edit

OWL Working Group

Minutes of 03 December 2008

Present
Boris Motik, Ian Horrocks, Sandro Hawke, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Markus Krötzsch, Alan Ruttenberg, Jeff Pan, Peter Patel-Schneider, Achille Fokoue, Christine Golbreich, Peter Patel-Schneider, Michael Schneider, Zhe Wu, Michael Smith
Scribe
Boris Motik
IRC Log
Original
Resolutions

None.

Topics
00:00:00 <scribenick> PRESENT: Boris Motik, IanH, Sandro, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, Alan Ruttenberg, JeffP, Peter Patel-Schneider, Achille, Christine Golbreich, pfps, Michael Schneider, Zhe, msmith
18:03:51 <bmotik> ScribeNick: bmotik

(Scribe set to Boris Motik)

18:04:30 <bmotik> topic: Agenda amendments

1. Agenda amendments

18:04:34 <bmotik> alanr: No amendments

Alan Ruttenberg: No amendments

18:04:41 <bmotik> topic: Previous minutes

2. Previous minutes

18:04:42 <IanH> Look OK to me

Ian Horrocks: Look OK to me

18:04:43 <bmotik> alanr: Minutes accepted

Alan Ruttenberg: Minutes accepted

18:04:48 <bmotik> topic: Pending review actions

3. Pending review actions

18:05:18 <bmotik> alanr: All pending review actions are OK

Alan Ruttenberg: All pending review actions are OK

18:05:34 <bmotik> topic: Due and overdue actions

4. Due and overdue actions

18:05:44 <bmotik> alanr: We can close ACTION-241

Alan Ruttenberg: We can close ACTION-241

18:05:59 <bmotik> alanr: ACTION-250 not done yet

Alan Ruttenberg: ACTION-250 not done yet

18:06:09 <bmotik> alanr: Thanks Sandro for publishing the docs

Alan Ruttenberg: Thanks Sandro for publishing the docs

18:06:16 <bmotik> sandro: Thanks everybody

Sandro Hawke: Thanks everybody

18:06:26 <bmotik> alanr: We now need to solicit reviews

Alan Ruttenberg: We now need to solicit reviews

18:06:41 <IanH> see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4#Publicity

Ian Horrocks: see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4#Publicity

18:06:42 <IanH> and http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Publicity

Ian Horrocks: and http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Publicity

18:06:44 <bmotik> alanr: Reviews are due in January

Alan Ruttenberg: Reviews are due in January

18:06:55 <bmotik> topic: Future planning

5. Future planning

18:07:18 <bmotik> alanr: Everybody, but editors in particular, should monitor public-owl-comments

Alan Ruttenberg: Everybody, but editors in particular, should monitor public-owl-comments

18:07:26 <bmotik> alanr: We should respond as a group

Alan Ruttenberg: We should respond as a group

18:07:46 <bmotik> alanr: Therefore, people responding should first discuss things with the other WG members

Alan Ruttenberg: Therefore, people responding should first discuss things with the other WG members

18:08:01 <bmotik> alanr: public-owl-dev is not our official comment list

Alan Ruttenberg: public-owl-dev is not our official comment list

18:08:25 <bmotik> sandro: Alan, you said that, if you are replying on some list, make sure that you say this is your personal opinion

Sandro Hawke: Alan, you said that, if you are replying on some list, make sure that you say this is your personal opinion

18:08:44 <bmotik> sandro: So, should people reply sent to public-owl-comments?

Sandro Hawke: So, should people reply sent to public-owl-comments?

18:08:48 <bmotik> alanr: No

Alan Ruttenberg: No

18:09:05 <bmotik> alanr: My understanding is that public-owl-comments are comments that need to be responded officially

Alan Ruttenberg: My understanding is that public-owl-comments are comments that need to be responded officially

18:09:11 <bmotik> alanr: Every other list is just a list

Alan Ruttenberg: Every other list is just a list

18:10:09 <bmotik> alanr: If you discuss any comment that came in from public-owl-comments on some other list, you need to put a disclaimer that this is your own opinion and not that of the WG

Alan Ruttenberg: If you discuss any comment that came in from public-owl-comments on some other list, you need to put a disclaimer that this is your own opinion and not that of the WG

18:10:38 <bmotik> alanr: If you read something on public-owl-comments, but discuss this on, say, public-owl-dev, you should put a displaimer

Alan Ruttenberg: If you read something on public-owl-comments, but discuss this on, say, public-owl-dev, you should put a displaimer

18:10:50 <bmotik> ianh: We should have a formal guidline for responding

Ian Horrocks: We should have a formal guidline for responding

18:10:54 <sandro> +1 everyone in WG should disclaim in any posting

Sandro Hawke: +1 everyone in WG should disclaim in any posting

18:12:07 <bmotik> ianh: If someone sends a comment to some list other than public-owl-comments, we should ask people whether they want a formal reply; if they do, we need to ask people to forward their comment to public-owl-comments

Ian Horrocks: If someone sends a comment to some list other than public-owl-comments, we should ask people whether they want a formal reply; if they do, we need to ask people to forward their comment to public-owl-comments

18:12:28 <bmotik> sandro: public-owl-comments is what we have a formal obligation to reply

Sandro Hawke: public-owl-comments is what we have a formal obligation to reply

18:12:43 <bmotik> sandro: It might be valuable to do that forwarding

Sandro Hawke: It might be valuable to do that forwarding

18:13:33 <bmotik> sandro: It is good to say "If you want a forward reply, please forward this to the public-owl-comments list. If you don't want a formal reply, do you mind if I forward this to public-owl-comments for our record"?

