15:19:23 <jun> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConsolidatedConcepts

15:19:31 <jun> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Model_Proposal

15:20:02 <Luc> Scribe: Satya Sahoo

15:20:37 <satya> Paolo: Consolidated the discussion about provenance concepts into one page (link posted by Jun)

15:21:09 <satya> Paolo: All members of the TF contributed to the consolidation process

15:22:24 <satya> Paolo: the TF did not add to the definition of a concept. Each provenance concept has three sections: a consolidated definition, examples from the Data Journalism example, and outstanding issues related to the provenance concept

15:22:56 <Luc> q?

15:23:02 <satya> Paolo: Goal of this work is to present an unified view of the provenance concepts for further discussions during the F2F

15:23:15 <pgroth> +q

15:23:20 <ralphh> +q

15:23:21 <Luc> ack pgroth

15:23:50 <Luc> q?

15:24:01 <satya> pgroth: When will TF decide to freeze the wiki page with consolidated provenance concepts

15:24:44 <satya> Paolo: The wiki page is relatively stable, currently minor changes are being made

15:24:44 <Luc> ack ralphh

15:25:06 <Luc> q?

15:25:25 <ralphh> http://www.linkedmodel.org/doc/voag/1.0/

15:25:28 <pgroth> you just do it

15:25:30 <pgroth> :-)

15:25:54 <paolo> ralphh: volunteers to join the TF

15:25:56 <paolo> model TF

15:26:00 <stain> just edit http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceTaskForces

15:26:10 <jun> respond to the mailing list:)

15:26:14 <satya> Ralph: How to join to the Model TF, have done previous work in modeling provenance issues

15:26:22 <pgroth> q+

15:27:31 <Luc>  Scribe: Paolo Missier

15:27:42 <Luc> q?

15:27:58 <Luc> ack pgroth

15:28:08 <paolo> Ralph: will not be at F2F, but will contribute his past work to the TF

15:28:33 <paolo> Luc: suggests Ralph to add his references to the Connection TF

15:29:07 <Luc> q?

15:29:10 <paolo> Luc: 17 concepts were listed in the charter, 8 of those have been addressed in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConsolidatedConcepts

15:29:10 <satya> q+

15:29:12 <stain> q+

15:29:17 <paolo> what should be done about the others?

15:29:19 <Luc> ack satya

15:29:33 <paolo> Satya: pick up new concepts on only after the F2F

15:29:37 <stain> q-  (ack satya)

15:29:43 <Luc> ack stain

15:29:49 <Luc> q?

15:30:01 <paolo> Stian: agrees with Satya. We've got enough for the F2F

15:30:04 <paolo> q+

15:30:10 <Luc> ack paolo

15:30:25 <Zakim> -??P17

15:30:36 <Luc> q?

15:30:42 <satya> Paolo: Discussion in F2F will bring out new concepts that should be taken up next by Wg

15:30:44 <Zakim> +??P17

15:30:52 <jorn> zakim, ??p17 is me

15:30:52 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

15:31:02 <Luc> q?

15:31:11 <paolo> Luc: no further defs will be added to the current list before the F2F

15:31:28 <Luc> q?

15:31:34 <paolo> Luc: acknowledges the hard work of the Model TF! :-)

15:31:34 <Luc> TOPIC: Model Task Force

<luc>Summary: In the spirit of building up our understanding of concepts, agreement was reached on a few more properties.  PIL is seen as an assertion language; derivation was defined; a set of event ordering constraints was adopted as a starting point to understand PIL.  Consensus was not reached on a definition of Agent since the group is still undecided as to whether the concept should be defined independently of process execution or not.

15:32:19 <paolo> Luc: some terms still require consensus, it would help to make progress today

Luc Moreau: some terms still require consensus, it would help to make progress today [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:32:29 <Luc>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0460.html

Luc Moreau: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0460.html ←

15:33:02 <paolo> Luc: the idea is that PIL is an /assertion language/

Luc Moreau: the idea is that PIL is an /assertion language/ [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:33:22 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:33:25 <paolo> idea socialized on the list but little feedback so far

Paolo Missier: idea socialized on the list but little feedback so far ←

15:33:32 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:34:05 <paolo> Jim Myers: that's fine, but what does that do for us?

