00:00:00 <msmith> PRESENT: ianh, bmotik, msmith, zhe, uli, ivan, bcuencagrau, ratnesh, sandro, pfps, baojie, jeffp, Alan_Ruttenberg, achille, rinke, calvanese
17:00:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc ←
17:00:12 <pfps> Zakim, this will be owlwg
Peter Patel-Schneider: Zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:00:12 <Zakim> ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 60 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 60 minutes ago ←
17:00:23 <pfps> RRSagent, make records public
Peter Patel-Schneider: RRSagent, make records public ←
17:00:32 <pfps> zakim, who is here?
Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is here? ←
17:00:36 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps ←
17:00:44 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot ←
17:00:55 <Zhe> zakim, mute me
17:00:56 <Zakim> sorry, Zhe, I don't know what conference this is
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Zhe, I don't know what conference this is ←
17:01:21 <pfps> zakim, this will be owlwg
Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:01:21 <Zakim> ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 61 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 61 minutes ago ←
17:01:28 <pfps> zakim, who is here?
Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is here? ←
17:01:28 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, pfps ←
17:01:29 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot ←
17:02:03 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:02:03 <Zakim> sorry, uli, I don't know what conference this is
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, uli, I don't know what conference this is ←
17:02:09 <bmotik> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Boris Motik: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
17:02:09 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has not yet started, bmotik ←
17:02:10 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot ←
17:02:11 <sandro> zakim, this will be owl
Sandro Hawke: zakim, this will be owl ←
17:02:11 <Zakim> ok, sandro, I see SW_OWL()12:00PM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, sandro, I see SW_OWL()12:00PM already started ←
17:02:14 <msmith> ScribeNick: msmith
(Scribe set to Michael Smith)
17:02:15 <Zakim> +??P21
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21 ←
17:02:20 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:02:25 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
17:02:34 <bmotik> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Boris Motik: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
17:02:39 <Zakim> -??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P3 ←
17:02:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21 ←
17:02:49 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
17:02:52 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
17:02:52 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-02-52
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-02-52 ←
17:02:53 <Ratnesh> zakim, ??P21 is Ratnesh
Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, ??P21 is Ratnesh ←
17:02:55 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
17:03:00 <sandro> RRSAgent, make log public
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, make log public ←
17:03:01 <Zhe> zakim, +1.603.897.aaaa is me
Zhe Wu: zakim, +1.603.897.aaaa is me ←
17:03:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.603.897.aaaa, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, ??P8, +0186527aacc, ??P21, Ivan ←
17:03:12 <pfps> zakim, who is here?
Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is here? ←
17:03:13 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:03:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot ←
17:03:17 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:03:25 <Zakim> +Ratnesh; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ratnesh; got it ←
17:03:27 <Zakim> -??P8
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P8 ←
17:03:31 <Zakim> +Zhe; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe; got it ←
17:03:33 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P8 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P8 is me ←
17:03:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro ←
17:03:39 <Zhe> Zakim, aaaa is me
17:03:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, +1.202.408.aabb, ??P5, +0186527aacc, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro ←
17:03:49 <Zhe> zakim, mute me
17:03:57 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
17:04:03 <Zakim> I already had ??P8 as ??P8, bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P8 as ??P8, bcuencagrau ←
17:04:05 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
17:04:11 <Zakim> sorry, Zhe, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Zhe, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa' ←
17:04:13 <Zakim> On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot ←
17:04:13 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:04:24 <Zakim> Zhe should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should now be muted ←
17:04:29 <Zakim> -??P5
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P5 ←
17:04:34 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:04:36 <Zakim> sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
17:04:38 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aadd ←
17:04:42 <Zakim> +??P4
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4 ←
17:04:47 <baojie> zakim, aadd is me
17:04:47 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P4
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P4 ←
17:04:52 <Zakim> sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bcuencagrau, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
17:04:55 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P4 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P4 is me ←
17:04:59 <Zakim> +baojie; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie; got it ←
17:04:59 <IanH> zakim, aacc is me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, aacc is me ←
17:05:02 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P4', bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '??P4', bmotik ←
17:05:06 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
17:05:08 <Zakim> -??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P1 ←
17:05:12 <Zakim> +IanH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH; got it ←
17:05:12 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
17:05:24 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
17:05:26 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
17:05:26 <uli> zakim, ??P2 is me
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P2 is me ←
17:05:29 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is me
Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is me ←
17:05:30 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:05:31 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:05:40 <Zakim> +uli; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +uli; got it ←
17:05:44 <Zakim> + +0122427aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: + +0122427aaee ←
17:05:48 <Zakim> +Achille; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it ←
17:05:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli, baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, +0122427aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli, baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, +0122427aaee ←
17:05:55 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:05:55 <JeffP> zakim, aaee is me
17:06:04 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot ←
17:06:09 <msmith> Agenda at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.06.25/Agenda
Agenda at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.06.25/Agenda ←
17:06:12 <Zakim> +JeffP; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +JeffP; got it ←
17:06:18 <Zakim> +??P8
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8 ←
17:06:24 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P8 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P8 is me ←
17:06:30 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:06:38 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
17:06:42 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe (muted), msmith, IanH, Ratnesh, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, bmotik (muted), Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau ←
17:06:44 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:06:55 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:06:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, Achille, IanH, baojie, bmotik, RRSAgent, msmith, Zhe, uli, Zakim, ivan, bcuencagrau, Ratnesh, sandro, pfps, trackbot ←
