Minutes of last week's teleconference were accepted.
WG members are invited to check the timetable at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/TimetableToRec. The plan is to vote on release of Candidate Recommendation on November 1st, which requires all issues to be tackled and exit criteria to CR to be defined. Timely response to email would be very appreciated.
Outstanding issues in the tracker were reviewed. They are either complete or require minor work to be completed by the end of the week. The only outstanding issue was related to some received public comment, and is being processed according to the agreed process. The chair congratulated the prov-o team for resolving the backlog of issues.
It was resolved that responses to ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508 can be sent to reviewers. Some further 20 issues have been tackled, and the group is invited to review responses by Wednesday October 03. The group discussed which section of the prov-dm document are normative. Some guidance to editors was provided: Section 5 would be the only section to be normative, provided some minor editorial issues are addressed. Finally, we began discussing ISSUE-519 and ISSUE-523 which identify problems in UML diagrams regarding inheritance associated with Influence. We ran out of time, and were unable to reach consensus: a detailed solution needs to be drafted, and reviewed by the working group.
14:46:03 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/27-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/27-prov-irc ←
14:46:05 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:46:06 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV
Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
14:46:06 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes ←
14:46:07 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be ←
14:46:08 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:46:08 <trackbot> Date: 27 September 2012
14:46:08 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot ←
14:47:28 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.09.27
14:47:34 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public ←
14:52:42 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started ←
14:52:49 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:52:57 <pgroth> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Paul Groth: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
14:52:57 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [IPcaller] ←
14:53:05 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Paul Groth: Zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
14:53:05 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgroth; got it ←
14:59:04 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:59:13 <Zakim> + +44.238.059.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.238.059.aaaa ←
14:59:28 <Luc> zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me
Luc Moreau: zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me ←
14:59:28 <Zakim> +Luc; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc; got it ←
14:59:40 <Luc> Hi, we don't have a scribe
Luc Moreau: Hi, we don't have a scribe ←
14:59:57 <Zakim> + +1.781.273.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.781.273.aabb ←
15:00:08 <MacTed> Zakim, aabb is OpenLink_Software
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, aabb is OpenLink_Software ←
15:00:08 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software; got it ←
15:00:15 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
15:00:15 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
15:00:17 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:00:17 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:00:19 <Zakim> +??P20
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P20 ←
15:00:47 <Luc> @khalidBelhajjame, hi Khalid, any chance you would be able to scribe?
Luc Moreau: @khalidBelhajjame, hi Khalid, any chance you would be able to scribe? ←
15:00:51 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.789.470.aacc ←
15:00:59 <stain> zakim, +44.789.470.aacc is me
Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim, +44.789.470.aacc is me ←
15:00:59 <Zakim> +stain; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +stain; got it ←
15:01:00 <Zakim> +??P30
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P30 ←
15:01:07 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
15:01:15 <khalidBelhajjame> zakim, ??P30 is me
Khalid Belhajjame: zakim, ??P30 is me ←
15:01:15 <Zakim> +khalidBelhajjame; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +khalidBelhajjame; got it ←
15:01:17 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aadd ←
15:01:21 <Luc> @khalidBelhajjame, hi Khalid, any chance you would be able to scribe?
Luc Moreau: @khalidBelhajjame, hi Khalid, any chance you would be able to scribe? ←
15:01:30 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
15:01:38 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
15:01:38 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
15:01:39 <khalidBelhajjame> @Luc I can try, but I have a bad connection
Khalid Belhajjame: @Luc I can try, but I have a bad connection ←
15:01:41 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
15:01:51 <khalidBelhajjame> I can try though
Khalid Belhajjame: I can try though ←
15:01:53 <Zakim> + +329331aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: + +329331aaee ←
15:01:55 <Zakim> + +44.131.467.aaff
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.131.467.aaff ←
15:01:56 <jun> zakim, +[IPcaller.a] is me
Jun Zhao: zakim, +[IPcaller.a] is me ←
15:01:56 <Zakim> sorry, jun, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller.a]'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, jun, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller.a]' ←
15:01:59 <stain> I can fill in for 30 minutes
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I can fill in for 30 minutes ←
15:02:01 <TomDN> Zakim, +32 is me
Tom De Nies: Zakim, +32 is me ←
15:02:01 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TomDN; got it ←
15:02:04 <Luc> Scribe: khalidBelhajjame
(Scribe set to Khalid Belhajjame)
15:02:07 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me
Tom De Nies: Zakim, mute me ←
15:02:07 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should now be muted ←
15:02:07 <Paolo> luc apologies, my keyboard is acting up
Paolo Missier: luc apologies, my keyboard is acting up ←
15:02:08 <jun> zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me
Jun Zhao: zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me ←
15:02:08 <jcheney> zakim, aaff is me
James Cheney: zakim, aaff is me ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> +jun; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +jun; got it ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +jcheney; got it ←
15:02:11 <Paolo> can barely type
Paolo Missier: can barely type ←
15:02:26 <Zakim> + +1.315.330.aagg
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.315.330.aagg ←
15:02:32 <tlebo> zakim, I am aagg
Timothy Lebo: zakim, I am aagg ←
15:02:32 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo; got it ←
15:03:00 <Luc> Topic: admin
Summary: Minutes of last week's teleconference were accepted.