Sandro Hawke: It is good to say "If you want a forward reply, please forward this to the public-owl-comments list. If you don't want a formal reply, do you mind if I forward this to public-owl-comments for our record"?

18:13:40 <bmotik> topic: Plans for other documents

6. Plans for other documents

18:13:41 <sandro> ACTION: sandro write wiki page on mailing-list behavior guidelines during last call

ACTION: sandro write wiki page on mailing-list behavior guidelines during last call

18:13:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-255 - Write wiki page on mailing-list behavior guidelines during last call [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-12-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-255 - Write wiki page on mailing-list behavior guidelines during last call [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-12-10].

18:14:19 <bmotik> alanr: We should go one-by-one through other documents and ask the editors about what their plans are

Alan Ruttenberg: We should go one-by-one through other documents and ask the editors about what their plans are

18:14:39 <bmotik> alanr: There seems to be some confusion as to what the purpose of the issue list is

Alan Ruttenberg: There seems to be some confusion as to what the purpose of the issue list is

18:14:55 <bmotik> alanr: We can also discuss which of these documents should be REC track

Alan Ruttenberg: We can also discuss which of these documents should be REC track

18:15:16 <bmotik> subtopic: RDF-Based Semantics

6.1. RDF-Based Semantics

18:15:43 <bmotik> alanr: Michael, can you please let us know what your plans are?

Alan Ruttenberg: Michael, can you please let us know what your plans are?

18:16:21 <bmotik> alanr: Michael doesn't seem to be on the call

Alan Ruttenberg: Michael doesn't seem to be on the call

18:16:51 <bmotik> alanr: Does anyone have any comments about the state of the RDF-Based Semantics

Alan Ruttenberg: Does anyone have any comments about the state of the RDF-Based Semantics

18:17:06 <bmotik> subtopic: Quick Reference Guide

6.2. Quick Reference Guide

18:17:27 <bmotik> alanr: Is there anyone who can something about the quick reference?

Alan Ruttenberg: Is there anyone who can something about the quick reference?

18:17:57 <bmotik> alanr: Nobody seems to be on the call

Alan Ruttenberg: Nobody seems to be on the call

18:18:27 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted

18:18:29 <bmotik> subtopic: RDF-Based Semantics

6.3. RDF-Based Semantics

18:18:34 <bmotik> alanr: Michael is now here

Alan Ruttenberg: Michael is now here

18:19:01 <bmotik> schneid: I have made many minor and medium fixes

Michael Schneider: I have made many minor and medium fixes

18:19:08 <bmotik> schneid: There are only 5 significant points

Michael Schneider: There are only 5 significant points

18:19:26 <bmotik> schneid: I can write these points up and send them to the list

Michael Schneider: I can write these points up and send them to the list

18:19:42 <bmotik> schneid: I believe that these points may become WG issues

Michael Schneider: I believe that these points may become WG issues

18:20:18 <bmotik> alanr: Would you mind saying why something would become an issue on the issue list?

Alan Ruttenberg: Would you mind saying why something would become an issue on the issue list?

18:20:32 <bmotik> schneid: That should be discussed during a discussion on the list

Michael Schneider: That should be discussed during a discussion on the list

18:20:58 <bmotik> schneid: None of these issues are of the sort "various people have various opinions"; instead, they are rather technical

Michael Schneider: None of these issues are of the sort "various people have various opinions"; instead, they are rather technical

18:21:17 <bmotik> schneid: I'll start with the list, we can have a dicsussion, and then we can decide

Michael Schneider: I'll start with the list, we can have a dicsussion, and then we can decide

18:21:32 <bmotik> ianh: Do you have a schedule for delivery?

Ian Horrocks: Do you have a schedule for delivery?

18:21:54 <bmotik> schneid: I hope mid January is reaslistic

Michael Schneider: I hope mid January is reaslistic

18:22:22 <bmotik> schneid: In the time before Christmas I'll try to write each issue up in a form so that we can discuss them

Michael Schneider: In the time before Christmas I'll try to write each issue up in a form so that we can discuss them

18:23:28 <bmotik> alanr: Would be expectation be that we publish another draft before the LC comment period ends?

Alan Ruttenberg: Would be expectation be that we publish another draft before the LC comment period ends?