17:07:04 <Zakim> +Alan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Alan ←
17:07:33 <msmith> topic: Admin
17:07:33 <msmith> subtopic: Roll Call
17:07:33 <msmith> Regrets, ElisaKendall, EvanWallace, CarstenLutz, Markus_Krötzsch
Regrets, ElisaKendall, EvanWallace, CarstenLutz, Markus_Krötzsch ←
17:07:41 <msmith> subtopic: Agenda Amendments
17:07:58 <msmith> ianh: no agenda amendments
Ian Horrocks: no agenda amendments ←
17:08:06 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
17:08:20 <msmith> subtopic: Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June)
17:08:26 <Zakim> +??P4
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4 ←
17:08:30 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P4 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P4 is me ←
17:08:30 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
17:08:32 <pfps> 4 june minutes look acceptable
Peter Patel-Schneider: 4 june minutes look acceptable ←
17:08:36 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
17:08:36 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
17:08:54 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June)
RESOLVED: Accept Previous3 Minutes (04 June) ←
17:09:11 <msmith> subtopic: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)
17:09:12 <pfps> 11 june minutes look acceptable
Peter Patel-Schneider: 11 june minutes look acceptable ←
17:09:18 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:09:20 <msmith> PROPOSED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)
PROPOSED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June) ←
17:09:21 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:09:26 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June)
RESOLVED: Accept Previous2 Minutes (11 June) ←
17:09:38 <msmith> subtopic: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)
17:09:40 <pfps> 18 june minutes are *perfect* :-)
Peter Patel-Schneider: 18 june minutes are *perfect* :-) ←
17:09:43 <msmith> PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)
PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June) ←
17:09:52 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:10:09 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June)
RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (18 June) ←
17:10:31 <msmith> subtopic: F2F3
17:10:37 <Zakim> + +39.047.101.aaff
Zakim IRC Bot: + +39.047.101.aaff ←
17:10:49 <msmith> ianh: clarify status on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People
Ian Horrocks: clarify status on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People ←
17:11:00 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
17:11:00 <Zakim> sorry, calvanese, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, calvanese, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
17:11:06 <msmith> topic: Action Item Status
17:11:06 <msmith> subtopic: Pending Review Actions
17:11:14 <calvanese> zakim, +39.047.101.aaff is me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, +39.047.101.aaff is me ←
17:11:14 <Zakim> +calvanese; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +calvanese; got it ←
17:11:20 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
17:11:20 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted ←
17:11:22 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
17:11:23 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
17:11:23 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
17:11:30 <Rinke> zakim, ??P18 is me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, ??P18 is me ←
17:11:34 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
17:11:41 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me ←
17:11:41 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
17:11:48 <msmith> ianh: on action-160 wasn't there question on top/bottom in profiles? keys in profiles? there was an action on uli re: top/bottom in profiles
Ian Horrocks: on ACTION-160 wasn't there question on top/bottom in profiles? keys in profiles? there was an action on uli re: top/bottom in profiles ←
17:12:09 <calvanese> zakim, unmute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, unmute me ←
17:12:13 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:12:13 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:12:32 <msmith> uli: I sent an email on top/bottom in dl-lite. diego?
Uli Sattler: I sent an email on top/bottom in dl-lite. diego? ←
17:12:57 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
17:12:57 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
17:13:14 <msmith> calvanese: dl-lite has no top concept... there is no point to having it. we don't believe it would impact properties, but there is not point. if it doesn't change computation properties, it is just by chance. you don't gain any expressivity
Diego Calvanese: dl-lite has no top concept... there is no point to having it. we don't believe it would impact properties, but there is not point. if it doesn't change computation properties, it is just by chance. you don't gain any expressivity ←
17:13:50 <msmith> ianh: its already that it doesn't add expressive power to DL
Ian Horrocks: its already that it doesn't add expressive power to DL ←
17:14:01 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
17:14:01 <Zakim> uli was not muted, uli
Zakim IRC Bot: uli was not muted, uli ←
17:14:09 <msmith> calvanese: yes, b/c you have nominals, that might not apply to profile which is strict subset
Diego Calvanese: yes, b/c you have nominals, that might not apply to profile which is strict subset ←
17:14:25 <msmith> uli: reason to add is not to add expressivity, it is to add useful syntactic sugar. e.g., rooting a property hierarchy from a top property
Uli Sattler: reason to add is not to add expressivity, it is to add useful syntactic sugar. e.g., rooting a property hierarchy from a top property ←
17:15:11 <msmith> ianh: with profiles, ruling things out is costly rather than having them. we should only rule things out if e.g., they have adverse impact on properties
Ian Horrocks: with profiles, ruling things out is costly rather than having them. we should only rule things out if e.g., they have adverse impact on properties ←
17:15:27 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
17:15:27 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
17:15:33 <msmith> msmith: +1 to ianh
Michael Smith: +1 to ianh ←
17:16:22 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:16:22 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:16:34 <msmith> calvanese: I partially agree. adding construct gives indication it is to be used. this may have bad impact, even if it can be simulated with existing constructs. similar argument for dl-lite profile
Diego Calvanese: I partially agree. adding construct gives indication it is to be used. this may have bad impact, even if it can be simulated with existing constructs. similar argument for dl-lite profile ←
17:16:43 <JeffP> +1 calvanese
17:16:57 <Zakim> -Ratnesh
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ratnesh ←
17:17:27 <msmith> bmotik: only profile now including top/bottom is EL++. I don't think property must be in profile for editor to hang things off it in UI
Boris Motik: only profile now including top/bottom is EL++. I don't think property must be in profile for editor to hang things off it in UI ←
17:18:14 <uli> 1-
Uli Sattler: 1- ←
17:18:14 <msmith> ianh: we had discussion about top/bottom being useful and addressed if it *tempts* users in a negative way. it seems we can have it in dl-lite
Ian Horrocks: we had discussion about top/bottom being useful and addressed if it *tempts* users in a negative way. it seems we can have it in dl-lite ←
17:18:21 <Zakim> +??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15 ←
17:18:33 <Ratnesh> zakim, ??P15 is Ratnesh
Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, ??P15 is Ratnesh ←
17:18:33 <Zakim> +Ratnesh; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ratnesh; got it ←
17:18:37 <msmith> calvanese: I'd like to check the details on whether we can have it
Diego Calvanese: I'd like to check the details on whether we can have it ←
17:19:15 <msmith> ianh: revisit this in future telecon. top/bottom is in el++
Ian Horrocks: revisit this in future telecon. top/bottom is in el++ ←
17:19:30 <msmith> bmotik: not in owl-r
Boris Motik: not in owl-r ←
17:19:43 <msmith> ianh: should we action someone to investigate easy keys
Ian Horrocks: should we action someone to investigate easy keys ←
17:19:58 <msmith> bmotik: no. its clear no easy keys in dl-lite. I added it to owl-r. unknown for EL++
Boris Motik: no. its clear no easy keys in dl-lite. I added it to owl-r. unknown for EL++ ←
17:20:34 <msmith> jeffp: top/bottom in el++ ?