<Luc>Summary: Minutes of last week's teleconference were accepted.
15:03:03 <Luc> proposed: to accept the minutes of the September 20, 2012 Telecon
PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of the September 20, 2012 Telecon ←
15:03:07 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: approve the minutes of last week
Luc Moreau: approve the minutes of last week ←
15:03:09 <jcheney> 0 (absent)
James Cheney: 0 (absent) ←
15:03:16 <smiles> 0
Simon Miles: 0 ←
15:03:17 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
15:03:20 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-09-20
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-09-20 ←
15:03:21 <khalidBelhajjame> 0 (absent)
0 (absent) ←
15:03:24 <stain> 0 (absent)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 0 (absent) ←
15:03:36 <Paolo> 0 (absent)
Paolo Missier: 0 (absent) ←
15:03:38 <jun> +1
15:03:43 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
15:03:51 <hook> 0 (absent)
15:04:00 <Luc> accepted: minutes of the September 20, 2012 Telecon
RESOLVED: minutes of the September 20, 2012 Telecon ←
15:04:08 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: minutes approved
Luc Moreau: minutes approved ←
15:04:22 <pgroth> :-)
Paul Groth: :-) ←
15:04:23 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: action assigned to Paulo
Luc Moreau: action assigned to Paulo ←
15:04:27 <pgroth> every week
Paul Groth: every week ←
15:04:32 <pgroth> now it's a running joke
Paul Groth: now it's a running joke ←
15:04:33 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
15:04:41 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: action on Paul to produce an overview slide
Luc Moreau: action on Paul to produce an overview slide ←
15:04:44 <pgroth> it's just to make me feel guilty every week
Paul Groth: it's just to make me feel guilty every week ←
15:04:48 <GK> zakim, ??p1 is me
Graham Klyne: zakim, ??p1 is me ←
15:04:48 <Zakim> +GK; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +GK; got it ←
15:04:49 <Zakim> +??P21
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21 ←
15:04:52 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: we can leave it for another week
Luc Moreau: we can leave it for another week ←
15:05:15 <Luc> Topic: Timetable to CR
Summary: WG members are invited to check the timetable at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/TimetableToRec. The plan is to vote on release of Candidate Recommendation on November 1st, which requires all issues to be tackled and exit criteria to CR to be defined. Timely response to email would be very appreciated.
<Luc>Summary: WG members are invited to check the timetable at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/TimetableToRec. The plan is to vote on release of Candidate Recommendation on November 1st, which requires all issues to be tackled and exit criteria to CR to be defined. Timely response to email would be very appreciated.
15:05:25 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: timetable to candidate recommendation
Luc Moreau: timetable to candidate recommendation ←
15:05:48 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/TimetableToRec
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/TimetableToRec ←
15:05:53 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: we are in the phase where we need to tackle external feeback
Luc Moreau: we are in the phase where we need to tackle external feeback ←
15:05:57 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
15:06:15 <Luc> End LC review for prov-dm/prov-o/prov-n: 2012-9-18
Luc Moreau: End LC review for prov-dm/prov-o/prov-n: 2012-9-18 ←
15:06:16 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: the link contains the document submitted to have the extention for th eWG
Luc Moreau: the link contains the document submitted to have the extention for th eWG ←
15:06:37 <Luc> End LC review for prov-constraints: 2012-10-10
Luc Moreau: End LC review for prov-constraints: 2012-10-10 ←
15:06:51 <Luc> CR Publication: 2012-11-15
Luc Moreau: CR Publication: 2012-11-15 ←
15:06:54 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: the lc review for prov-dm was the 18th of September
Luc Moreau: the lc review for prov-dm was the 18th of September ←
15:07:09 <Luc> Vote for CR: 2012-11-01
Luc Moreau: Vote for CR: 2012-11-01 ←
15:07:11 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: we want to publish candidate recomendation of the 15th of November
Luc Moreau: we want to publish candidate recomendation of the 15th of November ←
15:07:23 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: we should have a vote around the 1st of Novemer
Luc Moreau: we should have a vote around the 1st of Novemer ←
15:07:45 <khalidBelhajjame> luc: the issues needs to be addressed by then
Luc Moreau: the issues needs to be addressed by then ←
15:07:53 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:07:57 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: that is not a lot of time
Luc Moreau: that is not a lot of time ←
15:08:19 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:08:47 <khalidBelhajjame> ivan: we also have a clear plan what the exit criteria are
Ivan Herman: we also have a clear plan what the exit criteria are ←
15:09:08 <khalidBelhajjame> ... how do we judge that we have the correct implementation, how do we judge it, etc.
