Chatlog 2012-08-02

See original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

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

14:49:28 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:49:28 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/08/02-prov-irc
14:49:30 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:49:30 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:49:32 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
14:49:32 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:49:33 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:49:33 <trackbot> Date: 02 August 2012
14:49:36 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
14:49:36 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
14:49:52 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.08.02
14:50:30 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
14:50:44 <pgroth> Scribe: Daniel Garijo
14:50:50 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
14:50:56 <pgroth> Regrets: Luc Moreau
14:57:17 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
14:57:24 <Zakim> +??P2
14:57:31 <pgroth> Zakim, ??P2 is me
14:57:31 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
14:58:13 <TomDN> TomDN has joined #prov
14:58:21 <Curt> Curt has joined #prov
14:59:09 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov
14:59:19 <Zakim> +??P8
14:59:56 <hook> hook has joined #prov
14:59:58 <jun> jun has joined #prov
15:00:07 <Zakim> +??P10
15:00:13 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has joined #prov
15:00:18 <Zakim> + +329331aaaa
15:00:18 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
15:00:19 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
15:00:24 <jun> zakim, ??p10 is me
15:00:24 <Zakim> +jun; got it
15:00:34 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aabb
15:00:38 <TomDN> Zakim, +329 is me
15:00:38 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it
15:00:42 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aacc
15:00:47 <Zakim> + +1.315.330.aadd
15:00:50 <TomDN> Zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN
15:00:50 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it
15:00:53 <tlebo> zakim, I am aadd
15:00:53 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
15:01:04 <Zakim> -tlebo
15:01:14 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
15:01:14 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
15:01:15 <Zakim> +Ivan
15:01:33 <Zakim> +??P17
15:01:35 <Zakim> +tlebo
15:01:35 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me
15:01:35 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted
15:01:38 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov
15:01:49 <tlebo> I'll scribe
15:01:55 <pgroth> Topic: Admin
<pgroth> Summary: The group welcomed Ivan as the new W3C staff contact and he introduced himself. 
15:02:01 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-07-26
15:02:01 <tlebo> scribe: tlebo
15:02:10 <pgroth> Minutes of the July 26, 2012 Telecon
15:02:17 <smiles> +1
15:02:18 <TomDN> +1
15:02:18 <Curt> +1
15:02:19 <zednik> +1
15:02:19 <tlebo> proposal: accept minutes
15:02:26 <jun> +1
15:02:27 <hook> +1
15:02:39 <SamCoppens> +1
15:02:41 <tlebo> +1
15:02:45 <stain> +1
15:02:53 <pgroth> accepted: Minutes of the July 26, 2012 Telecon
15:03:19 <tlebo> topic: action items
15:03:38 <tlebo> paul: is still working on his action
15:03:50 <tlebo> ... Ivan is joining the WG as W3C POC
15:04:08 <tlebo> ivan: hi! 
15:04:24 <tlebo> ... sandro will be doing a bit in Aug, but Ivan will be around and back from vacation
15:04:24 <jcheney> jcheney has joined #prov
15:04:36 <tlebo> ... working through all of our documents now.
15:04:52 <Zakim> + +44.131.467.aaee
15:05:00 <tlebo> paul: please sign up for scribes
15:05:03 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
15:05:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, ??P8, jun, TomDN (muted), Curt_Tilmes, +1.818.731.aabb, +44.789.470.aacc, Ivan, tlebo, ??P17, +44.131.467.aaee
15:05:04 <Zakim> TomDN has TomDN, SamCoppens
15:05:08 <Zakim> On IRC I see jcheney, zednik, tlebo, SamCoppens, jun, hook, smiles, Curt, TomDN, Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, ivan, stain, trackbot, sandro
15:05:09 <pgroth> q?
15:05:10 <tlebo> ... aob?
