Chatlog 2012-10-18

See original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

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

14:48:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:48:13 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/10/18-prov-irc
14:48:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:48:15 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:48:17 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
14:48:17 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:48:18 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:48:18 <trackbot> Date: 18 October 2012
14:49:11 <ivan> zakim, this will be prov
14:49:11 <Zakim> ok, ivan; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
14:49:43 <Luc> Luc has joined #prov
14:53:17 <pgroth> pgroth has joined #prov
14:53:50 <pgroth> trackbot, start telcon
14:53:52 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:53:54 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
14:53:54 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:53:55 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:53:55 <trackbot> Date: 18 October 2012
14:54:01 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
14:54:01 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
14:54:12 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.10.18
14:54:19 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
14:54:26 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
14:54:45 <pgroth> Regrets: James Cheney
14:55:16 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
14:55:23 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:55:32 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
14:55:32 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
14:56:05 <ivan> zakim, code?
14:56:05 <Zakim> the conference code is 7768 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), ivan
14:56:34 <Zakim> + +1.617.324.aaaa
14:56:40 <ivan> zakim, aaaa is Ivan
14:56:40 <Zakim> +Ivan; got it
14:58:21 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
14:58:34 <Zakim> + +44.238.059.aabb
14:58:53 <Luc> zakim, aabb is me
14:58:53 <Zakim> +Luc; got it
14:59:40 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:59:45 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov
14:59:45 <Curt> Curt has joined #prov
14:59:57 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
15:00:32 <pgroth> scribe?
15:00:43 <hook> hook has joined #prov
15:00:52 <CraigTrim> CraigTrim has joined #PROV
15:01:19 <Zakim> + +1.661.382.aacc
15:01:23 <pgroth> Scribe: Curt
15:01:34 <CraigTrim> zakim, +aacc is me
15:01:34 <Zakim> sorry, CraigTrim, I do not recognize a party named '+aacc'
15:01:41 <CraigTrim> Zakim, aacc is me
15:01:41 <Zakim> +CraigTrim; got it
15:01:47 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
15:02:31 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov
15:02:38 <Zakim> +Luc.a
15:02:45 <pgroth> Topic: Admin
<pgroth> Summary: Minutes approved. Actions went through. Paul agreed to follow-up on actions with Stian.
15:02:50 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-10-11
15:02:51 <Zakim> +??P25
15:02:54 <satya> satya has joined #prov
15:02:57 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aadd
15:02:58 <jun> jun has joined #prov
15:02:59 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.aa]
15:03:01 <pgroth> Proposed Minutes of the October 11, 2012 Telecon
15:03:06 <Curt> +1
15:03:09 <satya> +1
15:03:09 <smiles> +1
15:03:10 <ivan> +1
15:03:13 <khalidBelhajjame> khalidBelhajjame has joined #prov
15:03:14 <hook> +1
15:03:14 <jun> zakim, [IPcaller.aa] is me
15:03:15 <Zakim> +jun; got it
15:03:17 <zednik> +1
15:03:22 <Paolo> 0 (not there)
15:03:23 <Dong> Dong has joined #prov
15:03:33 <pgroth> accepted: Minutes of the October 11, 2012 Telecon
15:03:43 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
15:03:56 <Curt> pgroth: review open action items
15:04:23 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.aa]
15:04:39 <Curt> pgroth: some action holders not present -- paul will follow up with email
15:04:47 <khalidBelhajjame> zakim, [IPcaller.aa] is me
15:04:47 <Zakim> +khalidBelhajjame; got it
15:04:56 <Curt> pgroth: scribes -- need them, please volunteer!
15:05:03 <pgroth> Topic: Reminder about the timetable
<pgroth> Summary: The group was reminded about the timetable and the goal to get to CR around mid-november and as such it was important to stay on-top of responses.
15:05:37 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/TimetableToRec
15:05:51 <Curt> pgroth: reviewing timetable ^
15:06:09 <Curt> pgroth: need to get issues closed to go to CR
15:06:41 <Curt> pgroth: luc sending out a lot of responses, need group to try to stay on top of them
15:07:12 <pgroth> q?
15:07:32 <pgroth> Topic: Exit Criteria
<pgroth> Summary: The revised exit criteria were gone through. There was a discussion around the current wording of interoperable independent implementations. The group agreed that the proposal by Luc around pairs of consuming and generating implementations was preferable. Paul agreed to revise the version for a vote next week on the mailing list.