... how do we judge that we have the correct implementation, how do we judge it, etc. ←
15:09:09 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
15:09:26 <Luc> ack iv
Luc Moreau: ack iv ←
15:10:18 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:10:25 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: we are still expecting feedback from other WGs, we didnt get any feedback and the deadline for feedback is over, can we still process late feedback?
Paul Groth: we are still expecting feedback from other WGs, we didnt get any feedback and the deadline for feedback is over, can we still process late feedback? ←
15:10:51 <khalidBelhajjame> ivan: we can say sorry it is too late
Ivan Herman: we can say sorry it is too late ←
15:11:34 <khalidBelhajjame> ... with the RDF WG we have issues, I would hope that ? will send feedback on teh constrainst document by next week
... with the RDF WG we have issues, I would hope that ? will send feedback on teh constrainst document by next week ←
15:11:50 <GK> q+ to ask: do we have any knowledge of areas where RDF group might have feedback for us
Graham Klyne: q+ to ask: do we have any knowledge of areas where RDF group might have feedback for us ←
15:12:08 <khalidBelhajjame> ... which WGs did we ask?
... which WGs did we ask? ←
15:12:40 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:13:14 <Luc> ... and we did it too for IETF mime type and we got feedback
Luc Moreau: ... and we did it too for IETF mime type and we got feedback ←
15:14:43 <pgroth> q+ to say what we asked
Paul Groth: q+ to say what we asked ←
15:14:51 <GK> q-
Graham Klyne: q- ←
15:15:22 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:15:32 <pgroth> ack
Paul Groth: ack ←
15:16:13 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: we asked about the construct of mention and about RDF types
Paul Groth: we asked about the construct of mention and about RDF types ←
15:16:19 <GK> @pgroth thanks
Graham Klyne: @pgroth thanks ←
15:16:32 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:16:32 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say what we asked
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to say what we asked ←
15:16:52 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: keep in mind that we have 4 weeks to complete the document
Luc Moreau: keep in mind that we have 4 weeks to complete the document ←
15:17:03 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:17:11 <khalidBelhajjame> .. no more question on the time table?
.. no more question on the time table? ←
15:17:17 <khalidBelhajjame> @luc, yes
@luc, yes ←
15:17:21 <khalidBelhajjame> yes
yes ←
15:17:28 <Luc> topic: PROV-O issues
Summary: Outstanding issues in the tracker were reviewed. They are either complete or require minor work to be completed by the end of the week. The only outstanding issue was related to some received public comment, and is being processed according to the agreed process. The chair congratulated the prov-o team for resolving the backlog of issues.
<Luc> Summary: Outstanding issues in the tracker were reviewed. They are either complete or require minor work to be completed by the end of the week. The only outstanding issue was related to some received public comment, and is being processed according to the agreed process. The chair congratulated the prov-o team for resolving the backlog of issues.
15:17:43 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: next item, review of the outstanding issues in the tracker
Luc Moreau: next item, review of the outstanding issues in the tracker ←
15:17:53 <Zakim> +Luc.a
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc.a ←
15:18:00 <khalidBelhajjame> ... we need to close some of those actions
... we need to close some of those actions ←
15:18:13 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: Stian, you sent an email on issue 491
Paul Groth: Stian, you sent an email on ISSUE-491 ←
15:18:27 <khalidBelhajjame> stian: we wanted to discuss that with Tim
Stian Soiland-Reyes: we wanted to discuss that with Tim ←
15:19:00 <khalidBelhajjame> stain: I suggested a definition
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I suggested a definition ←
15:19:27 <khalidBelhajjame> tlebo: the definitions of the properties reuse the definition of the classes
Timothy Lebo: the definitions of the properties reuse the definition of the classes ←
15:19:34 <khalidBelhajjame> ... I would like to keep them consistent
... I would like to keep them consistent ←
15:20:02 <khalidBelhajjame> ... if they are confusing, then I will need to revise the generation algorithm to let you know which annotations we should use
... if they are confusing, then I will need to revise the generation algorithm to let you know which annotations we should use ←
15:20:21 <khalidBelhajjame> stain: my argument is that we shouldnt use them
Stian Soiland-Reyes: my argument is that we shouldnt use them ←
15:20:49 <khalidBelhajjame> ... between agent and agent inference, it becomes confusing untangling the properties
... between agent and agent inference, it becomes confusing untangling the properties ←
15:21:13 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:21:35 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: we can leave the definitions there for consistency and add a link
Paul Groth: we can leave the definitions there for consistency and add a link ←
15:21:54 <khalidBelhajjame> ... instead of redefining everything
... instead of redefining everything ←
15:22:19 <khalidBelhajjame> tlebo: we can discuss that offline
Timothy Lebo: we can discuss that offline ←
15:22:37 <Luc> can we try to converge quickly?
Luc Moreau: can we try to converge quickly? ←
15:22:41 <khalidBelhajjame> ... I will respond to that by email
... I will respond to that by email ←
15:22:57 <Luc> good!
Luc Moreau: good! ←
15:23:00 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: can we try to converge quickly to close the issue by tomorrow?