Paolo Missier: Jim Myers: that's fine, but what does that do for us? ←

15:34:51 <paolo> Luc: recurrent theme is that there are "asserters" in our definitions. So we may as well make it explicit upfront

Luc Moreau: recurrent theme is that there are "asserters" in our definitions. So we may as well make it explicit upfront [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:35:24 <paolo> Jim: the idea of multiple witnesses that we agree on is aligned with this, so as a convenience that's fine

James Myers: the idea of multiple witnesses that we agree on is aligned with this, so as a convenience that's fine [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:35:27 <satya> q+

q+ ←

15:35:30 <tfrancart> q+

Thomas Francart: q+ ←

15:35:34 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:35:37 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya ←

15:36:13 <paolo> Satya: to follow up: if we see PIL in the RDF context, it follows naturally

Satya Sahoo: to follow up: if we see PIL in the RDF context, it follows naturally [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:36:23 <pgroth> stating the obvious isn't a bad thing ;-)

Paul Groth: stating the obvious isn't a bad thing ;-) ←

15:36:30 <paolo> Luc: yes, but for a different serialization this may be less obvious

Luc Moreau: yes, but for a different serialization this may be less obvious [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:36:34 <paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:36:34 <satya> ok

ok ←

15:37:01 <paolo> Thomas: shouldn't we also define rules (inference) that come with assertions?

Thomas Francart: shouldn't we also define rules (inference) that come with assertions? [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:37:39 <paolo> Luc: this idea has been circulated, we currently are agnostic regarding the types of assertions -- rules may well be included

Luc Moreau: this idea has been circulated, we currently are agnostic regarding the types of assertions -- rules may well be included [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:37:43 <satya> @Thomas: Inference will require us to define the formal semantics of the PIL first

@Thomas: Inference will require us to define the formal semantics of the PIL first ←

15:37:49 <Luc> ack tfrancart

Luc Moreau: ack tfrancart ←

15:38:32 <satya> q+

q+ ←

15:38:33 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:39:25 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo ←

15:39:52 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya ←

15:40:22 <paolo> Satya: inference is a mechanism to produce new assertions, note that the Rule exchange language is standard with W3C

Satya Sahoo: inference is a mechanism to produce new assertions, note that the Rule exchange language is standard with W3C [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:40:41 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:40:42 <ralphh> +q

Ralph Hodgson: +q ←

15:40:44 <paolo> Satya: what is the rule language? we need a formal semantics for PIL before we can move on to rules

Satya Sahoo: what is the rule language? we need a formal semantics for PIL before we can move on to rules [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:41:10 <Zakim> - +1.217.417.aagg

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.217.417.aagg ←

15:41:18 <paolo> Ralph: can we have a reference to PIL? how about refutation, conjecture in addition to asertion

Ralph Hodgson: can we have a reference to PIL? how about refutation, conjecture in addition to assertion [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:41:27 <paolo> s/asertion/assertion

15:41:29 <satya> W3C Rule Interchange Format recommendation: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group

W3C Rule Interchange Format recommendation: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group ←

15:41:40 <Luc> ack ralphh

Luc Moreau: ack ralphh ←

15:41:44 <paolo> Luc: PIL is what we are defining. it's a codename

Luc Moreau: PIL is what we are defining. it's a codename [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:42:04 <paolo> Luc: conjecture, refutation not part of charter but may well be discussed

Luc Moreau: conjecture, refutation not part of charter but may well be discussed [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:42:05 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:42:07 <jorn> q+

Jörn Hees: q+ ←

15:42:14 <Luc> PROPOSED: PIL is an assertion language, which allows asserters to make assertions about stuffs and activities in the real world (as they view it) and how they influence each other.

