Provenance Working Group Teleconference -- 09 Feb 2012

<trackbot> Date: 09 February 2012

<Luc> Hi, we still need a scribe ....

I'll scribe

<Luc> thanks tim, everything is setup for you

yup, thanks.

<Luc> scribe: Tim Lebo

approve minutes

luc: paul hasn't finished the long minutes, we'll do next week.

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open

actions

action 51

<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2012/02/08/the-provenance-data-model-third-working-draft/

luc finished the blog on action 51; closed.

action 52 on satya - continue DM issues.

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 52

satya: can be folded into the due date next thursday.

<MacTed> action-52?

<trackbot> ACTION-52 -- Satya Sahoo to address issues in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.01.05#prov-dm -- due 2012-01-19 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/52

luc: luc and paolo have asked questions that satya has not answered. please respond.
... we will be trying to close actions much faster.

satya: today or tomorrow will respond

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/53

action 53 to Kai - bootstrapping dc best practices.

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 53

daniel: kai has been working on it, has been getting good responses from other users groups. they seem happy.

luc: will the activity be seen by prov-wg?

daniel: mostly on the dc side, kai will come back and report.
... eric is hosting a call next monday

daniel is on dc call

luc: how to monitor progress?

daniel: still getting started.

luc: action is completed because activity is bootstrapped. please report back regularlly.

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/54

<MacTed> action-54?

<trackbot> ACTION-54 -- Paul Groth to engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others) -- due 2012-02-10 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/54

next action is #54 on paul. Engaging implemenation task force for a test harness

luc: helena or stephen?

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/55

next action was #55 on mike. make an owl file for next week.

<dgarijo> +q

daniel: khalid and daniel have made a list of terms to agree on and give rules for. (and a list of those we won't)

( http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF )

<satya> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF

luc: timing - next telecon due. on track to meet?

daniel: yes

(+1)

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/56

next is action 56 to james update rdf rules and align with dm.

jcheney: coupled with previous issue. using ProvRDF to keep track of DM and ont.

<dgarijo> I forgot to say that Tim also worked on the list initiated by James.

jcheney: daniel, khalid, satya, tim have been working around the doc.
... planning to fill in early next week

<dgarijo> tlebo: clarification about the rules James is talking about.

<dgarijo> jcheney: the rules in the provRDF file.

<khalidbelhajjame> Translation rules

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/57

<dgarijo> tlebo: the plan is to have completed the left side part of the list

(anyone is welcome to help me fill in the left-hand sides from DM - this needs to be done by Friday)

luc: paq, paul, graham. #57 due end of month. we'll leave it

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/58

<Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Feb/0021.html

<dgarijo> @tlebo: I though that that was what Khalid and I did with the lists :)

luc: action 58 to paul. he wrote summary of f2f.

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/?p=451

@daniel, nope, as I said in email.

luc: closing 58

<GK_> Oops, sorry I'm late. Connecting now.

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/60

luc: 60 on luc, xml schema. he sent email to list. some responses. james' approach similar?

<dgarijo> @tlebo: ok.

jcheney: was using attributes, but can change to elemetns.

luc: stephen, tim is interested

(+1)

tim: will look through it, not sure what he'll do with it.

luc: aim for an agreement in two weeks time?

<satya> tlebo: yes

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/61

luc: 61 on james update semantics to suit DM WD3

jcheney: provrdf an mappings are part of it and due ealier. so focusing on that.

<Luc> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/62

luc: 62 on luc to simplify intro do DM
... will report later in agenda.
... next face to face... coordinate with semweb activity.... mroe next week.
... other issues?

<Luc> can we see this list of term?

satya: reviewing wd3, have terms to map, nothing else to report. Mike finished blog post.
... simple exmaple of how to use prov-o. sent update yesterday

<Luc> can we see the blog post example?

(I didn't see update)

(ok)

satya: blog post coming outt

<dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF#List_of_terms_that_are_going_to_be_modeled_in_order_to_align_PROV-O_to_WD3

<dgarijo> although that list has to be merged with Khalid's

luc: wasAssociatedWith - why not?
... quite important.

<Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to note that I think a different format would be better, will try to address on email and skype.

luc: good to see that we can be systematic in translation.
... issues in DM?

<satya> @GK: yes, it is a discussion board

luc: would be good for dm and provo teams to discuss

tlebo: we can do that after the owl file and mapping page

luc: we need the HTML, too.

<jcheney> @GK: Tim's point I think is that the wiki page should be DM-centric in order to aid producing the deliverable(s)

luc: we need a doc that semweb community will look at after the primer.

<khalidbelhajjame> We also need to thing about the structure of the document

<khalidbelhajjame> think

satya: having concensus on owl file will aid HTML writing.

luc: but thought on how to structure doc before hand.

(I think we agreed to get rid of this laundry list approach in the HTML)

<dgarijo> @khalid : +1.

luc: ivan's feedback after f2f. many ontologies that were well presented. OPMV, FOAF, (not enough examples in foaf html)
... good to think about how the HTML will be structured.