Paul Groth: can we try to converge quickly to close the issue by tomorrow? ←
15:23:36 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: for issue 479, Stian tried to make changes, but I think we still need more changes becase Trig syntax is still there
Paul Groth: for ISSUE-479, Stian tried to make changes, but I think we still need more changes becase Trig syntax is still there ←
15:23:53 <khalidBelhajjame> satya: I have not been able to respond to your email
Satya Sahoo: I have not been able to respond to your email ←
15:24:24 <Luc> timing?
Luc Moreau: timing? ←
15:24:26 <khalidBelhajjame> satya: I will revisit the changes
Satya Sahoo: I will revisit the changes ←
15:24:38 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: that will be done by this week?
Paul Groth: that will be done by this week? ←
15:24:47 <khalidBelhajjame> satya: yes
Satya Sahoo: yes ←
15:25:04 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: issue 349 is now closed
Paul Groth: ISSUE-349 is now closed ←
15:25:10 <khalidBelhajjame> stian: yes
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes ←
15:25:22 <khalidBelhajjame> ... I will double check
... I will double check ←
15:25:23 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:25:47 <pgroth> good point
Paul Groth: good point ←
15:25:57 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
15:25:58 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: are we keeping track of the changes we are aking the document to use them when publishing the next version
Luc Moreau: are we keeping track of the changes we are aking the document to use them when publishing the next version ←
15:26:18 <Luc> ack L
Luc Moreau: ack L ←
15:26:19 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: for example in prov-dm i put in the appendix the changes made
Luc Moreau: for example in prov-dm i put in the appendix the changes made ←
15:26:24 <pgroth> ack tlebo
Paul Groth: ack tlebo ←
15:26:48 <khalidBelhajjame> tlebo: I added a section that reflect the changes, but we need to check that it was updated
Timothy Lebo: I added a section that reflect the changes, but we need to check that it was updated ←
15:27:02 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: it would be a good policy that any change is reflected in that section
Luc Moreau: it would be a good policy that any change is reflected in that section ←
15:27:15 <tlebo> The section for changes: http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#changes-since-wd-prov-o-20120724
Timothy Lebo: The section for changes: http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#changes-since-wd-prov-o-20120724 ←
15:28:07 <khalidBelhajjame> satya: for issue 349 we need also to change the identifiers used in the examples
Satya Sahoo: for ISSUE-349 we need also to change the identifiers used in the examples ←
15:28:22 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:28:24 <stain> ^^ stian
Stian Soiland-Reyes: ^^ stian ←
15:28:51 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: issue 446, Daniele?
Paul Groth: ISSUE-446, Daniele? ←
15:29:04 <khalidBelhajjame> ... will send an email to Daniele
... will send an email to Daniele ←
15:29:07 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/10
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/10 ←
15:29:40 <khalidBelhajjame> ... provo has only one open issue,
... provo has only one open issue, ←
15:30:06 <Luc> what about http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/3?
Luc Moreau: what about http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/3? ←
15:30:14 <khalidBelhajjame> tlebo: I will address the issue given the email sent by Graham
Timothy Lebo: I will address the issue given the email sent by Graham ←
15:30:14 <pgroth> @luc was getting there
Paul Groth: @luc was getting there ←
15:30:33 <khalidBelhajjame> tlebo: issue 476 is an externa comment
Timothy Lebo: ISSUE-476 is an externa comment ←
15:30:44 <khalidBelhajjame> ... what is the processing for it given that it is resolved
... what is the processing for it given that it is resolved ←
15:31:00 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments ←
15:31:32 <stain> ACTION stain: Add note on example identifiers changes in prov-o
Stian Soiland-Reyes: ACTION stain: Add note on example identifiers changes in prov-o ←
15:31:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-118 - Add note on example identifiers changes in prov-o [on Stian Soiland-Reyes - due 2012-10-04].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-118 - Add note on example identifiers changes in prov-o [on Stian Soiland-Reyes - due 2012-10-04]. ←
15:31:47 <smiles> @tlebo OK, I have checked issue 445 is resolved and will close it now
Simon Miles: @tlebo OK, I have checked ISSUE-445 is resolved and will close it now ←
15:32:12 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: there are a couple of issues regarding the ontologies
Luc Moreau: there are a couple of issues regarding the ontologies ←
15:32:41 <GK> (As an aside, when trying to review the proposed responses, it would have been really helpful to me to have a link back to the *original* email to the prov-comments list)
Graham Klyne: (As an aside, when trying to review the proposed responses, it would have been really helpful to me to have a link back to the *original* email to the prov-comments list) ←
15:32:47 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: issue 552, which need the resolution of the issue on influence
Paul Groth: ISSUE-552, which need the resolution of the issue on influence ←
15:33:08 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments ←
15:33:08 <pgroth> thanks stain
Paul Groth: thanks stain ←
15:33:14 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: all the responses are on the wiki
Luc Moreau: all the responses are on the wiki ←
15:33:27 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:33:46 <pgroth> it has the original email
Paul Groth: it has the original email ←
15:33:59 <khalidBelhajjame> GK: information about who send the original comment is missing
Graham Klyne: information about who send the original comment is missing ←
15:34:44 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/463
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/463 ←
15:34:55 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: you need to go to the tracker
Luc Moreau: you need to go to the tracker ←
15:35:11 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
15:35:40 <Luc> topic: PROV-DM issues
Summary: It was resolved that responses to ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508 can be sent to reviewers. Some further 20 issues have been tackled, and the group is invited to review responses by Wednesday October 03. The group discussed which section of the prov-dm document are normative. Some guidance to editors was provided: Section 5 would be the only section to be normative, provided some minor editorial issues are addressed. Finally, we began discussing ISSUE-519 and ISSUE-523 which identify problems in UML diagrams regarding inheritance associated with Influence. We ran out of time, and were unable to reach consensus: a detailed solution needs to be drafted, and reviewed by the working group.