PROPOSED: PIL is an assertion language, which allows asserters to make assertions about stuffs and activities in the real world (as they view it) and how they influence each other. ←

15:42:28 <jorn> q-

Jörn Hees: q- ←

15:42:29 <satya> +1

+1 ←

15:42:30 <stain> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←

15:42:32 <tfrancart> +1

Thomas Francart: +1 ←

15:42:32 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1 ←

15:42:35 <paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1 ←

15:42:37 <dcorsar> +1

David Corsar: +1 ←

15:42:42 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1 ←

15:42:43 <ralphh> +1

Ralph Hodgson: +1 ←

15:42:44 <Lena> +1

Helena Deus: +1 ←

15:43:03 <Luc> ACCEPTED: PIL is an assertion language, which allows asserters to make assertions about stuffs and activities in the real world (as they view it) and how they influence each other.

RESOLVED: PIL is an assertion language, which allows asserters to make assertions about stuffs and activities in the real world (as they view it) and how they influence each other. ←

15:43:24 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0459.html

Luc Moreau: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0459.html ←

15:43:38 <paolo> Luc: on the concept of Derivation

Luc Moreau: on the concept of Derivation [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:44:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:44:05 <paolo> Luc: any major objection to the proposal? (see link)

Luc Moreau: any major objection to the proposal? (see link) [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:44:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:44:29 <Luc> PROPOSED: Derivation represents how stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A.

PROPOSED: Derivation represents how stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A. ←

15:44:39 <stain> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←

15:44:44 <jun> +1

Jun Zhao: +1 ←

15:44:46 <tfrancart> 0

Thomas Francart: 0 ←

15:44:51 <satya> +1

+1 ←

15:44:53 <dcorsar> +1

David Corsar: +1 ←

15:44:57 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1 ←

15:45:01 <paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:45:02 <zednik> +q

Stephan Zednik: +q ←

15:45:09 <ralphh> +1

Ralph Hodgson: +1 ←

15:45:11 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:46:11 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn ←

15:46:12 <ralphh> q+

Ralph Hodgson: q+ ←

15:46:26 <Zakim> +??P17

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←

15:46:31 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo ←

15:47:05 <paolo> zednik: just looked at proposal. is Derivation is a relation or a thing?

Stephan Zednik: just looked at proposal. is Derivation is a relation or a thing? [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:47:14 <satya> @Stephan - I agree, derivation is a property

@Stephan - I agree, derivation is a property ←

15:47:22 <paolo> it  ought to be a relation

Paolo Missier: it ought to be a relation ←

15:48:01 <stain> it sounds like a relation to me.. but which could also have deeper details (such as a link to a process execution)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: it sounds like a relation to me.. but which could also have deeper details (such as a link to a process execution) ←

15:48:06 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:48:20 <paolo> Luc: up for discussion at F2F. Others raised the issue

Luc Moreau: up for discussion at F2F. Others raised the issue [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:48:36 <pgroth> i guess it's just english

Paul Groth: i guess it's just english ←

15:48:36 <paolo> zednik: are we also saying /how/ something was derived?

Stephan Zednik: are we also saying /how/ something was derived? [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:48:48 <satya> @Stephan: The how part is not covered in derivation (my POV)

@Stephan: The how part is not covered in derivation (my POV) ←

15:49:16 <pgroth> the transformation of stuff from?

Paul Groth: the transformation of stuff from? ←

15:49:43 <Luc> PROPOSED: Derivation expresses that some stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A.

PROPOSED: Derivation expresses that some stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A. ←

15:49:53 <Luc> ack zednik

Luc Moreau: ack zednik ←

15:50:22 <paolo> Ralph: derivation is a transformation, but a reified relationship

Ralph Hodgson: derivation is a transformation, but a reified relationship [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:50:36 <jorn> one could always reificate more information onto the derivation statement, couldn't one?

Jörn Hees: one could always reificate more information onto the derivation statement, couldn't one? ←

15:50:58 <paolo> Ralph: affected by: opens up derivation in a bigger notion, not sure about the term "affect"

Ralph Hodgson: affected by: opens up derivation in a bigger notion, not sure about the term "affect" [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:51:46 <paolo> Luc: first sentence about high level idea of what Derivation is, clearly it's not formal

Luc Moreau: first sentence about high level idea of what Derivation is, clearly it's not formal [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:52:22 <Luc> ack

Luc Moreau: ack ←

15:52:23 <stain> What if we add "In PIL, a thing B is..."