Jeff Pan: top/bottom in el++ ? ←
17:20:43 <msmith> bmotik: yes, checked with Carsten
Boris Motik: yes, checked with Carsten ←
17:20:53 <msmith> jeffp: it doesn't have nominals
Jeff Pan: it doesn't have nominals ←
17:21:03 <msmith> ianh: yes, presumably it doesn't hurt
Ian Horrocks: yes, presumably it doesn't hurt ←
17:21:13 <msmith> bmotik: yes, it doesn't hurt
Boris Motik: yes, it doesn't hurt ←
17:21:18 <msmith> jeffp: what about el+
17:21:20 <bcuencagrau> EL++ without nominals
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: EL++ without nominals ←
17:21:26 <msmith> bmotik: what's el+
Boris Motik: what's el+ ←
17:21:46 <msmith> jeffp: el+ is supported by CEL
Jeff Pan: el+ is supported by CEL ←
17:21:56 <JeffP> ok
17:22:04 <msmith> ianh: a bit off topic, we're only concerned with EL++ profile, not other fragments. interesting that CEL doesn't support all of EL++ since we'll need to follow-up moving forward the recs
Ian Horrocks: a bit off topic, we're only concerned with EL++ profile, not other fragments. interesting that CEL doesn't support all of EL++ since we'll need to follow-up moving forward the recs ←
17:23:36 <msmith> calvanese: follow-up on keys in dl-lite, and boris's comments on it adding recursion. we'd like to see some version of keys, could we consider a restricted version.
Diego Calvanese: follow-up on keys in dl-lite, and boris's comments on it adding recursion. we'd like to see some version of keys, could we consider a restricted version. ←
17:23:41 <msmith> ianh: are you willing to take action
Ian Horrocks: are you willing to take action ←
17:23:56 <msmith> action: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite
ACTION: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite ←
17:23:56 <trackbot> Created ACTION-162 - Investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [on Diego Calvanese - due 2008-07-02].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-162 - Investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [on Diego Calvanese - due 2008-07-02]. ←
17:24:12 <msmith>  action: calvanese to investigate easy keys in dl-lite
 action: calvanese to investigate easy keys in dl-lite ←
17:24:31 <msmith> ACCEPT ACTION-160 as completed
ACCEPT ACTION-160 as completed ←
17:24:36 <msmith> subtopic: due and overdue actions
17:24:57 <msmith> ianh: action-155
17:25:12 <pfps> could we have a pointer to the document from the ACTION-155 page?
Peter Patel-Schneider: could we have a pointer to the document from the ACTION-155 page? ←
17:25:29 <msmith> ianh: there is a document, we also need implementation
Ian Horrocks: there is a document, we also need implementation ←
17:25:40 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
17:25:40 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted ←
17:25:46 <msmith> ianh: yes, we should add pointer to doc to action. bump date forward for action-155 pending arrival of an implementation?
Ian Horrocks: yes, we should add pointer to doc to action. bump date forward for ACTION-155 pending arrival of an implementation? ←
17:26:01 <ivan> no
Ivan Herman: no ←
17:26:26 <msmith> ianh: ok, that's what we'll do
Ian Horrocks: ok, that's what we'll do ←
17:26:40 <msmith> ianh: action-156, action-157
Ian Horrocks: ACTION-156, ACTION-157 ←
17:26:47 <msmith> alanr: push them both a week
Alan Ruttenberg: push them both a week ←
17:26:52 <msmith> ianh: ok
Ian Horrocks: ok ←
17:27:15 <msmith> topic: Issues
17:27:15 <msmith> subtopic: Proposals to Resolve Issues
17:27:15 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-21 (import-target-match) and ISSUE-24 (1-version-allowed-policy)
17:27:53 <msmith> ianh: proposal to resolve says "per pfps email and subsequent discussion", are we really here? it doesn't seem complete
Ian Horrocks: proposal to resolve says "per pfps email and subsequent discussion", are we really here? it doesn't seem complete ←
17:28:07 <msmith> alanr: we're close, have 1 issue open. is inconsistent independent of header? bmotik and I disagreed. it may be case inconsistency is noticed by user, not maintainer, we'd like to state this
Alan Ruttenberg: we're close, have 1 issue open. is inconsistent independent of header? bmotik and I disagreed. it may be case inconsistency is noticed by user, not maintainer, we'd like to state this ←
17:29:06 <msmith> bmotik: one ontology saying something about another is recipe for disaster. breaks encapsulation. let's people say anything about anything.detecting these incompatibilities and maintenance could get out of hand
Boris Motik: one ontology saying something about another is recipe for disaster. breaks encapsulation. let's people say anything about anything.detecting these incompatibilities and maintenance could get out of hand ←
17:29:35 <alanr> how is this different from having axioms on a class in two different ontologies?
Alan Ruttenberg: how is this different from having axioms on a class in two different ontologies? ←
17:29:40 <Rinke> Not sure whether this has anything to do with the issues per se? Seems that the issues are being overloaded with side-issues that prevent them from being resolved.
Rinke Hoekstra: Not sure whether this has anything to do with the issues per se? Seems that the issues are being overloaded with side-issues that prevent them from being resolved. ←
17:29:49 <alanr> detecting is trivial
Alan Ruttenberg: detecting is trivial ←
17:30:31 <msmith> alanr: I'm not persuaded
Alan Ruttenberg: I'm not persuaded ←
17:31:04 <msmith> bmotik: allowing one ont to say something about another seems to me as a conceptual hack
Boris Motik: allowing one ont to say something about another seems to me as a conceptual hack ←
17:31:26 <Rinke> +1 to separate issue!
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 to separate issue! ←
17:31:29 <msmith> alanr: you're arguing conceptual integrity vs. use case from personal experience. we can spin this off to another issue and resolve the rest
Alan Ruttenberg: you're arguing conceptual integrity vs. use case from personal experience. we can spin this off to another issue and resolve the rest ←
17:31:40 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
17:31:40 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
17:31:56 <msmith> uli: +1 on separate issue. +1 to bmotik that this will open can of worms and may be difficult to explain behavior
Uli Sattler: +1 on separate issue. +1 to bmotik that this will open can of worms and may be difficult to explain behavior ←
17:33:02 <msmith> ianh: I see what you mean, just as you don't have control over another on, you may not have control over statements saying what onts are incompatible
Ian Horrocks: I see what you mean, just as you don't have control over another on, you may not have control over statements saying what onts are incompatible ←
17:33:10 <msmith> bmotik: already what we have is an improvement
Boris Motik: already what we have is an improvement ←
17:33:19 <msmith> alanr: not sure that's the case for owl 1
Alan Ruttenberg: not sure that's the case for owl 1 ←
17:33:26 <msmith> bmotik: but there was no semantics
Boris Motik: but there was no semantics ←
17:33:37 <msmith> alanr: yes, problem was no teeth to semantics
Alan Ruttenberg: yes, problem was no teeth to semantics ←
17:34:06 <msmith> bmotik: tool is more that welcome to do this. seems to be extrapolating from one use case
Boris Motik: tool is more that welcome to do this. seems to be extrapolating from one use case ←
17:34:37 <msmith> ianh: given we have agreement other than this, can we move forward closing ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 and open new issue to discuss versioning?