15:07:38 <TomDN> TomDN has joined #prov
15:07:43 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria
15:07:47 <Zakim> + +329331aaee
15:07:55 <TomDN> Zakim, +329 is me
15:07:55 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it
15:08:01 <Curt> pgroth: incorporated some feedback, put on list for review
15:08:05 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me
15:08:05 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted
15:08:30 <Curt> pgroth: added explicit exit criteria for PROV-DM per james, inherits from PROV-O and N
15:08:37 <Curt> pgroth: some wording updated
15:08:50 <smiles> Apart from the "independent" comment Luc made by email, they looked good to me
15:08:56 <pgroth> q?
15:10:07 <Curt> Luc: PROV-O - what is independent of what?  it doesn't require independence between producer/consumer
15:10:56 <Curt> Luc: suggested - independence between producer and consumer
15:11:38 <Curt> Luc: similar to client/server, producer and consumer must be independent to demonstrate interoperability
15:11:50 <pgroth> An interoperability pair consists of an implementation generating a
15:11:50 <pgroth> feature and an independent implementation consuming the feature. For
15:11:50 <pgroth> each feature, at least two interoperability pairs will have been
15:11:51 <pgroth> demonstrated to exist
15:11:58 <Luc> "An interoperability pair consists of an implementation generating a feature and an independent implementation consuming the feature. For each feature, at least two interoperability pairs will have been demonstrated to exist."
15:12:32 <pgroth> q?
15:12:33 <Curt> pgroth: This is stronger -- SKOS wasn't quite this strong.  If group wants it, ok..
15:12:41 <smiles> q+
15:13:15 <khalidBelhajjame> Yes, it looks stronge, but I think what Luc is suggesting is what one would exepect when talking about interoperability
15:13:20 <Curt> smiles: makes sense that they should be independent
15:13:47 <Paolo> it would be more convincing
15:13:51 <Curt> pgroth: worried about making it stronger than it really needs to be
15:14:01 <Luc> q+
15:14:13 <pgroth> ack smiles
15:14:16 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:14:39 <Paolo> ... two pairs of independent producers and consumers...
15:14:44 <Curt> Luc: are there concerns we wouldn't meet the stronger criteria?
15:14:55 <Curt> pgroth: we could for PROV-O, not sure about PROV-N
15:15:29 <Curt> Luc: an implementation includes a dataset -- we do have some PROV-N datasets, this should be workable
15:15:39 <Curt> Luc: as long as we have two consumers of that
15:15:49 <Curt> pgroth: will update with the proposed new language
15:15:58 <pgroth> q?
15:16:32 <Curt> ivan: What Luc proposes is good, but Paul has the question -- "Can we make it?"
15:16:50 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
15:16:56 <MacTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
15:16:56 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:16:58 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:16:58 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:17:09 <Curt> Luc: If we have two implmentations from the same organization, they may not be considered independent
15:17:41 <Curt> pgroth: we were trying to keep the threshold attainable
15:17:58 <Curt> pgroth: but your language is better, just want to make sure we can meet it
15:18:25 <ivan> q+
15:18:30 <Curt> pgroth: trying to figure out the right language, and consider the ramifications of that language on the exit criteria
15:19:02 <Curt> ivan: the language may be a little vague, but should be ok with it the way it is
15:19:15 <Curt> Luc: want to make sure the language reflects our intent
15:19:33 <Curt> ivan: It's ok with me, it seems satisfactory
15:19:50 <Curt> ivan: (in my view, not official w3c position)
15:20:10 <Curt> pgroth: ok, going back to original language
15:20:19 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria
15:21:10 <Curt> pgroth: we could have prov-n documents and two different implementations that could read/process them
15:21:16 <pgroth> q?
15:21:20 <pgroth> ack ivan
15:21:22 <ivan> ack ivan
15:21:27 <Curt> Luc: will we have two independent consumers of prov-n?
15:22:25 <Paolo> sorry, what does it mean to "consume prov-n"? would this be an independently generated parser?