18:23:38 <bmotik> sandro: The expectation is that we won't publish before January 23

Sandro Hawke: The expectation is that we won't publish before January 23

18:24:13 <bmotik> sandro: I think it would be OK to publish the RDF-Based Semantics before the end of LC comments

Sandro Hawke: I think it would be OK to publish the RDF-Based Semantics before the end of LC comments

18:24:37 <bmotik> sandro: Particularly if this would get us back in sync, so that all the documents could go to CR together

Sandro Hawke: Particularly if this would get us back in sync, so that all the documents could go to CR together

18:25:24 <bmotik> schneid: I don't expect to have the RDF-Based Semantics to have done before mid January

Michael Schneider: I don't expect to have the RDF-Based Semantics to have done before mid January

18:25:44 <bmotik> schneid: It looks strange to me to publish the RDF-Based Semantics before the comment period end

Michael Schneider: It looks strange to me to publish the RDF-Based Semantics before the comment period end

18:26:03 <bmotik> schneid: End of January is my expectation

Michael Schneider: End of January is my expectation

18:26:21 <bmotik> schneid: We could publish a LC version end of Jan

Michael Schneider: We could publish a LC version end of Jan

18:26:41 <bmotik> ianh: We can't be talking about much difference anyway (mid vs. end JanuarY)

Ian Horrocks: We can't be talking about much difference anyway (mid vs. end JanuarY)

18:26:58 <bmotik> ianh: We can work on comments as they come in

Ian Horrocks: We can work on comments as they come in

18:27:50 <bmotik> sandro: I assume in mid February we'd publish what we have currently in LC as CR

Sandro Hawke: I assume in mid February we'd publish what we have currently in LC as CR

18:28:07 <bmotik> sandro: It would be nice if we could publish the RDF-Based Semantics in sync

Sandro Hawke: It would be nice if we could publish the RDF-Based Semantics in sync

18:28:20 <bmotik> sandro: It would be good to go into REC together

Sandro Hawke: It would be good to go into REC together

18:28:54 <bmotik> schneid: We don't expect implementations of the RDF-Based Semantics, so we can make the CR phase shorter

Michael Schneider: We don't expect implementations of the RDF-Based Semantics, so we can make the CR phase shorter

18:29:03 <bmotik> schneid: This would allow us to sync up

Michael Schneider: This would allow us to sync up

18:30:57 <sandro> Sandro: Okay, so we'll try to sync up RDF-Based Semantics during CR, and send them all to PR together.

Sandro Hawke: Okay, so we'll try to sync up RDF-Based Semantics during CR, and send them all to PR together. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

18:30:58 <IanH> Ian: in order to exit CR for OWL 1 we should already have had implementations of OWL full; these will also be implementations of OWL 2 Full.

Ian Horrocks: in order to exit CR for OWL 1 we should already have had implementations of OWL full; these will also be implementations of OWL 2 Full. [ Scribe Assist by Ian Horrocks ]

18:31:24 <sandro> Sandro: there may be some additional OWL 2 Full tests....

Sandro Hawke: there may be some additional OWL 2 Full tests.... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

18:30:50 <bmotik> subtopic: New Features and Rationale

6.4. New Features and Rationale

18:31:31 <bmotik> christine: We just make sure that the document is aligned with the Syntax

Christine Golbreich: We just make sure that the document is aligned with the Syntax

18:31:39 <bmotik> christine: I think there is no problem there

Christine Golbreich: I think there is no problem there

18:32:38 <bmotik> alanr: The part of the rationale for OWL 2 is developments in the DL community

Alan Ruttenberg: The part of the rationale for OWL 2 is developments in the DL community

18:32:51 <bmotik> alanr: We have some allusions to this in the Syntax document

Alan Ruttenberg: We have some allusions to this in the Syntax document

18:33:21 <bmotik> alanr: We could add that to the New Features and Rational document, together with some pointers to the literature

Alan Ruttenberg: We could add that to the New Features and Rational document, together with some pointers to the literature

18:33:53 <bmotik> sandro: It seems like Syntax contains some explanation that might go better into the Rationale document

Sandro Hawke: It seems like Syntax contains some explanation that might go better into the Rationale document

18:34:08 <bmotik> alanr: An example is a comment about owl:Thing

Alan Ruttenberg: An example is a comment about owl:Thing

18:34:22 <bmotik> alanr: This includes a reference to the DL literature

Alan Ruttenberg: This includes a reference to the DL literature

18:34:52 <bmotik> christine: I haven't seen anything like this in review comments

Christine Golbreich: I haven't seen anything like this in review comments

18:35:12 <bmotik> christine: The only comment I remember of is about global restrictions, which we might want to explain better

Christine Golbreich: The only comment I remember of is about global restrictions, which we might want to explain better

18:36:12 <bmotik> bmotik: This comment is not part of the rationale; instead, it is just providing a different name for things we have in the spec

Boris Motik: This comment is not part of the rationale; instead, it is just providing a different name for things we have in the spec

18:36:44 <bmotik> christine: There are just some details to be fixed

Christine Golbreich: There are just some details to be fixed

18:36:51 <christine> if any !

Christine Golbreich: if any !

18:36:56 <bmotik> subtopic: Manchester Syntax

6.5. Manchester Syntax

18:37:00 <bmotik> alanr: Peter is not here, so let's skip this

Alan Ruttenberg: Peter is not here, so let's skip this

18:37:04 <bmotik> subtopic: Primer

6.6. Primer

18:37:14 <bmotik> alanr: Neither Bijan nor Peter is here

Alan Ruttenberg: Neither Bijan nor Peter is here

18:37:19 <bmotik> subtopic: Datarange Extension

6.7. Datarange Extension

18:37:27 <bmotik> alanr: No Bijan, no Uli

Alan Ruttenberg: No Bijan, no Uli

18:37:42 <bmotik> ianh: I'd say this is probably close to be finished

Ian Horrocks: I'd say this is probably close to be finished

18:37:56 <bmotik> ianh: I'd expect they'll be able to finish this in early january