Ian Horrocks: given we have agreement other than this, can we move forward closing ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 and open new issue to discuss versioning? ←
17:34:48 <msmith> alanr: incompatible with, not versioning
Alan Ruttenberg: incompatible with, not versioning ←
17:34:50 <pfps> fine by me
Peter Patel-Schneider: fine by me ←
17:34:56 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:35:07 <msmith> ianh: yes, incompatibleWith
Ian Horrocks: yes, incompatibleWith ←
17:35:55 <IanH> PROPOSED: resolve Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, modulo opening new issue on incompatibleWith
PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, modulo opening new issue on incompatibleWith ←
17:36:34 <msmith> bmotik: if we move forward splitting, I think we should take everything out
Boris Motik: if we move forward splitting, I think we should take everything out ←
17:36:49 <msmith> alanr: I disagree unless strong opposition. it would be a step backwards
Alan Ruttenberg: I disagree unless strong opposition. it would be a step backwards ←
17:37:09 <msmith> ianh: if we resolve in favor of your approach, doesn't that mean ripping out what's there now?
Ian Horrocks: if we resolve in favor of your approach, doesn't that mean ripping out what's there now? ←
17:37:27 <msmith> alanr: ontology header is better than nothing, if we remove it we may have to readd it later
Alan Ruttenberg: ontology header is better than nothing, if we remove it we may have to readd it later ←
17:37:40 <msmith> bmotik: I'd prefer to discuss if we need incompatibleWith at all
Boris Motik: I'd prefer to discuss if we need incompatibleWith at all ←
17:38:19 <msmith> alanr: it seems we're now moving backwards
Alan Ruttenberg: it seems we're now moving backwards ←
17:38:39 <msmith> pfps: I suggest going as proposal says, discuss incompatible with as separate issue
Peter Patel-Schneider: I suggest going as proposal says, discuss incompatible with as separate issue ←
17:38:48 <msmith> bmotik: out of document?
Boris Motik: out of document? ←
17:39:06 <msmith> pfps: minimal change to current doc. it is an interim state, even if no one likes it
Peter Patel-Schneider: minimal change to current doc. it is an interim state, even if no one likes it ←
17:39:12 <msmith> bmotik: ok
Boris Motik: ok ←
17:39:34 <IanH> PROPOSED: resolve Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith
PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith ←
17:39:46 <pfps> +1 to resolve this way
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to resolve this way ←
17:39:49 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:39:51 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:39:53 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:39:53 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:39:56 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:39:58 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
17:39:59 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
17:40:03 <baojie> 0
17:40:08 <Ratnesh> +1
Ratnesh Sahay: +1 ←
17:40:17 <bcuencagrau> +1
17:40:25 <IanH> RESOLVED: resolve Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith
RESOLVED: resolve ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 Imports and Versioning, per update from Boris, Peter's email and subsequent discussion, but open new issue on status of incompatibleWith ←
17:40:37 <Zhe> +1
17:40:38 <alanr> happy happy
Alan Ruttenberg: happy happy ←
17:40:42 <alanr> joy joy
Alan Ruttenberg: joy joy ←
17:40:46 <bmotik> ACTION to bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24
Boris Motik: ACTION to bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 ←
17:40:46 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - to ←
17:41:00 <bmotik> ACTION bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24
Boris Motik: ACTION bmotik2: Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 ←
17:41:00 <trackbot> Created ACTION-163 - Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-07-02].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-163 - Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-07-02]. ←
17:41:03 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-81 (reification, negative assertions)
17:41:53 <msmith> ianh: ISSUE-81 can be resolved using bmotik's proposal to use an alternative vocabulary for reification. any reasons not to resolve?
Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-81 can be resolved using bmotik's proposal to use an alternative vocabulary for reification. any reasons not to resolve? ←
17:42:18 <IanH> PROPOSED: resolve Issue 81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email
PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email ←
17:42:21 <pfps> +1 to proceed apace
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to proceed apace ←
17:42:24 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:42:25 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:42:26 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:42:27 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
17:42:28 <bcuencagrau> +1
17:42:37 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:42:37 <Ratnesh> +1
Ratnesh Sahay: +1 ←
17:42:46 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:42:58 <IanH> RESOLVED: resolve Issue 81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0156.html)
RESOLVED: resolve ISSUE-81 Reification of Negative Property Assertions, per Boris's email (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0156.html) ←
17:43:06 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:43:09 <ivan> happy happy
Ivan Herman: happy happy ←
17:43:15 <Zhe> +1
17:43:16 <JeffP> +1
17:43:35 <msmith> subtopic: Other Issue Discussions
17:43:35 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-108 (profilenames)
17:43:47 <Rinke> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0171.html
Rinke Hoekstra: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jun/0171.html ←
17:43:57 <msmith> ianh: brief revisit of profile naming (ISSUE-108) (as in Carsten's email) at least OWL-R and OWL-EL names are ok, DL-Lite needs a name. Carsten proposed calling it owl-db, but that's likely to be contentious
Ian Horrocks: brief revisit of profile naming (ISSUE-108) (as in Carsten's email) at least OWL-R and OWL-EL names are ok, DL-Lite needs a name. Carsten proposed calling it owl-db, but that's likely to be contentious ←
17:44:52 <Zhe> :_
17:45:29 <msmith> msmith: why can't we call it dl-lite?
Michael Smith: why can't we call it dl-lite? ←
17:45:30 <calvanese> unmute me
Diego Calvanese: unmute me ←
17:45:39 <calvanese> unmute me
Diego Calvanese: unmute me ←
17:45:40 <alanr> we want to market to a larger community!!
Alan Ruttenberg: we want to market to a larger community!! ←
17:45:48 <msmith> ianh: owl-lite is deprecated, owl dl-lite seems rather long winded
Ian Horrocks: owl-lite is deprecated, owl dl-lite seems rather long winded ←
17:45:51 <calvanese> zakim, unmute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, unmute me ←
17:45:51 <Zakim> calvanese should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should no longer be muted ←
17:46:04 <sandro> "OWL2 Lite" ?
