:18:35 <tlebo> let's hire some marketers :-)
15:18:37 <paolo> JimMcCusker  would have voted for PROV
15:19:02 <sandro> sandro: suggests doing +/- on each one.
15:19:20 <MacTed> ProvVoc - 21 results on Google.  not an acronym.
15:19:21 <MacTed> :-)
15:19:30 <MacTed> pronounced "provoke"
15:19:40 <Luc> q?
15:19:53 <sandro> i'm sure we'll get to the top of google with PIF or PROV, but not PAST, maybe not PIL.
15:19:58 <paolo> Luc: how do we vote
15:20:11 <Luc> q?
15:20:17 <paolo> sandro: vote for/against until we get somewhere -- min the negatives
15:20:32 <Luc> Votes for PIL
15:20:36 <sandro> (and PIV has some real strong negatives.)
15:20:42 <JimMcCusker> -1
15:20:43 <tlebo> -1
15:20:45 <Lena> -1
15:20:46 <Edoardo> -1
15:20:46 <Curt> -1
15:20:47 <MacTed> -1
15:20:47 <dcorsar> -1
15:20:48 <Yogesh> -1
15:20:48 <stain> 0
15:20:49 <smiles> +1
15:20:49 <sandro> 0
15:20:53 <paolo> 0
15:20:53 <jorn> 0
15:20:56 <zednik> -1
15:21:01 <YolandaGil> 0
15:21:02 <paolo> satya: -1
15:21:15 <Luc> Votes for PAST
15:21:21 <paolo> +1
15:21:21 <sandro> -1 (google problems)
15:21:22 <tlebo> +1
15:21:22 <YolandaGil> -1
15:21:22 <smiles> 0
15:21:23 <Curt> +1
15:21:23 <Yogesh> -1
15:21:23 <stain> +1
15:21:25 <JimMcCusker> 0
15:21:26 <zednik> 0
15:21:27 <Edoardo> 0
15:21:28 <jcheney> -1 (word)
15:21:28 <Lena> +1
15:21:30 <dcorsar> 0
15:21:31 <MacTed> -1
15:21:33 <jorn> -1
15:21:48 <Luc> Votes for PIF
15:21:51 <JimMcCusker> -1
15:21:53 <Yogesh> +1
15:21:53 <YolandaGil> +1
15:21:54 <smiles> +1
15:21:54 <stain> 0
15:21:55 <tlebo> +1
15:21:56 <zednik> -1
15:21:58 <dcorsar> +1
15:21:59 <paolo> satya: +1
15:22:00 <Curt> 0
15:22:01 <Lena> +1
15:22:01 <sandro> 0
15:22:01 <Edoardo> +1
15:22:02 <jorn> 0
15:22:06 <MacTed> 0
15:22:07 <paolo> 0
15:22:09 <jcheney> 0
15:22:22 <Luc> Votes for PROV
15:22:25 <JimMcCusker> +1
15:22:26 <sandro> +1
15:22:26 <jorn> +1
15:22:27 <stain> +1
15:22:27 <Vinh> +1
15:22:27 <zednik> +1
15:22:27 <Curt> +1
15:22:28 <smiles> -1
15:22:31 <Lena> +1
15:22:32 <Yogesh> 0
15:22:33 <jcheney> 0
15:22:35 <MacTed> +1
15:22:36 <dcorsar> +1
15:22:36 <Zakim> + +1.509.554.aahh
15:22:36 <YolandaGil> +1
15:22:38 <paolo> +1
15:22:39 <tlebo> +1
15:22:51 <stain> wow
15:23:11 <paolo> Luc: strong support for PROV
15:23:15 <Luc> PROVIDENCE
15:23:33 <paolo> Luc: concern: mixup with providence...
15:23:37 <Luc> q?
15:23:39 <jorn> maybe we should call it PROV IL?
15:23:50 <stain> I don't get the providence mixup
15:23:51 <YolandaGil> I don't understand what is the problem with providence
15:24:03 <stain> would that not be the problem with any of the P* names?
15:24:18 <JimMcCusker> Yeah, I use that as a joke when I give provenance talks...
15:24:29 <YolandaGil> I don't see a problem, Luc!
15:24:49 <MacTed> jorn - IL stands for?
15:25:03 <jorn> Interchange Language :)
15:25:04 <paolo> Luc: vote on PROV alone to see if there any negs
15:25:34 <stain> what kind of trademark does have for 'prov' ? 