<Luc>Summary: It was resolved that responses to ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508 can be sent to reviewers. Some further 20 issues have been tackled, and the group is invited to review responses by Wednesday October 03. The group discussed which section of the prov-dm document are normative. Some guidance to editors was provided: Section 5 would be the only section to be normative, provided some minor editorial issues are addressed. Finally, we began discussing ISSUE-519 and ISSUE-523 which identify problems in UML diagrams regarding inheritance associated with Influence. We ran out of time, and were unable to reach consensus: a detailed solution needs to be drafted, and reviewed by the working group.
15:35:54 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:36:07 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: we obtain the email from Robert, and then issued the issue.Given that his comments were extensive, we proke them into several issues
Paul Groth: we obtain the email from Robert, and then issued the issue.Given that his comments were extensive, we proke them into several issues ←
15:36:39 <khalidBelhajjame> GK: there is no simple way to get to the oriinal email
Graham Klyne: there is no simple way to get to the oriinal email ←
15:36:47 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:36:57 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: any comments regarding prov-o?
Luc Moreau: any comments regarding prov-o? ←
15:37:13 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#PROV-DM_.28Under_Review.29
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#PROV-DM_.28Under_Review.29 ←
15:37:15 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: next topic, prov-dm issues
Luc Moreau: next topic, prov-dm issues ←
15:37:28 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: during this week I sent proposed responses to 4 issues
Luc Moreau: during this week I sent proposed responses to 4 issues ←
15:37:32 <Luc> ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508
Luc Moreau: ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508 ←
15:37:41 <ivan> issue-492?
15:37:41 <trackbot> ISSUE-492 -- typo in example -- pending review
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-492 -- typo in example -- pending review ←
15:37:41 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/492
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/492 ←
15:37:45 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: we had supportive feedback during the week
Luc Moreau: we had supportive feedback during the week ←
15:37:48 <ivan> issue-500?
15:37:48 <trackbot> ISSUE-500 -- Data Model Section 2.1.1, hierarchies -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-500 -- Data Model Section 2.1.1, hierarchies -- open ←
15:37:48 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/500
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/500 ←
15:37:52 <Luc> ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508
Luc Moreau: ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508 ←
15:37:54 <ivan> issue-505?
15:37:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-505 -- Data Model Section 3 -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-505 -- Data Model Section 3 -- open ←
15:37:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/505
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/505 ←
15:37:55 <khalidBelhajjame> ... the deadline was yesterday
... the deadline was yesterday ←
15:37:59 <ivan> issue-508?
15:37:59 <trackbot> ISSUE-508 -- Data Model Table 5 -- pending review
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-508 -- Data Model Table 5 -- pending review ←
15:37:59 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/508
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/508 ←
15:38:08 <Luc> accepted: The suggested resolutions in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments to ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508 were accepted as responses by the working group. there were no objections to the resolutions on the mailing group only support
Luc Moreau: accepted: The suggested resolutions in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments to ISSUE-492, ISSUE-500, ISSUE-505, ISSUE-508 were accepted as responses by the working group. there were no objections to the resolutions on the mailing group only support ←
15:38:14 <khalidBelhajjame> ... the responses are accepted by the group
... the responses are accepted by the group ←
15:38:41 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
15:38:48 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P2 is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P2 is me ←
15:38:48 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it ←
15:39:02 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#PROV-DM_.28Draft.29
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#PROV-DM_.28Draft.29 ←
15:39:19 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: I sent few emails and drafted responses to 20 issues
Luc Moreau: I sent few emails and drafted responses to 20 issues ←
15:39:40 <khalidBelhajjame> ... I will ask the group to comment on them, the deadline is wednesday next week
... I will ask the group to comment on them, the deadline is wednesday next week ←
15:39:42 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0263.html
Luc Moreau: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0263.html ←
15:40:01 <khalidBelhajjame> ... there was one negative comment fro PAolo regarding some attributes that we debated at lenth
... there was one negative comment fro PAolo regarding some attributes that we debated at lenth ←
15:40:06 <khalidBelhajjame> ... length
... length ←
15:41:03 <khalidBelhajjame> Paolo: I am happy with the resolution at the end
Paolo Missier: I am happy with the resolution at the end ←
15:41:13 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:41:18 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: any comments?
