Chatlog 2012-03-29

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.

14:51:51 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:51:51 <RRSAgent> logging to
14:51:53 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:51:53 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:51:55 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
14:51:55 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:51:56 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:51:56 <trackbot> Date: 29 March 2012
14:51:59 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
14:51:59 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
14:52:17 <pgroth> Agenda:
14:52:29 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
14:52:47 <pgroth> Scribe: Daniel Garijo
14:52:58 <pgroth> Regrets: Simon Miles
14:53:05 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
14:53:39 <jun> jun has joined #prov
14:54:39 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
14:54:46 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:54:48 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
14:55:45 <Zakim> +??P15
14:55:57 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P15 is me
14:55:57 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
14:56:08 <dgarijo> scribe: dgarijo
14:56:27 <Zakim> + +329331aaaa
14:56:58 <Zakim> +Luc
14:57:29 <Tom_De_Nies> Zakim, +329331aaaa is me
14:57:29 <Zakim> +Tom_De_Nies; got it
14:59:45 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
14:59:59 <Curt> Curt has joined #prov
15:00:01 <Zakim> +tlebo
15:00:06 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
15:00:27 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
15:01:18 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has joined #prov
15:01:31 <Tom_De_Nies> Zakim, Tom_De_Nies is with SamCoppens
15:01:47 <Zakim> sorry, Tom_De_Nies, I do not recognize a party named 'SamCoppens'
15:01:53 <Zakim> +??P50
15:01:56 <Zakim> +??P43
15:01:56 <jcheney> Zakim, ??P50 is me
15:02:02 <jun> zakim, ??P43 is me
15:02:20 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
15:02:29 <Zakim> +jun; got it
15:02:38 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
15:02:56 <Paolo> zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me
15:03:08 <Zakim> +??P49
15:03:10 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it
15:03:12 <pgroth> q?
15:03:19 <pgroth> Zakim, who is on the call?
15:03:19 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller], dgarijo, Tom_De_Nies, Luc, tlebo, Curt_Tilmes, jcheney, jun, Paolo, ??P49
15:03:28 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
15:03:30 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
15:03:49 <dgarijo> yes
15:03:58 <StephenCresswell> StephenCresswell has joined #prov
<pgroth> Topic: Admin 
<pgroth> Summary: General issues. Introduced Tom De Nies as a new working group member from IBBT.
15:04:07 <pgroth> Minutes last telco:
15:04:15 <dgarijo> +1
15:04:21 <Curt> +1
15:04:23 <Tom_De_Nies> +1
15:04:24 <tlebo> +1
15:04:28 <jcheney> +1
15:04:30 <GK1> GK1 has joined #prov
15:04:33 <Paolo> +1
15:05:01 <Zakim> +??P53
15:05:06 <pgroth> Approved Minutes of the March 22 2012 Telecon
15:05:15 <GK> GK has joined #prov
15:05:24 <dgarijo> pgroth: open actions
15:05:32 <dgarijo> ... there is still 1 open, on me
15:05:48 <dgarijo> ... I think the action is done (new version of the paq)
15:05:58 <dgarijo> ... next topic: reminder about the scribes
15:06:27 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
15:06:28 <dgarijo> ... welcome to Tom De Nies
15:06:35 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:06:35 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:06:37 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:06:37 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:06:43 <dgarijo> tom: colleague of SamCoppens
15:07:05 <dgarijo> ... work in enrichment of  news and provenance assessment of news. Very happy to be here
15:07:12 <pgroth> q?
15:07:19 <dgarijo> paul: questions?
15:07:23 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-DM
<pgroth> Summary: A status update on the dm was given. Both prov-dm and prov-n are pretty much ready to go for review on monday. prov-dm-constraints will be worked on this weekend. Luc has set-up issue numbers that general comments (grammer, etc) on these documents should be tagged with. The issue numbers can be found in the agenda. 
15:07:35 <Zakim> +??P16
15:07:36 <dgarijo> pgroth: stauts update?
15:07:39 <Luc>
15:08:11 <GK> Zakim, ??P16 is me
15:08:11 <Zakim> +GK; got it
15:08:20 <MacTed> it would be VERY helpful if links to relevant docs can always be included in (added to) the Agenda
15:08:22 <dgarijo> luc:We've been working quite hard on the model. The documents are ready today (deadline is monday). In the wikipage there is a to do list and most of the items are covered.
15:08:31 <Paolo> "align collection productions [PM]"  done, actually
15:08:40 <dgarijo> ... invalidation will not be covered. It will be written and merged separately.