15:25:36 <paolo> Luc: how would this name be used in documents?
15:25:43 <paolo> +q
15:25:49 <JimMcCusker> foobar a prov\:Entity
15:26:10 <jorn> PROV IDM
15:26:14 <tlebo> Provenance Description and Interchange Framework?
15:26:20 <stain> +1 paolo
15:26:33 <sandro> "The Prov Data Model"
15:26:38 <sandro> "The Prov Data Model for Provenance Interchange"
15:26:43 <Luc> q?
15:26:44 <paolo> q-
15:27:00 <Zakim> -jorn
15:27:16 <paolo> Luc: Simon still has a formal objection?
15:27:18 <Zakim> +??P19
15:27:37 <Zakim> + +1.915.747.aaii
15:27:43 <jorn> Zakim: ??p19 is me
15:27:45 <Paulo> Paulo has joined #prov
15:27:48 <stain> "Provenance Rules On VVeb" 
15:27:51 <paolo> smiles: mostly on aesthetic grounds...  
15:27:57 <jorn> Zakim, ??p19 is me
15:27:57 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:28:06 <paolo> smiles: wouldn't formally object though
15:28:29 <jorn> +1
15:28:32 <JimMcCusker> +1
15:28:34 <stain> +1
15:28:34 <MacTed> +1
15:28:35 <smiles> +1
15:28:36 <paolo> action to emails the WG announcing that PROV is the proposed name
15:28:36 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to
15:28:41 <zednik> +1
15:29:05 <Luc> TOPIC: Primer Document  
<Luc> Summary: Simon presented his proposal for a primer. It was indicated that an example of provenance of something not web-specific would be desirable (though not necessarily in the first version of the primer). Work on the primer will start immediately. It was acknowledged that this document should be released when ready, even if it is released after other FPWDs. 
15:29:15 <Luc>
15:29:23 <stain> should not be in conflict - "Education and entertainment"
15:29:29 <stain> (how exams are entertainment is beyond me)
15:29:53 <paolo> smiles: primer should be released alongside the model doc
15:30:04 <paolo> smiles: would generate better feedback to us
15:30:31 <paolo> smiles: as the model is still evolving, the primer would not be complete at the time of release
15:30:54 <Zakim> +??P13
15:31:10 <Luc> q?
15:31:17 <paolo> smiles: would be good to have a "webby" example, doc-based like the jou example, to align well with the W3C setting where the doc belongs
15:31:22 <MacTed> q+
15:31:27 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:31:27 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
15:32:02 <paolo> ted: a "webby" example is good, but important also to have a completely non-webby example. Science domains, or others
15:32:16 <Luc> q?
15:32:28 <Luc> ack mac
15:32:33 <stain> smiles' proposal sounds reasonable, agree to not restrict to data journalism example
15:32:39 <paolo> smiles: ok, but the initial release needs to appeal to people who will provide early feedback
15:32:39 <zednik> q+
15:33:05 <paolo> ted: agree, but that puts people in the web mindset and that may form a bias
15:33:31 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:33:32 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:33:39 <Zakim> + +1.216.368.aajj
15:33:42 <Zakim> - +1.706.461.aagg
15:33:52 <zednik> q-
15:33:53 <Luc> q?
15:34:03 <ericstephan> ericstephan has joined #prov
15:34:04 <paolo> zednik: agree with Ted: danger to be perceived as provenance /of/ the web rather than /on/ the web
15:34:13 <stain> +1 ted - some simple science (high school chemistry experiment?) example should be good
15:34:20 <satya> zakim, +1.216.368.aajj is me
15:34:20 <Zakim> +satya; got it
15:34:52 <zednik> how about a simple scenario of the provenance of a physical object?  example from library community?
15:34:53 <paolo> Luc: primer not starte yet. too ambitious to release by the end of month? some authors are busy on all other docs at the same time
15:35:40 <satya> q+
15:35:40 <paolo> smiles: yes, timing is tight. delayed release is a plausible option
15:35:41 <Zakim> + +1.832.386.aakk
15:36:04 <paolo> Luc @Sandro: can docs be released without primer?
15:36:34 <paolo> sandro: early drafts of model docs without primer is fine if for limited time
15:36:42 <paolo> q+
15:36:43 <stain> what if we do some third party blog posts or something?
15:36:50 <Luc> q?