Luc Moreau: any comments? ←
15:41:25 <pgroth> are we talking about influence next?
Paul Groth: are we talking about influence next? ←
15:41:38 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:41:42 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: I will send an email asking to give feedback
Luc Moreau: I will send an email asking to give feedback ←
15:41:46 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:41:52 <khalidBelhajjame> ... and you will have until next wednesday night
... and you will have until next wednesday night ←
15:42:02 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:42:09 <khalidBelhajjame> pgroth: are we goining to talk about influence?
Paul Groth: are we goining to talk about influence? ←
15:42:16 <pgroth> ok great
Paul Groth: ok great ←
15:42:22 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:42:23 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: they are not ready for feedback
Luc Moreau: they are not ready for feedback ←
15:42:36 <khalidBelhajjame> Luc: next item of prov-dm
Luc Moreau: next item of prov-dm ←
15:42:39 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0271.html
Luc Moreau: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0271.html ←
15:43:39 <pgroth> +q to say yes
Paul Groth: +q to say yes ←
15:43:50 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:45:12 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:45:12 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say yes
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to say yes ←
15:45:39 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm ←
15:45:51 <jcheney> happy either way, but just thought it should be discussed
James Cheney: happy either way, but just thought it should be discussed ←
15:46:05 <Luc> @jcheney: agreed james
Luc Moreau: @jcheney: agreed james ←
15:46:24 <jcheney> as long as any repeated definitions are *identical*
James Cheney: as long as any repeated definitions are *identical* ←
15:46:34 <pgroth> +q you use MAY
Paul Groth: +q you use MAY ←
15:46:38 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
15:46:43 <Luc> @jcheney: they are, they are included automatically from a single file
Luc Moreau: @jcheney: they are, they are included automatically from a single file ←
15:46:57 <Luc> section 2 defines the core
Luc Moreau: section 2 defines the core ←
15:47:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:48:05 <jcheney> If core vs. non-core is a key property then I think that's a good enough reason.
James Cheney: If core vs. non-core is a key property then I think that's a good enough reason. ←
15:48:26 <TomDN> I have to go, bye
Tom De Nies: I have to go, bye ←
15:48:33 <Zakim> -TomDN
Zakim IRC Bot: -TomDN ←
15:48:59 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:50:13 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:50:17 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:50:18 <ivan> ack pgroth
Ivan Herman: ack pgroth ←
15:50:48 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
15:51:12 <dgarijo> Ivan: it bothers me that there are 2 places where an entity is defined
Ivan Herman: it bothers me that there are 2 places where an entity is defined [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
15:51:23 <Luc> table 5 http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#prov-dm-types-and-relations still shows what is core
Luc Moreau: table 5 http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#prov-dm-types-and-relations still shows what is core ←
15:51:31 <Zakim> -khalidBelhajjame
Zakim IRC Bot: -khalidBelhajjame ←
15:51:34 <GK> Did I mishear Paul? I thought he was saying the same as Ivan
Graham Klyne: Did I mishear Paul? I thought he was saying the same as Ivan ←
15:51:38 <dgarijo> ... if one has more info than the other, then it is an editorial problem
Daniel Garijo: ... if one has more info than the other, then it is an editorial problem ←
15:51:42 <GK> (in thrust)
Graham Klyne: (in thrust) ←
15:52:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:52:07 <dgarijo> Luc: the overview is not normative
Luc Moreau: the overview is not normative [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
15:52:24 <dgarijo> Ivan: did I misunderstand Paul?
Ivan Herman: did I misunderstand Paul? [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
15:52:29 <jcheney> I think it would be good to ensure that the MAY is reflected in sec. 5 too.
James Cheney: I think it would be good to ensure that the MAY is reflected in sec. 5 too. ←
15:52:49 <Luc> @jcheney: +1
Luc Moreau: @jcheney: +1 ←
15:52:55 <dgarijo> pgroth: if we say that section 2 is informative, then we have to make sure that no command words appear there.
Paul Groth: if we say that section 2 is informative, then we have to make sure that no command words appear there. [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
15:52:57 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
15:53:10 <Luc> yes, james had already indentified a similar problem in section 6
Luc Moreau: yes, james had already indentified a similar problem in section 6 ←
15:53:23 <pgroth> ok
Paul Groth: ok ←
15:53:25 <dgarijo> Ivan: that is even more true if both sections are normative
Ivan Herman: that is even more true if both sections are normative [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
15:53:39 <dgarijo> ... there should not be discrepancy
Daniel Garijo: ... there should not be discrepancy ←
15:53:45 <GK> I spotted one MAY in section 2.
Graham Klyne: I spotted one MAY in section 2. ←
15:53:49 <khalidBelhajjame_> @dgarijo thanks, I can take over
@dgarijo thanks, I can take over ←
15:53:53 <dgarijo> ... between both of them. That should be checked
Daniel Garijo: ... between both of them. That should be checked ←
15:53:58 <dgarijo> @khalid ok!