Ian Horrocks: I'd expect they'll be able to finish this in early january

18:38:21 <bmotik> alanr: RDF mapping needs to be flushed out

Alan Ruttenberg: RDF mapping needs to be flushed out

18:38:44 <bmotik> ianh: My expectation is that Bijan will be putting more time into the WG now

Ian Horrocks: My expectation is that Bijan will be putting more time into the WG now

18:39:06 <bmotik> topic: Coordination with RIF

7. Coordination with RIF

18:40:13 <bmotik> alanr: Chris Welty suggested a common document with RIF about datatypes

Alan Ruttenberg: Chris Welty suggested a common document with RIF about datatypes

18:40:23 <bmotik> alanr: We need to set up some way to coordinate between the groups

Alan Ruttenberg: We need to set up some way to coordinate between the groups

18:40:56 <bmotik> alanr: We should have a small group of people who can meet with a small group of RIF people and work on that

Alan Ruttenberg: We should have a small group of people who can meet with a small group of RIF people and work on that

18:41:10 <bmotik> ianh: I'd like to be clearer about the expected outcome and the impact on schedule

Ian Horrocks: I'd like to be clearer about the expected outcome and the impact on schedule

18:41:26 <bmotik> ianh: Are we committing that we won't go any further in our schedule without getting a result on that stuff?

Ian Horrocks: Are we committing that we won't go any further in our schedule without getting a result on that stuff?

18:41:46 <bmotik> ianh: We could also say that we'll do our best

Ian Horrocks: We could also say that we'll do our best

18:42:08 <bmotik> alanr: We should first find out which are the issues that might affect the schedule

Alan Ruttenberg: We should first find out which are the issues that might affect the schedule

18:42:14 <bmotik> alanr: We can decide on the schedule then

Alan Ruttenberg: We can decide on the schedule then

18:42:22 <bmotik> alanr: We haven't even done a triage of the issues

Alan Ruttenberg: We haven't even done a triage of the issues

18:42:48 <bmotik> alanr: We should do this soon, so that we could hit break if necessary

Alan Ruttenberg: We should do this soon, so that we could hit break if necessary

18:43:06 <bmotik> ianh: I can remind you of the 4 items on Chris's list

Ian Horrocks: I can remind you of the 4 items on Chris's list

18:43:13 <bmotik> ianh: rdf:text, but that's taken care of

Ian Horrocks: rdf:text, but that's taken care of

18:43:25 <bmotik> ianh: Aligning the datatypes

Ian Horrocks: Aligning the datatypes

18:43:37 <bmotik> ianh: Compatibility of OWL 2 RL with RIF

Ian Horrocks: Compatibility of OWL 2 RL with RIF

18:43:46 <bmotik> ianh: General OWL - RIF compatibility

Ian Horrocks: General OWL - RIF compatibility

18:44:02 <bmotik> alanr: The ones that might affect us are datatypes and the RIF expression of OWL 2 RL

Alan Ruttenberg: The ones that might affect us are datatypes and the RIF expression of OWL 2 RL

18:44:29 <bmotik> bmotik: expressing OWL RL in RIF is their problem

Boris Motik: expressing OWL RL in RIF is their problem

18:44:40 <bmotik> bmotik: we are using a very simple form of rules

Boris Motik: we are using a very simple form of rules

18:44:54 <bmotik> bmotik: we could help them, but shouldn't affect us

Boris Motik: we could help them, but shouldn't affect us

18:45:02 <bmotik> alanr: We should at least respond in a cordial way

Alan Ruttenberg: We should at least respond in a cordial way

18:45:29 <bmotik> bmotik: willing to attend one meeting, but not committing to long sequence

Boris Motik: willing to attend one meeting, but not committing to long sequence

18:45:32 <bmotik> bmotik: I could participate in one meeting, but I'm not comitting to a longer-running task-force

Boris Motik: I could participate in one meeting, but I'm not comitting to a longer-running task-force

18:45:44 <bmotik> bmotik: (at least not yet)

Boris Motik: (at least not yet)

18:45:52 <bmotik> alanr: Zhe, do you want to participate?

Alan Ruttenberg: Zhe, do you want to participate?

18:45:58 <bmotik> Zhe: Yes

Zhe Wu: Yes

18:46:18 <bmotik> ianh: At least one of us, and possibly both of us should be there

Ian Horrocks: At least one of us, and possibly both of us should be there

18:46:45 <bmotik> ianh: I am happy to participate to some exploratory effort, but I am not willing to commit to some longer-running WG

Ian Horrocks: I am happy to participate to some exploratory effort, but I am not willing to commit to some longer-running WG

18:47:24 <bmotik> Zhe: What is the time line?

Zhe Wu: What is the time line?

18:47:41 <bmotik> alanr: The goal is just to meet minds and then decide how to proceed

Alan Ruttenberg: The goal is just to meet minds and then decide how to proceed

18:48:00 <bmotik> christine: Is it a meeting or a teleconf?

Christine Golbreich: Is it a meeting or a teleconf?

18:48:05 <bmotik> alanr: It will be a teleconf

Alan Ruttenberg: It will be a teleconf

18:48:16 <bmotik> alanr: Can you be there?

Alan Ruttenberg: Can you be there?