15:22:30 <Curt> Luc: with my version, A producing and B consuming is one pair, B producing and A consuming is another pair, as long as A and B are independent
15:22:48 <Curt> pgroth: thought consumption would be easier than production
15:23:09 <Curt> pgroth: still some concerns -- let's postpone final vote on this
15:23:20 <hook> q+
15:23:36 <Paolo> q+
15:23:46 <pgroth> ack hook
15:24:06 <Curt> hook: if all features don't have independent pairs.
15:24:29 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
15:24:31 <Curt> pgroth: each feature must be coverened, but given implementations don't have to cover every feature
15:24:54 <Curt> ivan: it is considered to be an implemmentation for the features it covers
15:24:56 <pgroth> ack Paolo
15:25:09 <Zakim> +??P7
15:25:11 <ivan> s/implememmentation/implementation/
15:25:18 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P7 is me
15:25:18 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
15:25:26 <Curt> Paolo: what is a consumer?  How about just a parser?
15:25:28 <ivan> s/implemmentation/implementation/
15:25:46 <Curt> pgroth: yes, a parser would be
15:25:58 <pgroth> q?
15:26:26 <smiles> yes
15:26:31 <Curt> pgroth: interoperability pairs could be easier than the language we have now
15:26:33 <khalidBelhajjame> I think it makes more sense too
15:26:55 <Curt> pgroth: I will rephrase the language and send it around for review by Tuesday next week
15:27:07 <Curt> Luc: we can have an online vote
15:27:24 <pgroth> action: Paul to revise cr exit criteria, online vote next week
15:27:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-120 - Revise cr exit criteria, online vote next week [on Paul Groth - due 2012-10-25].
15:27:49 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-DM issues
<pgroth> Summary: The responses to ISSUE-524 ISSUE-519 ISSUE-521 ISSUE-450 ISSUE-482 ISSUE-518 were approved as working group responses. 
15:28:25 <hook> hook has joined #prov
15:28:50 <pgroth> proposed: accept ISSUE-529 ISSUE-524 ISSUE-519 ISSUE-521 ISSUE-450 ISSUE-482 ISSUE-499 ISSUE-518 as working group responses
15:28:58 <Dong> +1
15:28:59 <ivan> +1
15:29:00 <TomDN> +1
15:29:03 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
15:29:06 <dgarijo> +1
15:29:07 <zednik> +1
15:29:08 <satya> +1
15:29:38 <Curt> Luc: 529 and 499 still have some comments
15:30:08 <smiles> +1
15:30:11 <pgroth> accepted:  accept ISSUE-524 ISSUE-519 ISSUE-521 ISSUE-450 ISSUE-482 ISSUE-518 as working group responses
15:31:00 <Curt> Luc: there is a question from robert, a question about entity, and several comments from ivan
15:31:08 <Curt> Luc: and the one on mention, still to address
15:31:19 <Curt> Luc: will tackle most of them on monday
15:31:37 <pgroth> q?
15:31:37 <Curt> pgroth: requested acknowledgement from Robert on responses
15:31:43 <Curt> pgroth: he is traveling
15:31:52 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-N issues
<pgroth> Summary: public comment responses were accepted on all outstanding issues on PROV-N. PROV-N should now be complete.
15:32:50 <pgroth> proposed: ISSUE-541 ISSUE-542 ISSUE-543 ISSUE-545 ISSUE-537 ISSUE-535 ISSUE-534 ISSUE-536 ISSUE-538 ISSUE-533 ISSUE-546 ISSUE-540 ISSUE-539 ISSUE-544 as working group responses
15:32:55 <TomDN> +1
15:32:59 <ivan> +1
15:33:05 <Dong> +1
15:33:06 <dgarijo> +1
15:33:18 <zednik> +1
15:33:22 <stephenc> stephenc has joined #prov
15:33:29 <smiles> +1
15:33:30 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
15:33:49 <pgroth> accepted: ISSUE-541 ISSUE-542 ISSUE-543 ISSUE-545 ISSUE-537 ISSUE-535 ISSUE-534 ISSUE-536 ISSUE-538 ISSUE-533 ISSUE-546 ISSUE-540 ISSUE-539 ISSUE-544 as working group responses
15:34:09 <Curt> pgroth: anything more to address with PROV-N?