Stian Soiland-Reyes: What if we add "In PIL, a thing B is..." ←

15:52:23 <paolo> Luc: second part triesd to explain what Derviation means wrt the constructs of the language. Says how Derivation can influence some properties

Luc Moreau: second part triesd to explain what Derviation means wrt the constructs of the language. Says how Derivation can influence some properties [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:52:24 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:52:29 <Luc> ack ralphh

Luc Moreau: ack ralphh ←

15:52:48 <stain> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←

15:52:56 <jun> +1

Jun Zhao: +1 ←

15:53:02 <jorn> +1

Jörn Hees: +1 ←

15:53:05 <paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1 ←

15:53:15 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1 ←

15:53:34 <zednik> +0 (undecided, I want to see in a use case example)

Stephan Zednik: +0 (undecided, I want to see in a use case example) ←

15:53:39 <ralphh> +1

Ralph Hodgson: +1 ←

15:53:46 <Lena> 0

Helena Deus: 0 ←

15:53:55 <tfrancart> 0 : not sure why it refers only to "invariant properties" ?

Thomas Francart: 0 : not sure why it refers only to "invariant properties" ? ←

15:53:56 <paolo> pgroth: reminder; 0 abstain , -1 for reject, +1 for accept

Paul Groth: reminder; 0 abstain , -1 for reject, +1 for accept [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:53:57 <Luc> ACCEPTED: Derivation expresses that some stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A.

RESOLVED: Derivation expresses that some stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A. ←

15:54:06 <paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:54:18 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:55:48 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:55:52 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo ←

15:56:41 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:57:08 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0439.html

Luc Moreau: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0439.html ←

15:57:10 <paolo> Luc: need to have some education activity to make sure all the basic concepts are clear, including  thing, invariant properties, etc.

Luc Moreau: need to have some education activity to make sure all the basic concepts are clear, including thing, invariant properties, etc. [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:57:37 <paolo> [sorry I missed Luc's sentences]

Paolo Missier: [sorry I missed Luc's sentences] ←

15:57:54 <Luc> PROPOSED: An agent is an active thing. It may be linked to a process  execution, for example, by controlling it. Examples of agent include person, organization, and software agent.

PROPOSED: An agent is an active thing. It may be linked to a process execution, for example, by controlling it. Examples of agent include person, organization, and software agent. ←

15:58:08 <ralphh> +q

Ralph Hodgson: +q ←

15:58:11 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:58:43 <paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:58:58 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:59:02 <Luc> ack ralphh

Luc Moreau: ack ralphh ←

15:59:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:59:08 <pgroth> In pil: "things" represent real-world stuffs and have properties modeling aspects of stuff states

Paul Groth: In pil: "things" represent real-world stuffs and have properties modeling aspects of stuff states ←

15:59:37 <satya> Ralph: Many ontologies use the term "party" instead of agent

Ralph Hodgson: Many ontologies use the term "party" instead of agent ←

15:59:46 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:59:50 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo ←

15:59:55 <ralphh> instead of "Thing" not "Agent"

Ralph Hodgson: instead of "Thing" not "Agent" ←

15:59:59 <paolo> Ralph: Can we replace "thing" with "party" in the def?

Ralph Hodgson: Can we replace "thing" with "party" in the def? [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

15:59:59 <Luc> PROPOSED: An agent is an active thing. It may be linked to a process  execution, for example, by controlling it. Examples of agent include person, organization, and software agent.

PROPOSED: An agent is an active thing. It may be linked to a process execution, for example, by controlling it. Examples of agent include person, organization, and software agent. ←

16:00:33 <paolo> Luc: "thing" is used in the technical sense of PIL

Luc Moreau: "thing" is used in the technical sense of PIL [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

16:00:45 <paolo> Satya: is linking an Agent to a process optional?