18:48:26 <bmotik> sandro: Yes

Sandro Hawke: Yes

18:48:37 <bmotik> jeffp: I could offer some support on datatypes

Jeff Pan: I could offer some support on datatypes

18:49:11 <bmotik> alanr: Are these people enough, do we need Peter?

Alan Ruttenberg: Are these people enough, do we need Peter?

18:49:25 <alanr> sandro, boris,  jeff, christine, ian, alan

Alan Ruttenberg: sandro, boris, jeff, christine, ian, alan

18:49:25 <bmotik> ianh: We don't absolutely need him, but it woul be good to have him

Ian Horrocks: We don't absolutely need him, but it woul be good to have him

18:49:47 <bmotik> sandro: I'll try coordinate things for next week

Sandro Hawke: I'll try coordinate things for next week

18:50:04 <sandro> ACTION: sandro set up telecon time poll for rif/owl joint coordination one-time meeting

ACTION: sandro set up telecon time poll for rif/owl joint coordination one-time meeting

18:50:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-256 - Set up telecon time poll for rif/owl joint coordination one-time meeting [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-12-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-256 - Set up telecon time poll for rif/owl joint coordination one-time meeting [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-12-10].

18:50:22 <bmotik> alanr: Could you please mention in the e-mail that this is an exploratory meeting, and not a longer-running task-force

Alan Ruttenberg: Could you please mention in the e-mail that this is an exploratory meeting, and not a longer-running task-force

18:50:31 <bmotik> topic: Coordination with XML Schema

8. Coordination with XML Schema

18:50:51 <bmotik> ianh: This is just a place-holder for Peter's on-going tasks related to XML Schema WG

Ian Horrocks: This is just a place-holder for Peter's on-going tasks related to XML Schema WG

18:50:58 <bmotik> ianh: I don't think there is much outstanding here

Ian Horrocks: I don't think there is much outstanding here

18:51:20 <bmotik> topic: Test Cases

9. Test Cases

18:51:39 <bmotik> alanr: Sandro, it is desirable to have as many test cases as possible before CR?

Alan Ruttenberg: Sandro, it is desirable to have as many test cases as possible before CR?

18:51:42 <bmotik> sandro: yes

Sandro Hawke: yes

18:51:55 <bmotik> msmith: There are quite a few test cases that exist

Michael Smith: There are quite a few test cases that exist

18:52:06 <bmotik> msmith: We need details about whether the repository will be

Michael Smith: We need details about whether the repository will be

18:52:21 <bmotik> msmith: We need to determine which test-cases we propose

Michael Smith: We need to determine which test-cases we propose

18:52:41 <bmotik> Markus: Beside the test case we already have, we already have a platform for collecting test cases

Markus Krötzsch: Beside the test case we already have, we already have a platform for collecting test cases

18:53:00 <bmotik> Markus: This should be made announced so that people can submit their tests

Markus Krötzsch: This should be made announced so that people can submit their tests

18:54:05 <bmotik> sandro: Could you look into if anything needs to be done?

Sandro Hawke: Could you look into if anything needs to be done?

18:54:24 <MarkusK_> Markus: some minor updates are required so the test case collection site agrees with the most recent changes in the specification

Markus Krötzsch: some minor updates are required so the test case collection site agrees with the most recent changes in the specification [ Scribe Assist by Markus Krötzsch ]

18:54:34 <bmotik> sandro: Markus, have you read the W3C guidelines about test cases?

Sandro Hawke: Markus, have you read the W3C guidelines about test cases?

18:54:41 <bmotik> Markus: No, I didn't.

Markus Krötzsch: No, I didn't.

18:55:12 <bmotik> Markus: We could say that whoever publishes a test case, he does it under any of the licenses

Markus Krötzsch: We could say that whoever publishes a test case, he does it under any of the licenses

18:55:13 <christine> sorry have to leave, bye

Christine Golbreich: sorry have to leave, bye

18:55:20 <bmotik> sandro: We need to think this through

Sandro Hawke: We need to think this through

18:55:31 <bmotik> alanr: Have you got some legal counsel for W3C?

Alan Ruttenberg: Have you got some legal counsel for W3C?

18:56:01 <sandro> markus check with rigo@w3.org

Sandro Hawke: markus check with rigo@w3.org

18:56:20 <MarkusK_> The current license text is http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/projects/owltests/index.php/OWL_Test_Cases:Copyrights

Markus Krötzsch: The current license text is http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/projects/owltests/index.php/OWL_Test_Cases:Copyrights

18:56:44 <bmotik> ianh: I noticed that the test case ontology contains a few names that have "URI" in their name

Ian Horrocks: I noticed that the test case ontology contains a few names that have "URI" in their name

18:56:56 <bmotik> ianh: In the rest of the spec we've recently changed all "URI" to "IRI"

Ian Horrocks: In the rest of the spec we've recently changed all "URI" to "IRI"

18:57:15 <bmotik> ianh: Do the keepers of the test ontology want to change "URI" to "IRI?

Ian Horrocks: Do the keepers of the test ontology want to change "URI" to "IRI?

18:57:16 <MarkusK_> I am happy to change this

Markus Krötzsch: I am happy to change this

18:57:29 <bmotik> msmith: It would be fine to change it, but is it too late to change it?

Michael Smith: It would be fine to change it, but is it too late to change it?