15:05:19 <satya> satya has joined #prov
15:05:29 <tlebo> ivan: get unknowns identified
15:05:42 <jcheney> zakim, aaee is me
15:05:42 <tlebo> paul: who is P8?
15:05:47 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
15:06:03 <smiles> or me
15:06:05 <jun> not me
15:06:14 <smiles> zakim, P8 is probably me
15:06:17 <stain> Zakim, +44.789.470.aacc is me
15:06:21 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
15:06:23 <Zakim> sorry, smiles, I do not understand your question
15:06:24 <stain> he knew me last week!
15:06:25 <Zakim> +stain; got it
15:06:26 <smiles> zakim, ??P8 is probably me
15:06:30 <tlebo> 818 is san fran
15:06:31 <Zakim> +smiles?; got it
15:06:31 <pgroth>  Topic: PROV-Constraints
<pgroth> Summary: Several reviews have been supplied for PROV-Constraints. Stian will have his done this week. James believes that all comments so far can be succesfully addressed. The plan is to deliver a new version early next week for a Last Call vote at the next telecon. Two specific issues were discussed. The group agreed that issue 458 was addressed by leaving out the constraint making wasInfluencedBy irreflexive. The group discussed whether there should be an inference to say that any subtypes of agents were also entities. The group felt that adding this constraint would need more discussion and given the timetable should not be added. 
15:07:03 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
15:07:10 <tlebo> jcheney: read reviews as they came in. They seem to identify things that we can fix easily.
15:07:12 <pgroth> james?
15:07:16 <tlebo> ... not sig technical changes.
15:07:16 <pgroth> i lost my connection..
15:07:35 <Zakim> +??P9
15:07:41 <Zakim> +??P22
15:07:43 <tlebo> q+ to ask what the constraints timeline is
15:07:44 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P9 is me
15:07:45 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
15:07:57 <tlebo> go ahead, James
15:08:02 <dgarijo> is there a scribe? I can scribe.
15:08:08 <tlebo> @dgarijo you take scribe
15:08:11 <Zakim> -pgroth
15:08:11 <tlebo> scribe: dgarijo 
15:08:13 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
15:08:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles?, jun, TomDN (muted), Curt_Tilmes, +1.818.731.aabb, stain, Ivan, tlebo, ??P17, jcheney, Satya_Sahoo, dgarijo, ??P22
15:08:15 <dgarijo> ok
15:08:16 <Zakim> TomDN has TomDN, SamCoppens
15:08:16 <Zakim> On IRC I see dgarijo, satya, jcheney, zednik, tlebo, SamCoppens, jun, hook, smiles, Curt, TomDN, Zakim, RRSAgent, pgroth, MacTed, ivan, stain, trackbot, sandro
15:08:28 <stain> I am almost finished today
15:08:29 <dgarijo> jcheney: waiting for 1 outstanding review from stian
15:08:36 <stain> typing in my evil email..
15:08:37 <tlebo> q?
15:08:44 <ivan> zakim, ??P22 is pgroth 
15:08:44 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
15:09:10 <dgarijo> ... plan is review things early next week in order to be able to have a vote next meeting
15:09:19 <dgarijo> ... and just worry about minor stuff from there
15:09:26 <pgroth> q?
15:09:31 <tlebo> so, we're voting on this next Thus?
15:09:46 <dgarijo> tlebo: are we voting on this next thursday?
15:09:49 <dgarijo> pgroth: yes
15:10:07 <dgarijo> tlebo: ok, I'll look for responses next week.
15:10:19 <dgarijo> tlebo: I'll be looking for those
15:10:25 <pgroth> q?
15:10:32 <dgarijo> pgroth: in my review there were no blockers
15:10:34 <tlebo> @jcheney they're mini blockers :-)
15:10:42 <tlebo> q-
15:10:45 <stain> I think my review has a tiny blocker .. :-/
15:10:48 <stain> but editorial
15:10:48 <dgarijo> pgroth: Issue 458
15:10:49 <ivan> issue-458?