<GK_> (I've an idea that some of the FOAF/OPMV content is auto-generated from the OWN description)

luc: DMers shouldn't impose the provo html structure.
... action on structure of provo doc?

satya: will take action on structure of prov-o html

<scribe> ACTION: satya to design structure of provo-html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/09-prov-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Design structure of provo-html [on Satya Sahoo - due 2012-02-16].

<Luc> action to satya to outline the new structure of the prov-o document, to be discussed on 23

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to

luc: ivan suggested that it is usful to line up reviewers of the draft.

<GK_> @luc: that action got created with 16-feb due date, not 23rd

luc: need reviewers to provo html
... volunteers?

<estephan> I will review

satya: think it would be helpful to have DMers review, too.

luc: volunteers?
... zednick?

<GK_> (I probably shall review it, but I'm reluctant to make formal commitment at this time, until it's actually available.)

@etephan said he would, too

luc: simon?

<zednik> I am willing to review prov-o

<satya> perhaps both Simon and Yolanda?

<estephan> +1

smiles: sure, from pov of primer

<zednik> too many stephans ;-)

(too many "steph*n"s)

<davidschaengold> I'll volunteer as well to review it

<satya> @Stephan: you are co-author :)

<estephan> +q

<GK_> (What I'd like to do is review the ontology side-by-side with the *simplified* DM)

core dump

luc, paolo, eric stephen, cresswell, perhaps GK

estephan: hwo to give feedback?

luc: we need to know someone looked at it.

<satya> @Eric: raise issues?

dm

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvDMWorkingDraft4

luc: wiki page on current activities
... trying to adderss action 62 - simplify
... created new directory in hg

<Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/towards-wd4.html

luc: welcome to look, but still in progress.
... decided to structure into 3 parts
... part 1: model based on no "Thing"
... part 1: support scruffy prov (so no attributes, charact intervals, constraints)
... all moved out of doc
... dropped Account Record.

<Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/prov-asn.html

luc: part 3: ASN and grammar
... part 2: "upgrade path"

(from scruffy to proper prov)

<GK_> Would prefer to see it described as a "refinement path" rather than "upgrade"

luc: first version of this draft by next telecon

<dgarijo> yesterday on the DC call, Thom Baker said that he really liked the distinction between scruffy/proper provenance.

gk: part 1 any mor than summary of expression types?
... want it that simple.

<Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/towards-wd4.html

luc: tried to provide intuitive def for all concepts with examples in english
... list of terms an dtheir componetns with illustration

<Zakim> GK_, you wanted to ask if the first part will be anything more than a summary of the ASN expression types

gk: looks closer to waht group was asked to do.

luc: happy with anyone to look at and comment on (do not raise issues)
... if have commetns, write notes on page and send email notifying
... comments?

<GK_> I'll probably hold off detailed review untilk that 1st draft is available for co9mment

macted: which URLs are which part of breakout

<Luc> part 1: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/towards-wd4.html

<Luc> part 3: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/prov-asn.html

luc: will add link to wiki page
... would like reviewers of docs for next week

<estephan> +1 (Eric Stephan)

<GK_> I intend to review

<dgarijo> I'll try too

<Curt> I'll try

coordinate dm and prov-o

reading list: primer, prov-o, dm

luc: comments on joint release

smiles: from f2f, we have a schedule. prov-o owl next week and html week after.
... primer 8 march.
... then 1-2 weeks from that (20 march)

luc: we've slipped by 1 month
... timetable discussed at f2f
... 4th draft 1 march
... 5th draft 1 apri.l
... release of all 1 april?
... concerned.
... all docs earlier?

satya: last feb first march

<GK_> I personally think we need to get the simplified DM nailed and stabilized (in broad principle) before charging too fast with the other docs.

(I think first week march would be reasonable)

<satya> @GK: I agree

simon: if we agree on the owl, primer by end of feb. but what if there are concerns on the owl?

<dgarijo> I don't think that the primer is going to change a lot..

gk_: really helpful if broad DM stable before pushing on other docs.

<smiles> @dgarijo yes, I hope you're right :)

luc: provo due fairly soon

satya: agree that we need DM stable.

<smiles> Apologies, but I will have to leave in a minute...

luc: we need to close issues.

<GK_> I'm fine that there may be outstanding issues (near term); but the DM sets a general direction that we're all trying to follow

<Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to point out that the concepts aren't changing in DM. so it's "stable"

<dgarijo> @tlebo:+1

connection task force

estephan: kai did report on plans from f2f2. dc mapping. great effort.

<khalidbelhajjame> Sorry, I will have to leave as I have another meeting

estephan: while that continues, we should meet as a task force periodically.

<YolandaGil> Simon: there were a few minor things we wanted to update on the planner, we can discuss them when we meet at the end of the month.

estephan: most on task force have connections and would be good to keep the report alive.

<estephan> +q

estephan: monday call details on email

<YolandaGil> I'll be joining the conn TF call

luc: that's it. meet next week.

<GK_> Bye

- DRAFT -

Provenance Working Group Teleconference

09 Feb 2012

Attendees

Contents

approve minutes

actions

dm

coordinate dm and prov-o

connection task force

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output