Sandro Hawke: "OWL2 Lite" ? ←
17:46:21 <alanr> OWL-D
Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-D ←
17:46:27 <msmith> calvanese: we believe name owl-db would be suitable, since owl-r people like owl-r lets use owl-db. owl-d doesn't evoke anything related to dl-lite. I am not in favor of owl-d. owl-db name implies something
Diego Calvanese: we believe name owl-db would be suitable, since owl-r people like owl-r lets use owl-db. owl-d doesn't evoke anything related to dl-lite. I am not in favor of owl-d. owl-db name implies something ←
17:46:30 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me
17:46:30 <Zakim> Zhe should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should no longer be muted ←
17:46:50 <alanr> OWL-I
Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-I ←
17:47:07 <msmith> zhe: is this profile specific for db modeling integration and nothing else?
Zhe Wu: is this profile specific for db modeling integration and nothing else? ←
17:47:44 <alanr> quantify "large"?
Alan Ruttenberg: quantify "large"? ←
17:47:50 <uli> zakim, who is speaking
Uli Sattler: zakim, who is speaking ←
17:47:50 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is speaking', uli
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'who is speaking', uli ←
17:47:50 <msmith> calvanese: profile was created to connect to large databases. we believe it is specifically suited to databases. also conceptually matches expressivity of databases
Diego Calvanese: profile was created to connect to large databases. we believe it is specifically suited to databases. also conceptually matches expressivity of databases ←
17:47:55 <alanr> millions, 100s of millions?
Alan Ruttenberg: millions, 100s of millions? ←
17:48:03 <JeffP> zakim, who is talking?
Jeff Pan: zakim, who is talking? ←
17:48:07 <alanr> 10s of billions?
Alan Ruttenberg: 10s of billions? ←
17:48:16 <Zakim> JeffP, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (4%), Ratnesh (9%), calvanese (27%), Zhe (82%)
Zakim IRC Bot: JeffP, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (4%), Ratnesh (9%), calvanese (27%), Zhe (82%) ←
17:48:33 <msmith> zhe: misleading to me because dl-lite can be provided to other domains. plus gives users belief dedicated to storing owl. gives impression only implementable with db, nothing else. dl-lite could apply to sparql endpoint as well
Zhe Wu: misleading to me because dl-lite can be provided to other domains. plus gives users belief dedicated to storing owl. gives impression only implementable with db, nothing else. dl-lite could apply to sparql endpoint as well ←
17:49:00 <Ratnesh> zakim, mute me
Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, mute me ←
17:49:00 <Zakim> Ratnesh should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ratnesh should now be muted ←
17:49:42 <msmith> calvanese: one point is that its implemented using database technologies
Diego Calvanese: one point is that its implemented using database technologies ←
17:49:55 <msmith> zhe: is this implementation specific?
Zhe Wu: is this implementation specific? ←
17:50:02 <msmith> calvanese: its how the profile came about. its tuned to these features
Diego Calvanese: its how the profile came about. its tuned to these features ←
17:50:45 <msmith> ianh: useful exchange, and what we suspected. owl-db is controversial. any other less controversial names?
Ian Horrocks: useful exchange, and what we suspected. owl-db is controversial. any other less controversial names? ←
17:50:45 <Rinke> Profile names are easily interpreted as denoting disjoint `features'
Rinke Hoekstra: Profile names are easily interpreted as denoting disjoint `features' ←
17:50:55 <msmith> bmotik: why not 1,2,3 or A,B,C?
Boris Motik: why not 1,2,3 or A,B,C? ←
17:51:07 <alanr> the only reasonable mnemonic is "R"
Alan Ruttenberg: the only reasonable mnemonic is "R" ←
17:51:20 <msmith> ianh: we have reasonable names for EL++ and OWL-R which people are comfortable with. isn't 1,2,3 silly?
Ian Horrocks: we have reasonable names for EL++ and OWL-R which people are comfortable with. isn't 1,2,3 silly? ←
17:51:28 <msmith> bmotik: what's wrong with current names?
Boris Motik: what's wrong with current names? ←
17:51:38 <msmith> ianh: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful
Ian Horrocks: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful ←
17:52:06 <msmith> alanr: only name with good pneumonic is OWL-R, EL++ is historical and only relevant to small audience. I support getting away from historical names and suggest 1 letter (fairly meaningless) names
Alan Ruttenberg: only name with good pneumonic is OWL-R, EL++ is historical and only relevant to small audience. I support getting away from historical names and suggest 1 letter (fairly meaningless) names ←
17:52:25 <sandro> +1 get away from history.
Sandro Hawke: +1 get away from history. ←
17:53:07 <alanr> yes, peter, but for how many others?
Alan Ruttenberg: yes, peter, but for how many others? ←
17:53:08 <sandro> "DL" is another bad name.
Sandro Hawke: "DL" is another bad name. ←
17:53:10 <msmith> bmotik: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful, what about just dl-lite. el++ has established itself, it doesn't need the owl prefix
Boris Motik: owl dl-lite is too much of a mouthful, what about just dl-lite. el++ has established itself, it doesn't need the owl prefix ←
17:53:18 <alanr> I agree, that DL is another bad name
Alan Ruttenberg: I agree, that DL is another bad name ←
17:53:48 <msmith> ianh: that may be a step too far
Ian Horrocks: that may be a step too far ←
17:53:49 <alanr> OWL-C for OWL-DL (OWL-Complete)
Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-C for OWL-DL (OWL-Complete) ←
17:54:02 <alanr> OWL-A for (OWL-Anything for OWL-Full)
Alan Ruttenberg: OWL-A for (OWL-Anything for OWL-Full) ←
17:54:04 <Rinke> DL-Lite is about assertions, why not OWL-A
Rinke Hoekstra: DL-Lite is about assertions, why not OWL-A ←
17:54:22 <msmith> sandro: we are worst people to pick names. someone should subject a marketing department to this not us. knowledge of history is an impediment
Sandro Hawke: we are worst people to pick names. someone should subject a marketing department to this not us. knowledge of history is an impediment ←
17:55:15 <msmith> ianh: another side, the marketing people ask you to explain because they know nothing. so, names they create will depend on who explains them
Ian Horrocks: another side, the marketing people ask you to explain because they know nothing. so, names they create will depend on who explains them ←
17:55:24 <Rinke> agree with Sandro, one complaint that came up in my little survey was that people didn't know what the names meant
Rinke Hoekstra: agree with Sandro, one complaint that came up in my little survey was that people didn't know what the names meant ←
17:55:33 <ivan> +1 to Rinke
Ivan Herman: +1 to Rinke ←
17:55:46 <msmith> sandro: names should be targeted at people making the purchase decision
Sandro Hawke: names should be targeted at people making the purchase decision ←
17:55:56 <msmith> calvanese: name is indication, choice will be made on features. I made several good arguments for why owl-db is good for dl-lite. I didn't hear compelling, non-marketing counterarguments
Diego Calvanese: name is indication, choice will be made on features. I made several good arguments for why owl-db is good for dl-lite. I didn't hear compelling, non-marketing counterarguments ←
17:56:12 <alanr> I was convinced
Alan Ruttenberg: I was convinced ←
17:57:14 <msmith> zhe: why not call owl-r owl-db? oracle is largest database in the world and implements owl-r?