15:10:49 <trackbot> ISSUE-458 -- wasInfluencedBy is not irreflexive -- raised
15:10:49 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/458
15:11:01 <dgarijo> ... is influence reflexive or not
15:11:05 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/458
15:11:24 <pgroth> yes
15:11:27 <tlebo> I was the biggest proponent of irreflexive, and I'm no longer protesting to removing it.
15:11:32 <pgroth> q?
15:11:38 <smiles> I agree with removing the constraint
15:11:40 <dgarijo> jcheney: does anybody objects to removing that constraint?
15:11:40 <tlebo> (so it's all good)
15:11:45 <dgarijo> ... OK, closed
15:12:11 <tlebo> @dgarijo "accepted" is the keyword for a resolution
15:12:24 <dgarijo> @tlebo, thanks.
15:12:31 <pgroth> Agent(ex:Luc,[prov;type='prov:Person'])  Activity(ex:Luc)
15:12:46 <TomDN> +q
15:12:55 <TomDN> zakim, unmute me
15:12:55 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted
15:13:01 <pgroth> q?
15:13:06 <dgarijo> pgroth: the other issue was agent being an activity as well. Should we allow that in the constraints?
15:13:25 <stain> would that imply also Activity(ex:Luc,[prov:type='prov:Person'])
15:13:44 <dgarijo> tom: I haven't followed the email about it, but agent can also be an entity.
15:14:04 <dgarijo> pgroth: if you assert that Luc is an entity, it can't be an activity.
15:14:14 <smiles> q+
15:14:24 <pgroth> ack TomDN 
15:14:35 <dgarijo> jcheney: I'm agnostic. It won't break anything to allow people to say that.
15:14:35 <tlebo> from the hip, I think we shouldn't add this.
15:14:45 <stain> agent(ex:workflowEngine, [prov:type='prov:SoftwareAgent'])   activity(ex:workflowEngine)  would probably make more sense in some cases
15:15:04 <dgarijo> smiles: I agree with what Tom says. If an agent is a person, then we can infer it's a person.
15:15:05 <pgroth> ack smiles 
15:15:32 <dgarijo> pgroth: that will imply that all persons are entities.
15:15:43 <TomDN> it could be an inference, and normalization would always produce agent(Luc, [prov:Person]) -> entity(Luc)
15:16:06 <stain> used(food, ex:Luc)  wasAssociatedWith(ex:cooking, ex:Luc)  wasGeneratedBy(ex:food, ex:cooking)
15:16:22 <dgarijo> pgroth: if we want it, then we could add that inference.
15:16:25 <pgroth> q?
15:16:48 <dgarijo> tlebo: surprised of the proposal. Is it an issue that went through the list
15:16:49 <dgarijo> ?
15:16:52 <stain> yes, should be a proper issue!
15:17:11 <jcheney> q+
15:17:36 <dgarijo> pgroth: we can discuss it on the list, but I was wondering if we could just drop it or discuss it a bit here.
15:17:41 <pgroth> ack jcheney 
15:17:41 <stain> can animals be activities? lifeforms?
15:17:43 <TomDN> machines shouldn't be activities either...
15:18:13 <satya> @TomDN, assuming that machines are "hardware"
15:18:48 <tlebo> why single out Person? Why are Organizations allowed to be Activities?
15:18:48 <stain> a human is in some sense just a system of biological activities working together
15:18:53 <dgarijo> jcheney: we should be removing things as much as possible. 
15:19:22 <Curt> There was a use case of something like a "working group" which is both an agent and an activity (I disagree with that)
15:19:25 <dgarijo> pgroth: even if we don't include something like that I don't know if we can add this after last call.
15:19:33 <dgarijo> pgroth: Ivan, can we do that.
15:19:44 <dgarijo> Ivan: that would be a technical change.
15:19:54 <stain> Curt: but then this all falls back to "are there *any* agents that can be activities?"