15:08:49 <Zakim> +??P10
15:08:55 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov
15:09:03 <dgarijo> ... for provn we've done checks for everything except collections
15:09:09 <Paolo> @Luc collections productions done this morning
15:09:14 <sandro> sorry, previous meeting ran late.
15:09:16 <dgarijo> ... constraints part has not been started.
15:09:24 <Zakim> +sandro
15:09:33 <dgarijo> ... will try to have it for monday, although we are not sure.
15:09:38 <pgroth> q?
15:09:43 <dgarijo> pgroth: questions?
15:09:45 <tlebo> q+
15:09:54 <pgroth> ack tlebo
15:10:00 <Paolo> :collection (paolo) -- fix the constraints to allow for multiple contained() assertions" --> please see my mail this morning re: this
15:10:11 <dgarijo> tlebo: curious about the "finished today but still something to do for monday"
15:10:16 <Paolo> (have to go, sorry in between trains)
15:10:25 <Zakim> -Paolo
15:10:27 <dgarijo> luc: part 2 is the one we are going to start tomorrow.
15:10:33 <pgroth> q?
15:10:53 <Tom_De_Nies> Zakim, mute me
15:10:53 <Zakim> Tom_De_Nies should now be muted
15:10:56 <tlebo> (DM and N are finished today, CONSTRAINTS is for Monday.)
15:11:05 <dgarijo> luc: we have identified a number of questions for reviewers:
15:11:24 <dgarijo> ... can the doc be released as a fwd?
15:11:29 <dgarijo> ... blockers?
15:12:16 <dgarijo> ... reviewers with pending issues please confirm if they can be clsoed
15:12:25 <dgarijo> s/clsoed/closed
15:12:37 <Zakim> -??P53
15:12:51 <dgarijo> ... typos gramatical issues can be submitted in issues 331, 332 and 333
15:12:56 <pgroth> q?
15:13:09 <pgroth> q?
15:13:12 <Zakim> +??P22
15:13:39 <dgarijo> paul: reviewers for provd and provn can start reviewing now?
15:13:44 <stainPhone> stainPhone has joined #prov
15:14:00 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
15:14:09 <dgarijo> luc: they could. But there are a few tweaks we'll have to do once we reach the constraints on part to. Up to the reviewers.
15:14:15 <tlebo> Monday is fine :-)
15:14:17 <Zakim> -??P22
15:14:30 <Paolo> zakim, ??P22 is me
15:14:31 <Zakim> I already had ??P22 as ??P22, Paolo
15:14:41 <dgarijo> pgroth: reviewers were: Tim, khalid, curt, jun and...
15:15:14 <dgarijo> luc: if you are in agreement the we can send a notification on monday
15:15:33 <GK> I'm not seeing the document URIs at the page posted previuously
15:15:33 <Curt> I can't really do it until next week anyway
15:15:34 <dgarijo> pgroth: ok, so wait till monday to begin the review.
15:15:36 <pgroth> q?
15:15:54 <tlebo>
15:15:55 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-O
<pgroth> Summary: PROV-O will be ready to go by monday and be made available in mecurial repository. In addition to the current set of reviewers, MacTed and Sam agreed to try to review as well.
15:16:12 <pgroth> pgroth has left #prov
15:16:17 <dgarijo> tlebo: different parts of the team working on different parts of the doc.
15:16:19 <pgroth> pgroth has joined #prov
15:16:34 <dgarijo> ... some questions to the reviewers are on the link posted in the irc
15:16:45 <dgarijo> ... will be ready for review by monday
15:17:01 <Zakim> +??P22
15:17:06 <Luc> where is the prov-o.html document?
15:17:10 <Zakim> +??P24
15:17:15 <dgarijo> tlebo: the organization scheme has changed
15:17:23 <dgarijo> @Luc: in aquarius :(
15:17:34 <Luc> thanks
15:18:09 <pgroth> q?
15:18:12 <dgarijo> tlebo: is it enough to understand everything, are the cross references useful?
15:18:36 <dgarijo> tlebo: please start to be familiar with the ontology.
15:18:43 <dgarijo> ... should we add more examples.
15:19:13 <dgarijo> pgroth: would you move this to the w3c site (what people are supposed to review).
15:19:19 <pgroth> q?
15:19:29 <dgarijo> tlebo: yes, it will be a save as in mercurial
15:19:53 <dgarijo> pgroth: could anybody else volunteer to review?
15:20:11 <SamCoppens> I will review it also
15:20:18 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:20:18 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
15:20:20 <GK> (I may, but reluctant to over-commit right now)
15:20:34 <dgarijo> luc: macTed?