Satya Sahoo: is linking an Agent to a process optional? [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

16:00:58 <zednik> q+

Stephan Zednik: q+ ←

16:00:58 <paolo> Luc: def. is agnostic about it

Luc Moreau: def. is agnostic about it [ Scribe Assist by Paolo Missier ] ←

16:01:37 <Zakim> -paolo

Zakim IRC Bot: -paolo ←

16:01:45 <Zakim> -[ISI]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[ISI] ←

16:01:49 <paolo> my skype crashed out

Paolo Missier: my skype crashed out ←

16:01:54 <Zakim> -??P17

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P17 ←

16:01:58 <paolo> sorry

Paolo Missier: sorry ←

16:01:59 <Luc> SCRIBE: Satya Sahoo

16:02:03 <Zakim> -SamCoppens

Zakim IRC Bot: -SamCoppens ←

16:02:16 <Zakim> +??P17

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←

16:02:39 <satya> Paolo: Definition of Agent will be debated further

Paolo Missier: Definition of Agent will be debated further ←

16:02:49 <satya> Paolo/Luc

Paolo/Luc ←

16:03:32 <satya> Luc: Discussion on notion of Time in previous WG telcon

Luc Moreau: Discussion on notion of Time in previous WG telcon ←

16:03:46 <Luc> n PIL, there are different kinds of events: beginning of process execution, end of process execution, generation of thing, use of thing, which satisfy some ordering, according to relation "precede":

Luc Moreau: n PIL, there are different kinds of events: beginning of process execution, end of process execution, generation of thing, use of thing, which satisfy some ordering, according to relation "precede": ←

16:04:36 <satya> Luc: Four events identified with respect to the concept of Time

Luc Moreau: Four events identified with respect to the concept of Time ←

16:05:07 <Zakim> - +1.509.375.aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.509.375.aaee ←

16:05:29 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:06:02 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:06:04 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←

16:06:06 <satya> Luc: Is WG in agreement on the ordering constraints illustrated by the four events?

Luc Moreau: Is WG in agreement on the ordering constraints illustrated by the four events? ←

16:06:46 <pgroth> mailing list is good

Paul Groth: mailing list is good ←

16:06:47 <zednik> q-

Stephan Zednik: q- ←

16:06:52 <satya> zednik: Have comment on definition of Agent

Stephan Zednik: Have comment on definition of Agent ←

16:06:56 <Luc> ack stain

Luc Moreau: ack stain ←

16:07:40 <satya> Stian: w.r.t creation and use of a thing, are they associated with fixed point of time (?)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: w.r.t creation and use of a thing, are they associated with fixed point of time (?) ←

16:09:04 <satya> Luc: Stian's example of streaming video can be modeled as either as a series of Thing or a Thing

Luc Moreau: Stian's example of streaming video can be modeled as either as a series of Thing or a Thing ←

16:09:25 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:09:32 <satya> Stian: Agree with Luc's point

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Agree with Luc's point ←

16:09:37 <ralphh> q

Ralph Hodgson: q ←

16:09:38 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:09:44 <ralphh> q+

Ralph Hodgson: q+ ←

16:09:49 <pgroth> ralph

Paul Groth: ralph ←

16:10:31 <Luc> PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for defining the semantics of PIL

PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for defining the semantics of PIL ←

16:10:53 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:10:55 <satya> q+

q+ ←

16:11:28 <Luc> ack ralphh

Luc Moreau: ack ralphh ←

16:11:34 <satya> Ralph: Temporal logics has multiple ways of ordering, so there are more than four types of events

Ralph Hodgson: Temporal logics has multiple ways of ordering, so there are more than four types of events ←

16:11:49 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:12:13 <satya> Ralph: Will provide reference to multiple ordering of events

Ralph Hodgson: Will provide reference to multiple ordering of events ←

16:12:17 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:12:28 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya ←

16:12:50 <satya> Luc: This definition is similar to Lamport's paper

Luc Moreau: This definition is similar to Lamport's paper ←

16:14:25 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:14:26 <Lena> (apologies, I need to leave)

Helena Deus: (apologies, I need to leave) ←

16:14:42 <Luc> PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for defining the semantics of PIL

PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for defining the semantics of PIL ←

16:14:53 <Lena> +1

Helena Deus: +1 ←

16:14:58 <ralphh> +1

Ralph Hodgson: +1 ←

16:15:00 <stain> don't we need to agree on the constraints first?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: don't we need to agree on the constraints first? ←