15:20:01 <dgarijo> ... but constraints is not in last call.
15:20:03 <stain> @Curt
15:21:12 <dgarijo> pgroth: so I think james is right. This is going to open up a lot of discussion and given our time line, we should not add it yet.
15:21:13 <pgroth> q?
15:21:16 <Curt> +1 pgroth
15:21:23 <smiles> +1
15:21:24 <tlebo> @pgroth that's a good response: add the explicit type Entity
15:21:28 <stain> I think it would not cause any problems to not say something rather than to say something. It does not affect anything else in the constraints if the prov:Person is an activity or not, and PROV-Constraints is not attempting to model the world, just how processes and things are modelled in a sane way
15:21:30 <TomDN> @pgroth: +1, could we add that as a remark?
15:21:48 <dgarijo> ... if anybody wants to assert that persons are not activities, then they can assert it.
15:22:00 <dgarijo> +1 to pgroth.
15:22:20 <dgarijo> jcheney: I will review questions. I don't have anything more specific
15:22:28 <pgroth> Topic: Prox-xml
<pgroth> Summary: Stephan gave an update. All constructs for prov-xml have now be assigned in order to produce examples by Aug 15. Stephan will give an update as to whether more help is required on this task next week as he works through the examples. 
15:23:10 <Curt> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aon9DSj-WtGqdHJocGtPRGp5MTItbEhLX09sN1NxVVE#gid=0
15:23:22 <dgarijo> szednik: We are going to try to have xml examples by august 15th.
15:23:35 <dgarijo> ... hopefully next week.
15:23:41 <dgarijo> pgroth: any additional help?
15:24:04 <dgarijo> szednik: I'll be able to say next week, when I've taken a stab at it
15:24:17 <pgroth> q?
15:24:31 <Curt> (anyone who wants the doc, just request it through google docs and stephan will approve)
15:24:35 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-DC
<pgroth> Summary: Daniel asked for reviews of the recently released dublin core - prov mappings editor's draft. Sam, Simon, Tom and Ivan agreed to look at it. Additionally, Daniel agreed to add a link to the turtle file that encodes these mappings. They can then be placed in the ns namespace.
15:24:41 <pgroth> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/6b795ed2e6c9/dc-note/Overview.html
15:24:45 <ivan> (Curt, I did it)
15:25:05 <tlebo> dgarijo: releaed it last week into hg
15:25:20 <tlebo> ... asking those to reviewed last time to see if they agree to the changes.
15:25:29 <tlebo> .. please raise issues
15:25:33 <tlebo> ... document is not long.
15:25:49 <tlebo> pgroth: reviewers?
15:25:53 <SamCoppens> I will
15:25:54 <smiles> I will review it
15:25:57 <TomDN> I started on a review
15:26:04 <dgarijo> thanks!!
15:26:14 <ivan> I will also look at it
15:26:15 <ivan> q+
15:26:22 <pgroth> ack ivan
15:26:56 <tlebo> ivan: turtle file to put into /ns?
15:27:26 <tlebo> dgarijo: the turtle files is in hg, will send the link.
15:27:38 <tlebo> pgroth: add link to turtle file?
15:28:08 <tlebo> ivan: where to put final version of turtle file?
15:29:00 <dgarijo> dgarijo: I will add the links to the turtel files of each example in the repository. They are there but not linked in the document.
15:29:01 <tlebo> pgroth: the WG also needs to make the full concat for prov.owl with prov-o in it.
15:29:10 <pgroth> q?
15:29:16 <tlebo> @pgroth me too :-)
15:29:26 <pgroth> Topic: Handling Comments
<pgroth> Summary: Ivan gave an update on handling public comments, in particular, what constitutes a technical change. Essentially, it is a judgement call but the technical design should not change. There was a particular question around renaming a construct in PROV-O, this is not considered a technical change as it does not impact the design. The process for tracking public comments was discussed. Ivan suggested that perhaps creating new products would be a better approach. However, the group agreed that the current process was ok.