Daniel Garijo: @khalid ok! ←
15:54:19 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: to come to a conclusion, as pgroth we need to come back to the document
Luc Moreau: to come to a conclusion, as pgroth we need to come back to the document ←
15:54:22 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:54:29 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... and do soe editorial clean up
... and do soe editorial clean up ←
15:54:34 <GK> .. that was sect 2.1.3 - I didn't see any others.
Graham Klyne: .. that was sect 2.1.3 - I didn't see any others. ←
15:54:34 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:54:37 <pgroth> but section 5 would be the only normative one
Paul Groth: but section 5 would be the only normative one ←
15:54:41 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... are we of the view that section 2 is not normative?
... are we of the view that section 2 is not normative? ←
15:54:49 <khalidBelhajjame_> ivan: I would think so
Ivan Herman: I would think so ←
15:55:12 <jcheney> q+ to suggest anything "normative-looking" in sec. 2 should be checked to make sure it's also in sec. 5
James Cheney: q+ to suggest anything "normative-looking" in sec. 2 should be checked to make sure it's also in sec. 5 ←
15:55:13 <GK> OK, I'm happy with this too. (i.e. sect 2 informative)
Graham Klyne: OK, I'm happy with this too. (i.e. sect 2 informative) ←
15:55:39 <stainPhone> +1 for (making) sec 2 informative
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 for (making) sec 2 informative ←
15:55:40 <khalidBelhajjame_> pgroth: it is fine to have only section 5 as the normative one
Paul Groth: it is fine to have only section 5 as the normative one ←
15:55:55 <pgroth> they are
Paul Groth: they are ←
15:55:57 <Luc> proposed: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm
PROPOSED: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm ←
15:56:29 <khalidBelhajjame_> ivan: the use of may in that section is not always an ITF may but is an english one
Ivan Herman: the use of may in that section is not always an ITF may but is an english one ←
15:56:30 <GK> I think ReSpec picks up capitalized MAY, SHOULD, MUST etc and applies different styling.
Graham Klyne: I think ReSpec picks up capitalized MAY, SHOULD, MUST etc and applies different styling. ←
15:56:54 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... which is fine, but I want to make sure that the use of those terms are checked in the definitions
... which is fine, but I want to make sure that the use of those terms are checked in the definitions ←
15:56:58 <GK> So the thing to do is use capitalization consistently when editing source.
Graham Klyne: So the thing to do is use capitalization consistently when editing source. ←
15:57:00 <Luc> proposed: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm
PROPOSED: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm ←
15:57:00 <khalidBelhajjame_> luc: i did that
Luc Moreau: i did that ←
15:57:11 <pgroth> james is on the queue
Paul Groth: james is on the queue ←
15:57:15 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:57:17 <Luc> ack iva
Luc Moreau: ack iva ←
15:57:40 <ivan> ack jcheney
Ivan Herman: ack jcheney ←
15:57:40 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to suggest anything "normative-looking" in sec. 2 should be checked to make sure it's also in sec. 5
Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to suggest anything "normative-looking" in sec. 2 should be checked to make sure it's also in sec. 5 ←
15:58:11 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: are we happy with the proposal?
Luc Moreau: are we happy with the proposal? ←
15:58:38 <khalidBelhajjame_> GK: I am looking at section 7 to work out if there is something normative in that section
Graham Klyne: I am looking at section 7 to work out if there is something normative in that section ←
15:59:03 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... I agree that section 2 is inforative, but we need to check the rest
... I agree that section 2 is inforative, but we need to check the rest ←
15:59:05 <pgroth> the goal is to make Section 5 the only normative one
Paul Groth: the goal is to make Section 5 the only normative one ←
15:59:08 <Luc> proposed: guidance for editor: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm
PROPOSED: guidance for editor: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm ←
15:59:29 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: I will make edits and will ask people for review
Luc Moreau: I will make edits and will ask people for review ←
15:59:30 <GK> +1
Graham Klyne: +1 ←
15:59:36 <Luc> accepted: guidance for editor: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm
RESOLVED: guidance for editor: section 5 would be the only normative section in prov-dm ←
15:59:56 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-519_and_ISSUE-523_.28Influence_Inheritance.29
Luc Moreau: ISSUE-519_and_ISSUE-523_.28Influence_Inheritance.29">http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-519_and_ISSUE-523_.28Influence_Inheritance.29 ←
16:00:02 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: issue of inheritance with influence
Luc Moreau: issue of inheritance with influence ←
16:01:24 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... thinking about this issue, I think that it is not mandatory for generation, usage, ... sub-relations of influence
... thinking about this issue, I think that it is not mandatory for generation, usage, ... sub-relations of influence ←
16:01:44 <jcheney> luc, you seem to be cutting in and out
James Cheney: luc, you seem to be cutting in and out ←
16:02:10 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... I formulated a response here, and I would like a feedback on this
... I formulated a response here, and I would like a feedback on this ←
16:02:21 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:02:23 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... before implementing it
... before implementing it ←
16:02:37 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: any comments?