15:34:16 <Curt> Luc: should all be addressed now
15:34:43 <Curt> Luc: need to align bundle language with constraints
15:34:50 <Zakim> +??P18
15:34:53 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-O issues
<pgroth> Summary: The group went over two outstanding issues. There was a question about subclassing in PROV-O (ISSUE-552). The group discussed this and felt it might be a bug, however, those on the call were unsure. Tim was actioned to look at this issue. Daniel agreed to look at the second issue around the domain of the hadRole relation and its compatibility with prov-dm.
15:35:14 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:35:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Ivan, Luc, [IPcaller], Curt_Tilmes, CraigTrim, [IPcaller.a], Luc.a, ??P25, jun, +1.818.731.aadd, Satya_Sahoo, khalidBelhajjame, TomDN (muted), MacTed
15:35:18 <Zakim> ... (muted), dgarijo, ??P18
15:35:18 <Zakim> On IRC I see stephenc, hook, dgarijo, TomDN, Dong, khalidBelhajjame, jun, satya, zednik, CraigTrim, Curt, smiles, Paolo, pgroth, Luc, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, ivan, stain, trackbot
15:35:23 <stephenc> I just joined
15:35:34 <ivan> zakim, ??P18 is stephenc
15:35:35 <Zakim> +stephenc; got it
15:35:54 <ivan> issue-552?
15:35:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-552 -- Check subclass definitions in prov-o -- raised
15:35:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
15:35:58 <Curt> pgroth: Tim not present, need to address issues
15:36:01 <pgroth> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2012Sep/0000.html
15:36:29 <Curt> pgroth: can someone address 552?
15:36:39 <Curt> pgroth: is this a PROV-DM or PROV-O problem?
15:36:45 <MacTed> both...
15:37:00 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:37:00 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
15:37:02 <Luc> q+
15:37:18 <Curt> ivan: Can it be turned into subclasses?
15:37:25 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:37:26 <Curt> ivan: does PROV-DM support that?
15:37:47 <satya> I believe that is DM
15:37:54 <Curt> Luc: Is this need from PROV-DM or PROV-O?
15:38:18 <Curt> pgroth: DM definitions repeated into PROV-O, there aren't new definitions
15:38:22 <hook> hook has joined #prov
15:38:28 <dgarijo> I can find it in the overview: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/Overview.html#Quotation
15:38:37 <Curt> Luc: suggestion is to make quotation a type of derivation
15:38:45 <Curt> MacTed: That still equates to a subclass
15:39:09 <Curt> Luc: how is quotation expressed in PROV-O?
15:39:14 <MacTed> `The definition of Quotation includes "Quotation is a particular case of derivation.". However Quotation is not a subclass of Derivation, which is what the english would imply. A better wording, assuming I understand the current english would be: "Quotation is a kind of derivation".`
15:39:26 <Curt> pgroth: there is a property and a class prov:quotation
15:39:47 <Curt> MacTed: concern is that the english says it is a subclass, but isn't explicit where it should be
15:40:10 <Curt> MacTed: it isn't consistent whether quotation is a subclass of derivation
15:40:40 <satya> Atleast that is not in the OWL file of PROV-O
15:40:54 <Curt> MacTed: it sounds like the missing language is in PROV-O
15:41:55 <Curt> pgroth: can one of the PROV-O editors address this?
15:42:03 <Curt> Luc: should action to Tim ask if this is a bug
15:42:39 <pgroth> action: Tim check whether it is a bug  or feature the lack of subclassing for Quotation and Derivation see ISSUE 552
15:42:39 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find Tim. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>.
15:43:04 <Curt> MacTed: This is an example -- there may be other places where similar subclassing is missing
15:43:30 <MacTed> "lack of subclassing for, e.g., Quotation and Derivation"
15:44:20 <Curt> pgroth: I'll revise the action and email Tim
15:44:40 <ivan> issue-568?
15:44:40 <trackbot> ISSUE-568 -- domain of prov:hadRole -- raised
15:44:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/568
15:45:15 <Zakim> -CraigTrim
15:46:22 <Curt> Luc: domain includes influence, which would allow expression of some relationships that DM does not allow
15:46:53 <dgarijo> I'll check it out
15:47:30 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/446
15:47:31 <Curt> pgroth: dgarijo has open issue
15:47:52 <Curt> dgarijo: I will check it out
15:48:04 <pgroth> q?
15:48:24 <Curt> Luc: what are the implications of changing the domain of hadrole?
15:48:41 <pgroth> q
15:48:42 <pgroth> q?