15:36:57 <ericP> ericP has joined #prov
15:37:01 <Luc> ack sat
15:37:08 <Zakim> - +1.509.554.aahh
15:38:19 <stain> paolo: that people who would be writing the primer can instead focus on filling in a complete example and challenge our model
15:38:33 <paolo> Luc: would be nice to see the ASN in use in the example
15:39:17 <paolo> smiles: primer needs to be understandeable -- ASN may possibly make it harder?
15:39:32 <Zakim> + +1.509.554.aall
15:39:58 <paolo> smiles: there prior comments on going bottom up with small examples rather than a large big one example from the start
15:40:30 <paolo> q+
15:40:41 <Luc> ack pao
15:41:57 <stain> I like the flow of how instance how starts very simple
15:41:59 <Lena> +1
15:42:01 <YolandaGil> I am interested Luc
15:42:05 <stain> I would not mind joining
15:42:09 <satya> after the release of the model document?
15:42:15 <paolo> Luc: who would contribute to the primer?
15:42:20 <tlebo> +1
15:42:24 <satya> +1
15:42:25 <paolo> Paolo after model / ontology doc
15:42:25 <MacTed> +1 with limited available time
15:42:25 <zednik> I am willing to contribute (+1)
15:42:38 <stain> should not have more than say 3 authors
15:42:44 <ericstephan> +1 after the connection informal report
15:42:45 <Zakim> -jorn
15:42:57 <Zakim> +??P19
15:43:03 <jorn> zakim, ??p19 is me
15:43:03 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
15:43:03 <paolo> @stian: few editors, but no hard limit on authors...?
15:43:13 <stain> agree
15:43:26 <paolo> smiles: will put a structure up on the wiki then contact interested people
15:43:40 <tlebo> The diagrams at are very nice
15:43:52 <Luc> topic: First Public Working Drafts  
<luc> Summary: it is intended to have versions of the conceptual model document and formal model document, ready for internal review around 2011-09-17. Proposed FPWDs are intended to be circulated for the 2011-09-29 teleconference. The WG will then have to approve their release as FPWDs. The editors of the PAQ document were not present. Is this document also going for the same timetable? 
15:44:23 <paolo> Luc @sandro: formal reqs prior to releasing docs as drafts:?
15:45:02 <paolo> sandro: there's a page for that, but:  need to get a persistent URL from W3C
15:45:04 <satya> @Tim: agree, can we try to use similar diagram format for the formal model draft?
15:45:38 <paolo> sandro: doc needs to be validated for format / HTML -- respec should make that easy
15:45:44 <paolo> luc: any editorial control?
15:45:45 <stain> I raised the question on namespace as well for the ontology - do we know what would make sense for now?
15:46:35 <paolo> sandro: status of specs: a very briefly explanation of what the draft is about
15:46:58 <tlebo> @satya: very much so. I'll use it to base the diagrams I am doing for model documetn
15:47:07 <paolo> Sandro: need a group resolution to publish, and need to point to it when requesting release
15:48:13 <sandro> Here's the check list for publication:
15:49:31 <Lena> +q
15:50:03 <paolo> Paolo: release timetable as agreed: Sept 16th then Sept 29 for approval
15:50:24 <paolo> satya: requesting sept 19th, then feedback cycle, then Sept 29th for approval
15:50:35 <paolo> q+
15:50:41 <Luc> ack len
15:51:09 <paolo> Lena: should we include security elements (authz) in the model/ontology?
15:51:28 <paolo> Lena: scope of model should be clear, i.e., authz out of scope
15:51:34 <smiles> q+
15:51:47 <tlebo> lena: conneg and authorization; survey results show people confuse provenance and authorization
15:51:54 <Luc> ack pao
15:53:40 <Luc> ack sm
15:54:43 <paolo> smiles @lena: the authz issue is on whether we trust what happened in the past, may not be out of scope after all
15:54:54 <satya> q+
15:55:17 <paolo> luc: first working draft offers a first look at our work, so this can be raised as a missing element that should be added
15:55:31 <Luc> ack satya
15:55:36 <paolo> satya: important not to go into the derivation part of provenance in this group
15:55:55 <Luc> Topic: Formal Model document  
<luc> Summary: Satya updated the group about progress on the ontology. Stian used the ontology to generate provenance from Taverna. He has raised an number of issues to be discussed by the authors.  The notion of entity was briefly discussed.  Discussions are to continue during the week.
15:56:49 <paolo> satya: updates will be made this week, only a few people attended previous meeting.