16:15:06 <Zakim> - +1.832.386.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.832.386.aabb ←

16:15:29 <satya> pgroth: Suggest removing "semantics"

Paul Groth: Suggest removing "semantics" ←

16:15:34 <Luc> PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for building an understanding of PIL

PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for building an understanding of PIL ←

16:15:41 <satya> +1

+1 ←

16:15:46 <jun> 0 (feels a bit premature to propose these constraints; but fine with using them as a starting point)

Jun Zhao: 0 (feels a bit premature to propose these constraints; but fine with using them as a starting point) ←

16:15:55 <stain> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←

16:15:56 <tfrancart> +1

Thomas Francart: +1 ←

16:15:59 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1 ←

16:16:01 <dcorsar> +1

David Corsar: +1 ←

16:16:16 <jorn> 0

Jörn Hees: 0 ←

16:16:23 <stain> @jun as we're not voting on the constraints themselves they are not set in stone

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @jun as we're not voting on the constraints themselves they are not set in stone ←

16:16:47 <stain> zednik: who?

Stephan Zednik: who? [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←

16:16:49 <jun> @stain, yes agreed

Jun Zhao: @stain, yes agreed ←

16:16:50 <Luc> ACCEPTED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for building an understanding of PIL

RESOLVED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for building an understanding of PIL ←

16:16:51 <stain> Zakim: who?

16:16:58 <stain> Zakim: who is on the call?

16:17:03 <ralphh> On the subject of temporal relationships, Allen defined 13 - I will post some references

Ralph Hodgson: On the subject of temporal relationships, Allen defined 13 - I will post some references ←

16:17:20 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←

16:17:25 <Zakim> -jun

Zakim IRC Bot: -jun ←

16:17:26 <Zakim> -??P17

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P17 ←

16:17:40 <Zakim> -??P22

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P22 ←

16:17:42 <Zakim> - +1.518.633.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.518.633.aacc ←

16:17:44 <Zakim> -??P51

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P51 ←

16:17:45 <ralphh> bye

Ralph Hodgson: bye ←

16:17:49 <Zakim> - +1.216.368.aaff

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.216.368.aaff ←

16:17:53 <ralphh> quit

Ralph Hodgson: quit ←

16:17:55 <Zakim> -pgroth

Zakim IRC Bot: -pgroth ←

16:17:57 <Zakim> -Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←

16:17:57 <Zakim> -stain

Zakim IRC Bot: -stain ←

16:18:09 <Zakim> -ralphh

Zakim IRC Bot: -ralphh ←

16:18:26 <stain> I wanted to ask if there will be a videolink or webex from the f2f - or just telcon link

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I wanted to ask if there will be a videolink or webex from the f2f - or just telcon link ←

16:18:40 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, set log public ←

16:18:45 <pgroth> telcon only

Paul Groth: telcon only ←

16:18:51 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, draft minutes ←

16:18:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/30-prov-minutes.html Luc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/30-prov-minutes.html Luc ←

16:18:59 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon

Luc Moreau: trackbot, end telcon ←

16:18:59 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←

16:18:59 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Luc, pgroth, +1.646.389.aaaa, +1.832.386.aabb, paolo, stain, SamCoppens, jorn, [ISI], +1.518.633.aacc, +1.650.386.aadd, jun,

Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Luc, pgroth, +1.646.389.aaaa, +1.832.386.aabb, paolo, stain, SamCoppens, jorn, [ISI], +1.518.633.aacc, +1.650.386.aadd, jun, ←

16:19:00 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←

16:19:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/30-prov-minutes.html trackbot

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/30-prov-minutes.html trackbot ←

16:19:01 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←

16:19:01 <RRSAgent> I see no action items

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see no action items ←

16:19:02 <Zakim> ... +1.509.375.aaee, +1.216.368.aaff, +1.217.417.aagg

Zakim IRC Bot: ... +1.509.375.aaee, +1.216.368.aaff, +1.217.417.aagg ←

Formatted by CommonScribe Show Interleaved IRC Text

---