15:29:40 <dgarijo> pgroth: we discussed last week how to handle public comments
15:30:03 <dgarijo> pgroth: there was a question about what is a technical comment
15:30:24 <dgarijo> ... ivan and sandro talked to thomas and have an update.
15:31:02 <dgarijo> ivan: the general point is to remind that the last call means that the design is done. Renaming is an editorial change.
15:31:18 <dgarijo> ... I don't see any problem in this particular case.
15:31:40 <dgarijo> ... if this change came when we were in CR it would be more problematic.
15:31:41 <pgroth> q?
15:31:49 <tlebo> ivan: changing property name is an editorial change. sees no problem with this. Will need to be more cautious as we go further. naame change in CR is impossible b/c it breaks implementations.
15:32:04 <ivan> s/naame/name/
15:32:24 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Tracking_Public_Comments
15:32:53 <dgarijo> pgroth: the idea behind this wiki page is that we will create a new issue for each comment we receive, to keep good track of them.
15:33:22 <dgarijo> ... add the issues in the wikipage as well. Is that good enough? 
15:34:21 <dgarijo> ivan: that will work. Each group decides how to handle this themselves: raise a separate product to deal with comments, to mantain a single table in the wiki, etc.
15:34:37 <tlebo> having a new product seems to make sense, the "dm/o/paq" distinctions are less important now. 
15:34:58 <tlebo> Including a link to their email approving our response is a good idea.
15:35:06 <pgroth> q?
15:35:14 <dgarijo> pgroth: a new product is fine, but having a last call product for each deliverable would make a busy tracker.
15:35:25 <pgroth> q?
15:35:29 <dgarijo> ivan: i don't have a strong opinion, but what you say is right,.
15:35:36 <stain> other trackers have 'versions' for that particular problem
15:36:13 <dgarijo> ivan: one more thing: If I look at the wiki page right now I still have to go to each individual issue to see if they are closed or not.
15:36:39 <pgroth> q?
15:36:46 <dgarijo> ... add for each entry whether the issue is closed in the wiki page.
15:36:59 <stain> I think it should be managable
15:37:15 <dgarijo> I agree with Stian. 
15:37:20 <jun> whatever works for you, Paul. Fine with either way
15:37:31 <pgroth> q?
15:37:34 <dgarijo> not to create a product for each deliverable, it's too much IMO.
15:37:41 <dgarijo> pgroth: AOB?
15:37:56 <tlebo> bye!
15:37:57 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
15:37:59 <Zakim> -smiles
15:38:00 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has left #prov
15:38:00 <Zakim> -tlebo
15:38:00 <Zakim> -dgarijo
15:38:01 <Zakim> -jun
15:38:02 <Zakim> -pgroth
15:38:03 <Zakim> -jcheney
15:38:03 <Zakim> -stain
15:38:04 <Zakim> -??P17
15:38:07 <Zakim> -TomDN
15:38:08 <Zakim> -Ivan
15:38:09 <ivan> ivan has left #prov
15:38:16 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
15:38:21 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aabb
15:38:22 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended
15:38:22 <Zakim> Attendees were pgroth, +329331aaaa, Curt_Tilmes, jun, +1.818.731.aabb, TomDN, +1.315.330.aadd, SamCoppens, tlebo, Ivan, +44.131.467.aaee, jcheney, Satya_Sahoo, stain, smiles?,
15:38:22 <Zakim> ... dgarijo
15:38:30 <pgroth> rrsagent, set lots public
15:38:30 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'set lots public', pgroth.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:38:41 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
15:38:47 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:38:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/02-prov-minutes.html pgroth
15:38:54 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
15:38:54 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:38:54 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
15:39:02 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:39:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/02-prov-minutes.html trackbot
15:39:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:39:03 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000295