18:57:42 <bmotik> ianh: I don't think it needs to be changed

Ian Horrocks: I don't think it needs to be changed

18:58:05 <bmotik> alanr: Editorial changes to the documents should be fine

Alan Ruttenberg: Editorial changes to the documents should be fine

18:58:20 <bmotik> msmith: We should change this before we approve tests

Michael Smith: We should change this before we approve tests

18:58:30 <bmotik> alanr: How do we go about adding and approving tests?

Alan Ruttenberg: How do we go about adding and approving tests?

18:58:34 <MarkusK_> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Conformance_and_Test_Cases#Approval_Process_Overview

Markus Krötzsch: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Conformance_and_Test_Cases#Approval_Process_Overview

18:59:05 <bmotik> sandro: One style is meticulous: everyone looks at a test case, understands it, and then agrees on it

Sandro Hawke: One style is meticulous: everyone looks at a test case, understands it, and then agrees on it

18:59:44 <bmotik> sandro: There is this bulk-test style: These three engines all pass particular tests, so we all approve them and don't look at each test in detail

Sandro Hawke: There is this bulk-test style: These three engines all pass particular tests, so we all approve them and don't look at each test in detail

18:59:54 <bmotik> alanr: Where is in this process place for discussion?

Alan Ruttenberg: Where is in this process place for discussion?

19:00:00 <bmotik> sandro: I don't understand the question

Sandro Hawke: I don't understand the question

19:00:14 <bmotik> alanr: Is approving tests expected to be controversial?

Alan Ruttenberg: Is approving tests expected to be controversial?

19:00:35 <bmotik> sandro: I think it will test at least 3-4 or 10 minutes to approve each test

Sandro Hawke: I think it will test at least 3-4 or 10 minutes to approve each test

19:00:51 <bmotik> ianh: I don't recall there being a great deal of discussion and arguments in OWL 1

Ian Horrocks: I don't recall there being a great deal of discussion and arguments in OWL 1

19:01:06 <bmotik> ianh: This is because we had many implementations that agreed on everything

Ian Horrocks: This is because we had many implementations that agreed on everything

19:01:12 <bmotik> ianh: The semantics is well-defined

Ian Horrocks: The semantics is well-defined

19:01:21 <bmotik> ianh: I don't expect problems

Ian Horrocks: I don't expect problems

19:01:44 <bmotik> sandro: The problem is when you have an issue in the langauge, and you realize this only when you look at the test

Sandro Hawke: The problem is when you have an issue in the langauge, and you realize this only when you look at the test

19:02:02 <bmotik> msmith: Most of the OWL 1 tests are already OK

Michael Smith: Most of the OWL 1 tests are already OK

19:02:18 <bmotik> msmith: There is some work to make them ready to go

Michael Smith: There is some work to make them ready to go

19:03:06 <alanr> Mike will start posting sets of links to test cases that are ready review

Alan Ruttenberg: Mike will start posting sets of links to test cases that are ready review

19:03:26 <alanr> Ian and I will start adding question periods / approval items to the agenda

Alan Ruttenberg: Ian and I will start adding question periods / approval items to the agenda

19:03:28 <msmith> I will do all this in coordination with MarkusK

Michael Smith: I will do all this in coordination with MarkusK

19:03:48 <bmotik> alanr: Do you have an expectation when we can start receiving tests on the mailing lists?

Alan Ruttenberg: Do you have an expectation when we can start receiving tests on the mailing lists?

19:03:55 <bmotik> msmith: I hope next week

Michael Smith: I hope next week

19:04:52 <bmotik> topic: F2F5

10. F2F5

19:05:15 <bmotik> alanr: What is the likelyhood of us needing another F2F?

Alan Ruttenberg: What is the likelyhood of us needing another F2F?

19:05:24 <bmotik> alanr: We'd need to give 8 week notice

Alan Ruttenberg: We'd need to give 8 week notice

19:06:17 <bmotik> alanr: If we decided that don't know now whether we need another F2F b ythe end of LC, then we'd be able to have F2F only in March

Alan Ruttenberg: If we decided that don't know now whether we need another F2F b ythe end of LC, then we'd be able to have F2F only in March

19:06:27 <bmotik> ianh: This would mean that we'd have significan schedule delay

Ian Horrocks: This would mean that we'd have significan schedule delay

19:06:36 <bmotik> ianh: Therefore, we should plan for another F2F

Ian Horrocks: Therefore, we should plan for another F2F

19:06:40 <bmotik> bmotik: +1 to Ian

Boris Motik: +1 to Ian

19:07:02 <bmotik> ianh: We should plan to February; if we decide later tha we don't need it, we can cancel it

Ian Horrocks: We should plan to February; if we decide later tha we don't need it, we can cancel it

19:07:25 <bmotik> alanr: There might be some penatly for canceling

Alan Ruttenberg: There might be some penatly for canceling

19:07:37 <bmotik> ianh: I agree, but we could at least settle on some provisional date

Ian Horrocks: I agree, but we could at least settle on some provisional date

19:08:06 <bmotik> sandro: If we reserve a date now, we can have less than 8 weeks notice

Sandro Hawke: If we reserve a date now, we can have less than 8 weeks notice

19:08:54 <bmotik> schneid: One day might suffice

Michael Schneider: One day might suffice

19:09:05 <IanH> Well, a lot depends on the comments!

Ian Horrocks: Well, a lot depends on the comments!