Zhe Wu: why not call owl-r owl-db? oracle is largest database in the world and implements owl-r? ←
17:57:25 <JeffP> We can call it OWL-Aberdeen
Jeff Pan: We can call it OWL-Aberdeen ←
17:57:43 <ivan> JeffP: I would prefer OWL-Amsterdam!
Jeff Pan: I would prefer OWL-Amsterdam! [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ] ←
17:57:48 <JeffP> hehe
17:57:49 <Rinke> me too!
Rinke Hoekstra: me too! ←
17:57:49 <msmith> ianh: enough of this discussion. owl-db is just too attractive, so probably no one can have it
Ian Horrocks: enough of this discussion. owl-db is just too attractive, so probably no one can have it ←
17:57:57 <sandro> +1 to random city names. :-)
Sandro Hawke: +1 to random city names. :-) ←
17:58:12 <ivan> rowl, dowl?
Ivan Herman: rowl, dowl? ←
17:58:14 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
17:58:14 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted ←
17:58:21 <Rinke> howl?
Rinke Hoekstra: howl? ←
17:58:21 <alanr> who gets OWL-Bagdad?
Alan Ruttenberg: who gets OWL-Bagdad? ←
17:58:22 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-67 (reification)
17:58:59 <msmith> ianh: anyone?
Ian Horrocks: anyone? ←
17:59:11 <msmith> pfps: I don't think anything needs to be done, current status is fine
Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't think anything needs to be done, current status is fine ←
17:59:22 <msmith> ianh: current status is that we're using rdf reification
Ian Horrocks: current status is that we're using rdf reification ←
17:59:30 <msmith> alanr: I'm happy with current reification. as long as triple being reified is included
Alan Ruttenberg: I'm happy with current reification. as long as triple being reified is included ←
17:59:32 <Zhe> second alanr
17:59:52 <msmith> bmotik: I don't think we should output triple being reified. this can be handled in the semantics
Boris Motik: I don't think we should output triple being reified. this can be handled in the semantics ←
18:00:09 <alanr> that's not an argument against. It's an argument that says we can also do it a different way
Alan Ruttenberg: that's not an argument against. It's an argument that says we can also do it a different way ←
18:00:49 <msmith> zhe: conceptually, bmotik is 100% correct. but with tons of annotations this makes implementers life difficult. what's the objection to adding the triple
Zhe Wu: conceptually, bmotik is 100% correct. but with tons of annotations this makes implementers life difficult. what's the objection to adding the triple ←
18:01:23 <msmith> alanr: yes, what's argument against? this is a divergence from rdf semantics
Alan Ruttenberg: yes, what's argument against? this is a divergence from rdf semantics ←
18:01:56 <alanr> I put a proposal for how to solve this on the email
Alan Ruttenberg: I put a proposal for how to solve this on the email ←
18:02:11 <msmith> bmotik: impossible to know when mapping rdf to ontology if ontology contained axiom or just annotation of axiom. I consider sticking with current better solution
Boris Motik: impossible to know when mapping rdf to ontology if ontology contained axiom or just annotation of axiom. I consider sticking with current better solution ←
18:02:51 <msmith> msmith: +1 to supporting annotation of non-present axioms
Michael Smith: +1 to supporting annotation of non-present axioms ←
18:03:08 <alanr> There is also rdf/xml support for concise reification when it includes the triple
Alan Ruttenberg: There is also rdf/xml support for concise reification when it includes the triple ←
18:03:36 <msmith> pfps: I don't believe argument that additional processing burden is accurate since it introduces an additional triple to parse
Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't believe argument that additional processing burden is accurate since it introduces an additional triple to parse ←
18:03:54 <msmith> zhe: bmotik, I believe you proposed solutions via email to some of these problems. pfps, oracle believes not including triple will make life harder
Zhe Wu: bmotik, I believe you proposed solutions via email to some of these problems. pfps, oracle believes not including triple will make life harder ←
18:04:59 <msmith> alanr: support for concise reification in RDF/XML, but only in some circumstances
Alan Ruttenberg: support for concise reification in RDF/XML, but only in some circumstances ←
18:05:10 <sandro> (er, no, you still need to parse the triples even when not using the RDF/XML trick.)
Sandro Hawke: (er, no, you still need to parse the triples even when not using the RDF/XML trick.) ←
18:05:27 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
18:05:29 <msmith> bmotik: are you proposing we use this special syntax
Boris Motik: are you proposing we use this special syntax ←
18:06:00 <msmith> alanr: if triple is in serialization, on can put an id on the predicate to indicate reification. there is no shorthand for only the reified part
Alan Ruttenberg: if triple is in serialization, on can put an id on the predicate to indicate reification. there is no shorthand for only the reified part ←
18:06:17 <msmith> ianh: closing discussion soon
Ian Horrocks: closing discussion soon ←
18:07:19 <alanr> no bad ida
Alan Ruttenberg: no bad ida ←
18:07:29 <alanr> better to add a special annotation so they are parallel
Alan Ruttenberg: better to add a special annotation so they are parallel ←
18:08:14 <alanr> I don't understand
Alan Ruttenberg: I don't understand ←
18:08:20 <ivan> me neither
Ivan Herman: me neither ←
18:08:26 <msmith> bmotik: one could use following procedure.... if re-ified and non-reified version are present... but this is non-monotonic. question to zhe - if hint that reified triples in RDF/XML should use this shorthand, would that be ok?
Boris Motik: one could use following procedure.... if re-ified and non-reified version are present... but this is non-monotonic. question to zhe - if hint that reified triples in RDF/XML should use this shorthand, would that be ok? ←
18:08:43 <ivan> I do not think we can do that, Boris
Ivan Herman: I do not think we can do that, Boris ←
18:09:05 <Zhe> sounds good
18:09:10 <msmith> ianh: take to email, then revisit discussion
Ian Horrocks: take to email, then revisit discussion ←
18:09:39 <msmith> topic: General Discussion
18:09:39 <msmith> subtopic: Schedule
18:10:12 <msmith> ianh: agenda has short list of things needing attention. features: 1) rich annotations, 2) nary datatypes. no bijan? :( perhaps uli on nary?