15:56:56 <tlebo> q+
15:57:06 <paolo> satya: entailments and extension mechanisms will be addressed next
15:57:27 <tlebo> (should Stian work from the main branch in mercuruial?)
15:57:34 <paolo> satya: soliciting feedback at this stage, as Stian provided.
15:57:37 <Luc> ack tl
15:57:52 <paolo> satya: need to get the RDF encoding for the file crime scenario right as it is normative
15:58:25 <Zakim> -jorn
15:58:30 <stain> I just asked was if I should edit directly on the head branch or a sepearate feature branch
15:58:31 <satya>
15:59:06 <paolo> q+
15:59:24 <Luc> ack paol
15:59:38 <satya> Monday US 12pm ET
16:00:05 <tlebo> @stain, I think that is a weak "yes", join the head branch. 
16:00:24 <paolo> satya: that was the time for the regular ontology call (skype)
16:00:59 <Zakim> +??P45
16:01:10 <paolo> satya: no complete agreement on how to express entities.
16:01:45 <Zakim> -??P10
16:01:50 <paolo> what is the id criteria to distinguish entities?  (ref to the cars example)
16:03:17 <paolo> satya: what are the distinguishing attributes for different entities that refer to the same characterized thing
16:03:45 <Zakim> -[ISI]
16:04:19 <paolo> luc: there may be different perspectives about the "same car". each of them is asserted as an entity
16:04:38 <MacTed> +1
16:05:30 <paolo> paolo @satya: long ago the URI used to be called a "surrogate key"...
16:05:39 <Zakim> - +1.915.747.aaii
16:05:57 <Zakim> - +1.832.386.aakk
16:06:10 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
16:06:10 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
16:06:12 <MacTed> q+
16:07:01 <Zakim> -Yogesh
16:07:10 <JimMcCusker> q+
16:07:25 <Zakim> + +1.518.633.aamm
16:09:13 <Luc> ack mac
16:09:23 <Luc> ack jim
16:09:56 <stain> satya, I'll push my changes to the OWL file if that's OK. I've fixed the verbs and labels.
16:10:06 <stain> not touched the HTML but can do a search replace
16:10:10 <Zakim> -??P45
16:10:12 <satya> @Stian, thanks!
16:10:40 <Luc> q?
16:11:15 <stain> satya: do you agree on making hadParticipant super-property of used and wasControlledBy ? 
16:11:32 <paolo> luc @smiles:  would the car example be suitable for the primar?
16:12:02 <paolo> smiles: potentially yes, to explain what we mean by entity etc, identifying attributes, etc.
16:12:06 <Luc> q?
16:12:06 <stain> satya: that does not cover the case of compliments - some OWL expert can figure that out
16:12:09 <satya> @Stian: I had asserted that earlier, but some members want further discussion about it - so they are not related
16:12:21 <Zakim> -satya
16:12:22 <Zakim> -??P50
16:12:22 <Zakim> -paolo
16:12:24 <Zakim> - +1.509.554.aall
16:12:24 <Zakim> -Sandro
16:12:25 <Zakim> -??P9
16:12:25 <Zakim> -tlebo
16:12:26 <Zakim> -MacTed
16:12:30 <Zakim> -Curt
16:12:32 <Zakim> -Vinh
16:12:34 <Luc> paolo, i will do the necessary incantation here
16:12:39 <paolo> ok thanks
16:12:41 <stain> @Satya - ok, will leave that out
16:12:41 <Zakim> -Luc
16:12:42 <stain> bye
16:12:44 <Luc> thanks for scribing
16:12:46 <Zakim> - +1.518.633.aamm
16:12:47 <Zakim> -jcheney
16:12:58 <ericstephan> bye
16:12:58 <Zakim> -stain
16:13:02 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public
16:13:11 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:13:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate Luc
16:13:12 <ericstephan> ericstephan has left #prov
16:13:19 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon
16:13:19 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:13:19 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been paolo, Curt, Luc, +1.540.449.aabb, Yogesh, stain, +1.315.723.aadd, Vinh, tlebo, MacTed, [ISI], Sandro, jcheney, +1.518.633.aaff,
16:13:20 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:13:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:13:21 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:13:21 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
16:13:22 <Zakim> ... +1.706.461.aagg, jorn, +1.509.554.aahh, +1.915.747.aaii, satya, +1.832.386.aakk, +1.509.554.aall, +1.518.633.aamm