15:20:43 <dgarijo> macTed: I'll try to have a look
15:20:49 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:20:49 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:20:50 <Luc> @paul, could you remind us the timing for review
15:21:05 <dgarijo> paul: so sam an macTed as new reviewers.
15:21:28 <pgroth> april 9th
15:21:35 <dgarijo> pgroth: monday is the release, April 9th is the due date for the reviews.
15:21:38 <Zakim> -??P22
15:21:49 <pgroth> q?
15:22:09 <GK> q+
15:22:17 <dgarijo> ... will try to reach consensus on 12 or 19th depending on the feedback. On monday we'll send an email to remember everyone
15:22:17 <pgroth> ack GK
15:22:34 <Luc> they will be emailed on Monday
15:22:38 <dgarijo> GK: Can I ask for confirmation of the URIs of the docs to be reviewed.
15:22:54 <dgarijo> pgroth: will send them on monday, when they are ready to be released.
15:22:59 <pgroth> q?
15:23:05 <pgroth> Topic: Prov-Primer
<pgroth> Summary: The primer will be ready to release on Monday. It was agreed that collections would be postponed until the next working draft of the primer. 
15:23:35 <dgarijo> pgroth: simon couldn't be here, but sent an update: Comments by Stian and Paolo are addrssed.
15:23:45 <Zakim> -??P24
15:23:47 <dgarijo> ... he will have the rest by monday (examples)
15:23:57 <dgarijo> ... he might be postponing collections.
15:24:14 <Zakim> +??P22
15:24:43 <pgroth> q?
15:24:48 <dgarijo> ... questions for the reviewers: The primer doesn't talk that mucho about qualified involvement. What is the opinion of the reviewers about that? Can that be left for a later draft?
15:24:51 <Luc> q+
15:24:53 <dgarijo> ... blocking issues?
15:24:56 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:25:21 <dgarijo> luc: how do we talk about roles withouth qE?
15:25:34 <dgarijo> s/qE/qI
15:25:46 <Luc> yes
15:25:50 <stainPhone> time can be mentioned wirh location and custom attributes
15:25:53 <pgroth> q?
15:26:11 <stainPhone> +1
15:26:12 <dgarijo> paul: that might be the question he's asking to the reviewers.
15:26:14 <dgarijo> +1
15:26:37 <dgarijo> ... so sounds reasonable to delay the discussion about collections in the primer.
15:27:05 <dgarijo> luc: agrees.
15:27:17 <dgarijo> pgroth: I will send an email to Simon.
15:27:19 <pgroth> q?
15:27:26 <pgroth> Topic: PAQ
<pgroth> Summary: Graham and Paul gave a status update on the PAQ. They think they have addressed most issues. They plan to release something for review by next week if all goes well. There was a discussion around what to use to substitute for entity-uri.  
15:27:29 <stainPhone> and I am Stephan are doing the prov-o mapping of collections. 
15:27:40 <pgroth> sure
15:28:02 <dgarijo> GK: I made a past to the doc simplifying sections.
15:28:20 <dgarijo> ... still to discuss some of the changes with paul.
15:28:26 <pgroth> updated version is here:
15:28:44 <dgarijo> ... there are still issues to resolve in the doc.
15:29:31 <dgarijo> ... unify the namespace. Added an appendix. Issues like 70, 211 have been addressed. 233, 76 too.
15:30:16 <dgarijo> ... should we be changing the prov:entity uri with sime other thing?
15:30:32 <dgarijo> paul: we need to follow up some of these issues.
15:30:39 <MacTed> Zakim, who's noisy?
15:30:50 <Zakim> MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: GK (50%)
15:30:59 <dgarijo> ... how to use sparql and linked data.
15:31:05 <MacTed> mute would be appreciated on clacky keyboard 
15:31:05 <dgarijo> ... with prov.
15:31:15 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
15:31:36 <dgarijo> ... people wanted to retrieve the prov of entities and activities
15:31:37 <dgarijo> Zakim, mute GK
15:31:37 <Zakim> GK should now be muted
15:31:51 <dgarijo> @graham, sorry, I couldn't hear :(
15:31:56 <Zakim> +??P0
15:32:03 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:32:03 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
15:32:09 <pgroth> q?
15:32:11 <Paolo> akim, ??P0 is me
15:32:11 <MacTed> q+
15:32:18 <dgarijo> paul: what do the gorup thinks about that?
15:32:21 <Zakim> -GK
15:32:21 <stainPhone> provElement or similar?
15:32:24 <Paolo> zakim, ??P0 is me
15:32:24 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it
15:32:41 <Zakim> +??P2
15:32:43 <dgarijo> MacTed: distinction between entity and activity is artificial.