Ian Horrocks: agenda has short list of things needing attention. features: 1) rich annotations, 2) nary datatypes. no bijan? :( perhaps uli on nary? ←
18:10:27 <uli> Bijan isn't here
Uli Sattler: Bijan isn't here ←
18:10:32 <sandro> zakim, where is bijan?
Sandro Hawke: zakim, where is bijan? ←
18:10:32 <Zakim> sorry, sandro, I do not understand your question
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, sandro, I do not understand your question ←
18:10:52 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
18:10:52 <Zakim> uli was not muted, uli
Zakim IRC Bot: uli was not muted, uli ←
18:11:18 <msmith> uli: what are you after?
Uli Sattler: what are you after? ←
18:11:36 <msmith> ianh: I'd like some comments on schedule?
Ian Horrocks: I'd like some comments on schedule? ←
18:12:14 <msmith> uli: we could be moving really faster. I won't be around for next two weeks, otherwise I'd say proposal in 1 week
Uli Sattler: we could be moving really faster. I won't be around for next two weeks, otherwise I'd say proposal in 1 week ←
18:12:27 <msmith> ianh: a concrete proposal for what should be added to spec? but not now?
Ian Horrocks: a concrete proposal for what should be added to spec? but not now? ←
18:12:51 <alanr> probably depends on what happens next week and the week after too...
Alan Ruttenberg: probably depends on what happens next week and the week after too... ←
18:12:57 <msmith> uli: depends on this week.
Uli Sattler: depends on this week. ←
18:13:05 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
18:13:05 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
18:13:07 <msmith> ianh: this is reasonable guesstimate
Ian Horrocks: this is reasonable guesstimate ←
18:13:43 <msmith> alanr: we should get quick check-in on prioritizing things. rich annotations, nary. how are people on nary? priorities, benefits vs cost of delaying? when do we say it's out?
Alan Ruttenberg: we should get quick check-in on prioritizing things. rich annotations, nary. how are people on nary? priorities, benefits vs cost of delaying? when do we say it's out? ←
18:14:45 <msmith> ianh: is my answer some number of weeks?
Ian Horrocks: is my answer some number of weeks? ←
18:15:11 <msmith> alanr: I would like to hear from people. I'd like to hear input.
Alan Ruttenberg: I would like to hear from people. I'd like to hear input. ←
18:15:35 <msmith> ianh: is it significant delay worthy?
Ian Horrocks: is it significant delay worthy? ←
18:15:39 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the call? ←
18:15:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, msmith, IanH, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau (muted), Alan, bmotik, calvanese (muted), Ratnesh
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Zhe, msmith, IanH, Ivan, Sandro, uli (muted), baojie, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau (muted), Alan, bmotik, calvanese (muted), Ratnesh ←
18:15:43 <Zakim> ... (muted)
Zakim IRC Bot: ... (muted) ←
18:15:51 <msmith> msmith: I think nary are important and would be prepared to wait some
Michael Smith: I think nary are important and would be prepared to wait some ←
18:15:58 <uli> "How horrible would you think failing on n-ary be?"
Uli Sattler: "How horrible would you think failing on n-ary be?" ←
18:16:04 <pfps> i'm prepared to wait forever as long as it isn't more than 15 minutes (thanks Oscar Wilde)
Peter Patel-Schneider: i'm prepared to wait forever as long as it isn't more than 15 minutes (thanks Oscar Wilde) ←
18:16:11 <bmotik> I believe that n-ary datatypes are a high-risk feature
Boris Motik: I believe that n-ary datatypes are a high-risk feature ←
18:16:39 <Achille> we can leave without nary
Achille Fokoue: we can leave without nary ←
18:16:44 <alanr> I'm concerned about unknowns with n-aries, and known issues, like difficulty in combinations.
Alan Ruttenberg: I'm concerned about unknowns with n-aries, and known issues, like difficulty in combinations. ←
18:16:48 <msmith> bmotik: adding nary adds a huge burden to developers. some algorithmic issues haven't been resolved and I'm skeptical
Boris Motik: adding nary adds a huge burden to developers. some algorithmic issues haven't been resolved and I'm skeptical ←
18:16:57 <msmith> msmith: notes Carsten also absent
Michael Smith: notes Carsten also absent ←
18:17:04 <uli> good point
Uli Sattler: good point ←
18:17:06 <Achille> it is not worth delaying the spec for it
Achille Fokoue: it is not worth delaying the spec for it ←
18:17:11 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
18:17:11 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
18:17:16 <msmith> ianh: not time now to get to into the details
Ian Horrocks: not time now to get to into the details ←
18:17:30 <ivan> owl3?
Ivan Herman: owl3? ←
18:17:38 <msmith> uli: not having any nary support would be regretted later as something we missed
Uli Sattler: not having any nary support would be regretted later as something we missed ←
18:17:50 <msmith> ianh: perhaps we should set some implementation bar. 2 implementations to get to rec, correct?
Ian Horrocks: perhaps we should set some implementation bar. 2 implementations to get to rec, correct? ←
18:18:41 <msmith> sandro: in general, should only add things for which we think reasonable to there may be two implementations. if we're unsure, that means its at risk
Sandro Hawke: in general, should only add things for which we think reasonable to there may be two implementations. if we're unsure, that means its at risk ←
18:18:49 <pfps> +1 to "at risk"iness
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to "at risk"iness ←
18:19:19 <msmith> alanr: that doesn't help because there's significant work to get it into the spec
Alan Ruttenberg: that doesn't help because there's significant work to get it into the spec ←
18:19:47 <msmith> ianh: i agree with that, but the implementation point clarifies just how much expressive power we want to add. those wanting it very powerful must weight that against cost of implementing it so that it can proceed
Ian Horrocks: i agree with that, but the implementation point clarifies just how much expressive power we want to add. those wanting it very powerful must weight that against cost of implementing it so that it can proceed ←
18:20:46 <msmith> alanr: so far focused on one type of concrete domain extension, < > simple arithmetic. perhaps allen interval relations instead. I'm taking this up with carsten
Alan Ruttenberg: so far focused on one type of concrete domain extension, < > simple arithmetic. perhaps allen interval relations instead. I'm taking this up with carsten ←
18:20:56 <uli> alanr, can you explain this?