19:09:48 <bmotik> bmotik: will need F2F if we get substantial LC comments

Boris Motik: will need F2F if we get substantial LC comments

19:09:49 <bmotik> bmotik: We'll probably need a F2F

Boris Motik: We'll probably need a F2F

19:09:57 <IanH> +1 to Boris

Ian Horrocks: +1 to Boris

19:10:11 <bmotik> sandro: We should have a poll about dates and times

Sandro Hawke: We should have a poll about dates and times

19:10:23 <bmotik> alanr: I'm rather constrained in February and March

Alan Ruttenberg: I'm rather constrained in February and March

19:11:14 <bmotik> STRAWPOLL: Should we try for February (1) or March (2)?

STRAWPOLL: Should we try for February (1) or March (2)?

19:11:07 <sandro> Feb

Sandro Hawke: Feb

19:11:10 <schneid> Feb

Michael Schneider: Feb

19:11:12 <bcuencagrau> Any

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Any

19:11:13 <IanH> February

Ian Horrocks: February

19:11:20 <Zhe1> +1 to any as long as in the US

Zhe Wu: +1 to any as long as in the US

19:11:20 <schneid> 1

Michael Schneider: 1

19:11:24 <alanr> no opinion

Alan Ruttenberg: no opinion

19:11:24 <IanH> 1

Ian Horrocks: 1

19:11:25 <msmith> if in boston, no preference

Michael Smith: if in boston, no preference

19:11:26 <Achille> where?

Achille Fokoue: where?

19:11:33 <IanH> Boston

Ian Horrocks: Boston

19:11:33 <bmotik> bmotik: 1 (February)

Boris Motik: 1 (February)

19:11:36 <JeffP> prefer in Europe

Jeff Pan: prefer in Europe

19:11:40 <Achille> +1

Achille Fokoue: +1

19:12:00 <alanr> calling back in

Alan Ruttenberg: calling back in

19:12:08 <MarkusK_> any, but prefer Europe

Markus Krötzsch: any, but prefer Europe

19:12:39 <bmotik> ianh: It might be difficult to have the meeting anywhere other than in Boston

Ian Horrocks: It might be difficult to have the meeting anywhere other than in Boston

19:13:07 <schneid> no preference on location on my side

Michael Schneider: no preference on location on my side

19:13:15 <IanH> Nobody said March

Ian Horrocks: Nobody said March

19:13:26 <bmotik> alanr: We should set up a poll for February and 1st week of March

Alan Ruttenberg: We should set up a poll for February and 1st week of March

19:13:56 <bmotik> alanr: Can you do this?

Alan Ruttenberg: Can you do this?

19:14:07 <sandro> ACTION: Sandro set up WBS poll for F2F times

ACTION: Sandro set up WBS poll for F2F times

19:14:07 <trackbot> Created ACTION-257 - Set up WBS poll for F2F times [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-12-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-257 - Set up WBS poll for F2F times [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-12-10].

19:14:08 <bmotik> sandro: Sure

Sandro Hawke: Sure

19:14:31 <bmotik> topic: Frequency of calls

11. Frequency of calls

19:14:39 <bmotik> alanr: Do we want to continue weekly?

Alan Ruttenberg: Do we want to continue weekly?

19:14:50 <bmotik> alanr: What about holidays?

Alan Ruttenberg: What about holidays?

19:14:58 <schneid> on demand, not over the holliday

Michael Schneider: on demand, not over the holliday

19:15:10 <IanH> Wed 24th an 31st

Ian Horrocks: Wed 24th an 31st

19:15:27 <bmotik> alanr: We wouldn't have meetings on Wed 24th and 31st

Alan Ruttenberg: We wouldn't have meetings on Wed 24th and 31st

19:16:19 <bmotik> schnei: I think we can do calls on demand, depending on the agenda

Michael Schneider: I think we can do calls on demand, depending on the agenda

19:16:32 <bmotik> schnei: We shouldn't plan now for this

Michael Schneider: We shouldn't plan now for this

19:16:47 <bmotik> ianh: I sort of suggest doing it the other way around

Ian Horrocks: I sort of suggest doing it the other way around

19:16:56 <bmotik> ianh: We have a few issues to resolve, approcing test cases

Ian Horrocks: We have a few issues to resolve, approcing test cases

19:17:03 <bmotik> ianh: We should carry on for the moment

Ian Horrocks: We should carry on for the moment

19:17:18 <bmotik> ianh: If we see that we don't have material, we can cancel

Ian Horrocks: If we see that we don't have material, we can cancel

19:17:20 <bmotik> bmotik: +1 to Ian

Boris Motik: +1 to Ian

19:17:30 <Zhe1> +1 to ian

Zhe Wu: +1 to ian

19:17:38 <bmotik> ianh: Having meetings on demand might easily turn into never

Ian Horrocks: Having meetings on demand might easily turn into never

19:17:39 <schneid> no problem with this, was just a suggestion :)

Michael Schneider: no problem with this, was just a suggestion :)

19:17:52 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

19:17:58 <bmotik> alanr: OK, so we are continuing with weekly

Alan Ruttenberg: OK, so we are continuing with weekly

19:18:24 <bmotik> topic: Status of at-risk items

12. Status of at-risk items

19:18:40 <bmotik> ianh: I just tried to group together everything that is outstanding

Ian Horrocks: I just tried to group together everything that is outstanding

19:18:46 <bmotik> ianh: No particular comments

Ian Horrocks: No particular comments

19:19:18 <schneid> the "At Risk" points are perfect for the next F2F

Michael Schneider: the "At Risk" points are perfect for the next F2F

19:18:53 <bmotik> topic: Open items

13. Open items

19:19:23 <bmotik> alanr: I'll try to speed up my action regarding Man Syntax labels

Alan Ruttenberg: I'll try to speed up my action regarding Man Syntax labels

19:19:35 <bmotik> alanr: Ian, can you take over chairing?