15:32:47 <GK> zakim, ??p2 is me
15:32:47 <Zakim> +GK; got it
15:33:01 <dgarijo> ... we're building ourselves problems.
15:33:02 <Tom_De_Nies> Tom_De_Nies has joined #prov
15:33:20 <Luc> q+
15:33:29 <pgroth> ack MacTed 
15:33:32 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:34:12 <dgarijo> luc: paul mentioned activities and entities. There are a lot of terms with ids (nearly all of them). I don't think it is artificial
15:34:15 <pgroth> q?
15:35:19 <dgarijo> MacTed: however it is a redefined type. Entitiy has a common usage in the world, and we are using it in a total different way. The struggle to keep that in a different way is the thing that I don't like
15:35:20 <pgroth> q?
15:35:27 <Luc> but this would be teh case for any word we use, wouldn't it?
15:35:28 <pgroth> q?
15:35:47 <GK> q+ to ask if any alternative terms have been suggested?
15:36:33 <Curt> the concept represented by our term entity is inherently complex
15:36:33 <dgarijo> pgroth: for the paq we need a term that represents everything with an identity in the model. Maybe provenance element, or ideantifiable.
15:36:42 <stainPhone> "about" ? ;)
15:36:43 <GK> Ah...
15:37:16 <dgarijo> MacTed: it continues to be confusing for us all.
15:37:22 <pgroth> q?
15:37:25 <pgroth> ack GK
15:37:25 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask if any alternative terms have been suggested?
15:37:43 <pgroth> q?
15:37:48 <dgarijo> GK: has an alternative name been suggested?
15:38:04 <dgarijo> pgroth: maybe we should go back to the paq itself
15:38:28 <dgarijo> ... we will release it next week for people to look at it
15:38:28 <pgroth> q?
15:38:32 <Luc> @GK: I agree that one can always propose better names, but for now, we don't have any other suggestion
15:38:41 <pgroth> q?
15:38:46 <Luc> q+
15:38:47 <GK> @Luc hence my Q :)
15:39:07 <dgarijo> luc: what is your timetable. Synchronized release?
15:39:14 <dgarijo> pgroth: I don't think so.
15:39:52 <Luc> we could release it shortly afterwads
15:39:53 <dgarijo> ... it is almost there, but almost everyone is commmitted to reviewing something. And also, it is somehow separate. 
15:40:04 <GK> Not so much "separate" as "orthogonal" ?
15:40:22 <dgarijo> ... next week we'll have something when people have time to review
15:40:55 <dgarijo> GK: I may be travelling next week. Limited internet connection access.
15:41:23 <pgroth> Topic: Namespace Unification
<pgroth> Summary: Paul reported on an email conversation with Jeni Tennison confirming that using a url with a hash was ok for xml. The group voted to use a common namespace . Paul agreed to create an html index for this namespace and consult Ivan about having content negotiation to the owl file.
15:41:40 <pgroth>
15:41:43 <dgarijo> pgroth: last week we talked about the ns unification. The use of the hash
15:42:02 <dgarijo> ... is this use violated in rdf/xml serializations?
15:42:20 <dgarijo> ... sandro contacted the xml working group
15:42:24 <pgroth> q?
15:42:27 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:42:50 <dgarijo> .... they encouraged us to have a common namespace
15:42:59 <dgarijo> ... the one proposed is fine with xml
15:43:13 <dgarijo> ... it doesn't really matter what you have.
15:43:31 <GK> I'm happy with that resolution.
15:43:44 <pgroth> Propose that we use as the common namespace for all prov specs
15:43:52 <GK> +1
15:43:52 <dgarijo> +1
15:43:54 <Curt> +1
15:43:55 <tlebo> +1
15:43:58 <Zakim> -??P22
15:44:00 <jcheney> +1
15:44:04 <sandro> +1
15:44:06 <zednik> +1
15:44:07 <SamCoppens> +1
15:44:09 <StephenCresswell> +1
15:44:12 <jun> +1
15:44:12 <MacTed> +0
15:44:26 <Tom_De_Nies> +1
15:44:35 <pgroth> Accepted: use as the common namespace for all prov specs
15:44:42 <pgroth> Close ISSUE-224
15:44:45 <dgarijo> pgroth: we can close issue 224
15:45:27 <dgarijo> ... provide an html index to link all the docs toghether.
15:45:45 <dgarijo> ... are there volunteers for this?
15:45:47 <pgroth> q?
15:45:59 <pgroth> q?
15:46:26 <dgarijo> ... I'll go ahead and start doing it after monday
15:46:52 <dgarijo> ... I'll need some help
15:46:55 <pgroth> q?