Uli Sattler: alanr, can you explain this? ←
18:21:07 <alanr> uli, yes, via email
Alan Ruttenberg: uli, yes, via email ←
18:21:22 <msmith> bmotik: allen interval for time intervals will not solve problems for owl
Boris Motik: allen interval for time intervals will not solve problems for owl ←
18:21:44 <alanr> won't solve all time problems for time. But may solve some some time problems
Alan Ruttenberg: won't solve all time problems for time. But may solve some some time problems ←
18:21:46 <msmith> bmotik: nary datatypes won't help this ...(scribe interpret) because they only apply to data properties on a single individuals (not comparison between multiple events)
Boris Motik: nary datatypes won't help this ...(scribe interpret) because they only apply to data properties on a single individuals (not comparison between multiple events) ←
18:22:37 <msmith> ianh: will ask bijan next week about this
Ian Horrocks: will ask bijan next week about this ←
18:23:01 <msmith> ianh: also discussion about datatypes in general, what should be supported. is this going to derail us?
Ian Horrocks: also discussion about datatypes in general, what should be supported. is this going to derail us? ←
18:23:20 <msmith> bmotik: thinks we can resolve. we have to resolve. I don't think solution is difficult
Boris Motik: thinks we can resolve. we have to resolve. I don't think solution is difficult ←
18:23:21 <alanr> I have concerns that this will take time.
Alan Ruttenberg: I have concerns that this will take time. ←
18:23:54 <Zakim> -calvanese
Zakim IRC Bot: -calvanese ←
18:24:17 <uli> ;)
Uli Sattler: ;) ←
18:24:23 <uli> yes
Uli Sattler: yes ←
18:24:26 <uli> very
Uli Sattler: very ←
18:24:36 <msmith> ianh: ISSUE-118 is languishing. any champion for this issue?
Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-118 is languishing. any champion for this issue? ←
18:25:24 <msmith> alanr: I've suggested unnamed and bnodes as alternative constructs
Alan Ruttenberg: I've suggested unnamed and bnodes as alternative constructs ←
18:25:47 <msmith> ianh: documents need to be produced. test, ufds
Ian Horrocks: documents need to be produced. test, ufds ←
18:25:48 <alanr> action: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes
ACTION: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes ←
18:25:48 <trackbot> Created ACTION-164 - Send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-07-02].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-164 - Send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-07-02]. ←
18:26:30 <alanr> mike, you know about action=raw ? to get raw mediawiki pages?
Alan Ruttenberg: mike, you know about action=raw ? to get raw mediawiki pages? ←
18:26:46 <msmith> msmith: alanr, no. thanks
Michael Smith: alanr, no. thanks ←
18:27:18 <msmith> msmith: re tests, I'm targeting f2f3 as a milestone. two parts, the tests, and the documents. I'll try to get something to the group before f2f3 on each
Michael Smith: re tests, I'm targeting f2f3 as a milestone. two parts, the tests, and the documents. I'll try to get something to the group before f2f3 on each ←
18:27:32 <alanr> mike, see http://svn.neurocommons.org/svn/trunk/product/wiki/get-ncpage-ontology.pl
Alan Ruttenberg: mike, see http://svn.neurocommons.org/svn/trunk/product/wiki/get-ncpage-ontology.pl ←
18:27:49 <msmith> ianh: none for ufd
Ian Horrocks: none for ufd ←
18:28:00 <msmith> pfps: I think bijan is working on primer
Peter Patel-Schneider: I think bijan is working on primer ←
18:28:09 <msmith> topic: additional business
18:28:17 <msmith> ianh: no additional business, adjourn
Ian Horrocks: no additional business, adjourn ←
18:28:21 <Zakim> -uli
Zakim IRC Bot: -uli ←
18:28:24 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
18:28:25 <Zakim> -baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie ←
18:28:26 <Zakim> -JeffP
Zakim IRC Bot: -JeffP ←
18:28:26 <Zakim> -Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille ←
18:28:28 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
18:28:28 <Zakim> -Ratnesh
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ratnesh ←
18:28:30 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
18:28:32 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
18:28:33 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
18:28:38 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
18:28:41 <sandro> msmith, I put some notes about scribing here: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Scribe_Conventions#After_scribing_.28New_Style_Minutes.29
Sandro Hawke: msmith, I put some notes about scribing here: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Scribe_Conventions#After_scribing_.28New_Style_Minutes.29 ←
18:28:45 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
18:29:02 <msmith> rrsagent, pointer
rrsagent, pointer ←
18:29:02 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-29-02
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-29-02 ←
18:29:14 <alanr> e.g http://sw.neurocommons.org/cgi-bin/get-ncpage-ontology.pl?page=CommonsPurl:Record/Ncbi_gene§ion=purlRdf
Alan Ruttenberg: e.g http://sw.neurocommons.org/cgi-bin/get-ncpage-ontology.pl?page=CommonsPurl:Record/Ncbi_gene§ion=purlRdf ←
18:29:26 <sandro> Zakim, list attendees
Sandro Hawke: Zakim, list attendees ←
18:29:26 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli,
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli, ←
18:29:30 <Zakim> ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke ←
18:29:39 <Zakim> -Alan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Alan ←
18:31:07 <msmith> zakim, bye
zakim, bye ←
18:31:07 <Zakim> leaving. As of this point the attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli,
Zakim IRC Bot: leaving. As of this point the attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.202.408.aabb, +0186527aacc, Ivan, Sandro, Ratnesh, Zhe, msmith, +1.518.276.aadd, baojie, bmotik, IanH, uli, ←
18:31:10 <Zakim> ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: ... +0122427aaee, Achille, JeffP, bcuencagrau, Alan, calvanese, Rinke ←
18:31:21 <msmith> rrsagent, make log public
rrsagent, make log public ←
18:31:32 <msmith> rrsagent, draft minutes
rrsagent, draft minutes ←
18:31:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-minutes.html msmith
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-minutes.html msmith ←
18:31:39 <msmith> rrsagent, bye
rrsagent, bye ←
18:31:39 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-actions.rdf :
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-actions.rdf : ←
18:31:39 <RRSAgent> ACTION: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [1]
ACTION: calvanese to investigate top/bottom roles in dl-lite [1] ←
18:31:39 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-23-56
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-23-56 ←
18:31:39 <RRSAgent> ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24 [2]
ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the strucutral spec according to resolution of ISSUE-21 and ISSUE-24 [2] ←
18:31:39 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-41-00
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T17-41-00 ←
18:31:39 <RRSAgent> ACTION: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [3]
ACTION: alan to send email re: suggestions (again) for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes [3] ←
18:31:39 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-25-48
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/25-owl-irc#T18-25-48 ←
Formatted by CommonScribe