15:48:43 <Curt> Luc: for PROV-O last call, and on other documents
15:48:55 <Curt> ivan: This is a bug, not a change in fundamental design, correct?
15:49:11 <Curt> pgroth: need to confirm bug, but yes, not changing the design
15:49:25 <Luc_> Luc_ has joined #prov
15:49:27 <Curt> ivan: If it is a real bug, there isn't a problem with the last call
15:49:46 <Curt> ivan: last call asks if there questions about design, not bugs
15:49:56 <Curt> ivan: If there are design changes, then we have to look at it again
15:50:04 <Curt> ivan: not sure how this will affect other documents
15:50:46 <Curt> Luc: If we have a second last call for PROV-O, do we have to do that with the others too?
15:50:48 <Curt> ivan: no
15:50:55 <Curt> Luc: would that delay CR?
15:51:04 <Curt> ivan: we want them to go together, so yes
15:51:17 <Curt> ivan: it would incur a minimum delay of three weeks
15:51:19 <pgroth> q?
15:51:22 <pgroth> Topic: Reminder on Notes
<pgroth> Summary: The status of several notes was gone through. Work on prov-aq will begin again in november. Daniel will begin to respond to all issues on PROV-DC beginning next week. Paolo said he would check into the status of PROV-Dictionary.
15:51:24 <Curt> ivan: but we aren't there yet..
15:51:53 <Curt> pgroth: dgarijo sent email update on PROV-DC
15:52:14 <Curt> dgarijo: we still need to write formal responses for issues
15:52:36 <Curt> pgroth: PROV-AQ, graham will work on that towards Novembers
15:52:43 <Curt> ^Novembers^November
15:52:59 <pgroth> q?
15:53:10 <Curt> pgroth: other priorities, will delay PROV-AQ until November, thoughts about that?
15:53:28 <pgroth> q?
15:53:37 <Curt> pgroth: Needs a push to clean up final note, more important to work on implementations for now
15:53:49 <Curt> ivan: the note, or a draft at that point?
15:54:00 <Curt> pgroth: publish draft then, then the note later
15:54:30 <Curt> ivan: suggest publishing the note with the rest of the rec, publishing together would be better
15:55:16 <Curt> pgroth: PROV-Dictionary, make that into a note
15:55:29 <Curt> pgroth: stain working on that
15:55:34 <Paolo> q+
15:55:46 <pgroth> ack Paolo
15:56:08 <Curt> Paolo: we talked about this, we made a plan, haven't heard updates since
15:56:34 <Curt> Paolo: I will remind stain
15:56:46 <Dong> Sorry, I need to go
15:57:15 <Luc_> q+
15:57:16 <pgroth> q?
15:57:16 <Curt> pgroth: I'll discuss with Luc how to address this
15:57:21 <Curt> (I have to go)
15:57:32 <Paolo> have to run...
15:57:36 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.a]
15:57:41 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
15:57:59 <khalidBelhajjame> bye
15:58:03 <Zakim> -dgarijo
15:58:04 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
15:58:04 <TomDN> bye
15:58:06 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
15:58:07 <Zakim> -khalidBelhajjame
15:58:16 <Zakim> -stephenc
15:58:17 <Zakim> -??P25
15:58:23 <Zakim> -MacTed
15:58:39 <Zakim> -TomDN
15:58:45 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
15:58:47 <Zakim> -jun
15:58:49 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:58:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/18-prov-minutes.html pgroth
15:58:54 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
15:58:54 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:58:54 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been pgroth, +1.617.324.aaaa, Ivan, +44.238.059.aabb, Luc, [IPcaller], Curt_Tilmes, +1.661.382.aacc, CraigTrim, +1.818.731.aadd, jun,
15:58:57 <Zakim> ... Satya_Sahoo, khalidBelhajjame, +329331aaee, TomDN, MacTed, dgarijo, stephenc
15:59:02 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:59:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/18-prov-minutes.html trackbot
15:59:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:59:03 <RRSAgent> I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/18-prov-actions.rdf :
15:59:03 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Paul to revise cr exit criteria, online vote next week [1]
15:59:03 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/18-prov-irc#T15-27-24
15:59:03 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Tim check whether it is a bug  or feature the lack of subclassing for Quotation and Derivation see ISSUE 552 [2]
15:59:03 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/18-prov-irc#T15-42-39
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000331