Alan Ruttenberg: Ian, can you take over chairing?

19:19:52 <bmotik> ianh: OK. Alan, introduce what you have in mind regarding repairs

Ian Horrocks: OK. Alan, introduce what you have in mind regarding repairs

19:21:00 <IanH> Alan: preference is to have repairs in existing docs, but could be another doc

Alan Ruttenberg: preference is to have repairs in existing docs, but could be another doc [ Scribe Assist by Ian Horrocks ]

19:21:13 <bmotik> alanr: We should explain to OWL users which kinds of RDF graphs could be brought into OWL by repairs

Alan Ruttenberg: We should explain to OWL users which kinds of RDF graphs could be brought into OWL by repairs

19:21:28 <bmotik> alanr: We could have a pointer to owl:list for the list vocabulary

Alan Ruttenberg: We could have a pointer to owl:list for the list vocabulary

19:21:41 <bmotik> alanr: as an example

Alan Ruttenberg: as an example

19:22:32 <bmotik> alanr: Is anyone willing to help?

Alan Ruttenberg: Is anyone willing to help?

19:23:05 <Zakim> sorry, msmith, I do not know which phone connection belongs to aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, msmith, I do not know which phone connection belongs to aaaa

19:23:22 <bmotik> pfps: Not only am I not willing to work on this, but I'm disenthartened

Peter Patel-Schneider: Not only am I not willing to work on this, but I'm disenthartened

19:23:33 <bmotik> pfps: I worry that this might delay other work

Peter Patel-Schneider: I worry that this might delay other work

19:23:42 <bmotik> ianh: Alan, have you got some idea about schedule?

Ian Horrocks: Alan, have you got some idea about schedule?

19:24:05 <bmotik> alanr: If we had a section in the Primer that I authored, I'd try to align it with the next publication or Primer

Alan Ruttenberg: If we had a section in the Primer that I authored, I'd try to align it with the next publication or Primer

19:24:40 <bmotik> alanr: End of January would be a realistic schedule for this

Alan Ruttenberg: End of January would be a realistic schedule for this

19:25:00 <bmotik> ianh: Some comment from Peter about this?

Ian Horrocks: Some comment from Peter about this?

19:25:17 <bmotik> pfps: Primer is in Bijan's hands

Peter Patel-Schneider: Primer is in Bijan's hands

19:25:34 <bmotik> pfps: If Bijan doesn't get his act together, I'll start working on it

Peter Patel-Schneider: If Bijan doesn't get his act together, I'll start working on it

19:25:42 <bmotik> pfps: Bijan has promised to work on it

Peter Patel-Schneider: Bijan has promised to work on it

19:25:47 <bmotik> ianh: So no schedule?

Ian Horrocks: So no schedule?

19:25:49 <bmotik> pfps: No

Peter Patel-Schneider: No

19:26:15 <bmotik> ianh: This depends on whether they would be REC track?

Ian Horrocks: This depends on whether they would be REC track?

19:26:36 <bmotik> alanr: A question would be whether my suggestion of adding a section to Primer is a reasonable way to go

Alan Ruttenberg: A question would be whether my suggestion of adding a section to Primer is a reasonable way to go

19:26:58 <bmotik> ianh: It looks you are alone on that

Ian Horrocks: It looks you are alone on that

19:27:11 <bmotik> ianh: Your contribution might either go into the Primer or a note

Ian Horrocks: Your contribution might either go into the Primer or a note

19:27:21 <bmotik> ianh: Are you happy with that?

Ian Horrocks: Are you happy with that?

19:27:52 <bmotik> ianh: Perhaps we should take the Primer idea off-line for discussion with Bijan and Peter

Ian Horrocks: Perhaps we should take the Primer idea off-line for discussion with Bijan and Peter

19:28:18 <bmotik> ianh: We can put this on the agenda next week, together with a decision about whether these documents would be on the REC track

Ian Horrocks: We can put this on the agenda next week, together with a decision about whether these documents would be on the REC track

19:28:38 <sandro>    http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/rif-owl-coord/

Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/rif-owl-coord/

19:28:40 <bmotik> topic: Additional business

14. Additional business

19:29:22 <bmotik> sandro: The link to the time for the RIF meeting is in IRC

Sandro Hawke: The link to the time for the RIF meeting is in IRC

19:30:12 <Zakim> Attendees were bmotik, IanH, Sandro, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, alanr, Achille, JeffP, Zhe, christine, schneid, msmith, +1.908.612.aaaa, Peter, Alan_Ruttenberg

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were bmotik, IanH, Sandro, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, alanr, Achille, JeffP, Zhe, christine, schneid, msmith, +1.908.612.aaaa, Peter, Alan_Ruttenberg



Formatted by CommonScribe