15:47:10 <Luc> q+
15:47:17 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:47:32 <dgarijo> luc: regarding collections: 3 relations are being proposed.
15:47:46 <pgroth> Topic: Collections
<pgroth> Summary: Luc raised the problem of naming relations for collections. There was limited comment.
15:48:03 <dgarijo> ... do we want to have the same form (in the past) as the o ther properties?
15:48:17 <pgroth> q?
15:48:21 <dgarijo> it would be nice to have some input
15:48:32 <GK> What's the anticip[ated context of use?
15:49:06 <Paolo> q+
15:49:14 <pgroth> ack Paolo 
15:49:46 <dgarijo> paolo: any time you want to track the prov of the collection.
15:49:51 <jun> do we have a link to the proposal?
15:50:11 <GK> SO, if it's for tracking provenance of collections as well as members, I think using the same form is appropriate.
15:50:50 <dgarijo> ... for workflows is more important (to know if an element of the collection belonged to an execution, etc)
15:50:55 <pgroth> q?
<pgroth> Topic: Substitute for entity-URI in PAQ
<pgroth> Summary: The group returned to the conversation around what to use instead of entity-uri in the PAQ. In order to support, the retrieval of provenance for other provenance constructs (e.g. activity). Luc suggested to use the term "resource". Graham and Paul agreed that this is maybe a good option and to investigate more.
15:51:47 <dgarijo> paul: I want to come back about the name in the PAQ for entity URI
15:52:29 <pgroth> q?
15:52:30 <Luc> q+
15:52:31 <dgarijo> ... any suggestions would be helpful
15:52:42 <dgarijo> luc: why not resource?
15:53:00 <dgarijo> - Provenance element? provenance resource?
15:53:30 <dgarijo> gk: It was because we wanted to have a way of talking about the views.
15:54:02 <dgarijo> paul: the scruffyness of the dm allows us to refer to resource.
15:54:30 <dgarijo> gk: I'm trying to see what are the implications about this. I'm not sure
15:54:48 <dgarijo> ... I would have to check the rest of the document. Maybe works.
15:54:58 <dgarijo> luc: It is a reasonable suggestions
15:55:50 <dgarijo> pgroth: the distinction between entity/process is more a dm problem.
15:56:12 <Luc> q+
15:56:17 <dgarijo> ... you could raise an issue, MacTed, and propose other names.
15:56:24 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:56:31 <dgarijo> Luc: do you have suggestions for other names?
15:56:59 <Curt> we went through other terms people didn't like.... They don't like entity either, but it was left standing after other terms were eliminated.
15:57:01 <dgarijo> ... that was the best one we came up with. We used to have Bob (and we don't want to go back there).
15:57:09 <pgroth> +1 curt
15:57:21 <dgarijo> ... the only way to move forward is through new proposals
15:57:25 <GK> q+ to say I think I can see a way to revising PAQ 1.2 to remove "entity" and just talk about "resource" without losing the essence of the material
15:57:44 <dgarijo> MacTed: I don't think we are the first people to look at these questions.
15:58:09 <dgarijo> pgroth: the conclusion is: If you have a better name for consideration, feel free to propose it.
15:58:18 <pgroth> ack GK
15:58:18 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think I can see a way to revising PAQ 1.2 to remove "entity" and just talk about "resource" without losing the essence of the material
15:58:46 <dgarijo> GK: we can eliminate the term entity without loosing much in the doc.
15:59:29 <pgroth> q?
15:59:36 <dgarijo> pgroth: good bye everyone
15:59:39 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
15:59:44 <Zakim> -tlebo
15:59:44 <dgarijo> ... and good luck for monday
15:59:47 <Zakim> -pgroth
15:59:49 <Zakim> -jcheney
15:59:52 <Zakim> -Luc
15:59:55 <Zakim> -jun
15:59:57 <Zakim> -GK
16:00:00 <Zakim> -dgarijo
16:00:03 <Zakim> -Paolo
16:00:04 <pgroth> daniel I'll do the minutes
16:00:05 <Zakim> -MacTed
16:00:07 <Zakim> -sandro
16:00:09 <Zakim> -??P10
16:00:09 <dgarijo> ok, thanks!
16:00:12 <dgarijo> bye!
16:00:17 <Zakim> -Tom_De_Nies
16:00:27 <Tom_De_Nies> bye!
16:00:47 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
16:00:53 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:00:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate pgroth
16:00:58 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
16:00:58 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:01:06 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:01:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:01:07 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:01:07 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
16:01:08 <GK> @Paul: would you like me take to a pass at this while it's fresh in my mind (s/entity/resource/)