Luc Moreau: any comments? ←
16:02:41 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:02:58 <khalidBelhajjame_> GK: I am not sure what inheritance means here
Graham Klyne: I am not sure what inheritance means here ←
16:03:16 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... what is being described is sub-property relation
... what is being described is sub-property relation ←
16:03:16 <pgroth> yes
Paul Groth: yes ←
16:03:26 <pgroth> this is what I asked online
Paul Groth: this is what I asked online ←
16:03:30 <khalidBelhajjame_> ivan: but that will have ipact on how the ontology is defined
Ivan Herman: but that will have ipact on how the ontology is defined ←
16:03:43 <satya> It will in prov-o by owl2 rdf semantics
Satya Sahoo: It will in prov-o by owl2 rdf semantics ←
16:04:06 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: in the ontology you will have the class influence and its subclasses, and the same for sub-properties
Luc Moreau: in the ontology you will have the class influence and its subclasses, and the same for sub-properties ←
16:04:27 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:04:34 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... but in the XML schema, that is not the case
... but in the XML schema, that is not the case ←
16:04:49 <khalidBelhajjame_> pgroth: I am worring about the ramifications on other form of relations
Paul Groth: I am worring about the ramifications on other form of relations ←
16:05:35 <satya> sorry, I have to leave
Satya Sahoo: sorry, I have to leave ←
16:05:38 <satya> bye
Satya Sahoo: bye ←
16:05:43 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: I was not planning to do changes based on this
Luc Moreau: I was not planning to do changes based on this ←
16:05:43 <jun> Sorry, I have to go now ... bye
Jun Zhao: Sorry, I have to go now ... bye ←
16:05:48 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo ←
16:05:49 <Zakim> -jun
Zakim IRC Bot: -jun ←
16:06:02 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: the prov constraints states what we mean
Luc Moreau: the prov constraints states what we mean ←
16:06:10 <pgroth> yeah but I'm reading prov-dm
Paul Groth: yeah but I'm reading prov-dm ←
16:06:10 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/#influence-inference
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/#influence-inference ←
16:06:27 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: as stated in inference 15
Luc Moreau: as stated in inference 15 ←
16:06:53 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... it can be done through inheritance, but it doesnt have to be done that way
... it can be done through inheritance, but it doesnt have to be done that way ←
16:07:12 <stainPhone> I guess the reviewer might wonder if you can have wasInfluencedBy while none of the prov subproperies (so to speak) could apply.
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I guess the reviewer might wonder if you can have wasInfluencedBy while none of the prov subproperies (so to speak) could apply. ←
16:07:15 <khalidBelhajjame_> pgroth: is the problem stems from the use of the UML diagram?
Paul Groth: is the problem stems from the use of the UML diagram? ←
16:07:16 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
16:07:18 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: no
Luc Moreau: no ←
16:07:31 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:07:44 <khalidBelhajjame_> ivan: this is something taht we need to follow on
Ivan Herman: this is something taht we need to follow on ←
16:07:49 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: is Tim still on the call?
Luc Moreau: is Tim still on the call? ←
16:08:17 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... have you got a view on whether influence should be represented as a superclasss in the UML diagram
... have you got a view on whether influence should be represented as a superclasss in the UML diagram ←
16:08:25 <khalidBelhajjame_> tlebo: I am inclined towards to
Timothy Lebo: I am inclined towards to ←
16:08:57 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: the problem with inheritance, is that the attributes are inherited, which pose problem, like influencer and influencee
Luc Moreau: the problem with inheritance, is that the attributes are inherited, which pose problem, like influencer and influencee ←
16:09:02 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
16:09:02 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
16:09:03 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:09:59 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: UML is closer to object oriented programming style
Luc Moreau: UML is closer to object oriented programming style ←
16:10:10 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... which is not desirable in our context
... which is not desirable in our context ←
16:10:32 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:10:33 <stainPhone> For instance wasInfluencedBy(agent, activity)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: For instance wasInfluencedBy(agent, activity) ←
16:10:38 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
16:10:50 <khalidBelhajjame_> Luc: we have to revisit this issue
Luc Moreau: we have to revisit this issue ←
16:10:59 <khalidBelhajjame_> ... and come back with a concrete proposal
... and come back with a concrete proposal ←
16:11:02 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
16:11:04 <Zakim> -tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←
16:11:05 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
16:11:05 <Zakim> -dgarijo
Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo ←
16:11:07 <Zakim> -??P20
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P20 ←
16:11:10 <Zakim> -stain
Zakim IRC Bot: -stain ←
16:11:12 <khalidBelhajjame_> #luc thanks
#luc thanks ←
16:11:14 <Zakim> -jcheney
Zakim IRC Bot: -jcheney ←
16:11:18 <khalidBelhajjame_> @luc, thanks
@luc, thanks ←
16:11:28 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller.a] ←
16:11:31 <Zakim> -??P21
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P21 ←
16:11:35 <Zakim> -pgroth
Zakim IRC Bot: -pgroth ←
Formatted by CommonScribe