W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > December 2005

Minutes telecon, 20 December 2005

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 20:36:07 +0000
Message-ID: <43A86B37.7020006@hpl.hp.com>
To: public-rif-wg@w3.org


Minutes of RIF WG telecon 20/12/2005
====================================

(Draft)

Key points
==========
RESOLVED: regular telecon time Tuesday 11AM East US
ACTION:   all Update use cases in light of updated template; by Dec 31st
     Please send use cases that illustrate the need for, or relate to:
     - OWL and RDF compatibility
     - classification of rule systems demonstrating differences in
       semantic approaches to rules.

Action items, resolutions
=========================
     RESOLVED: next meeting 3 January 2006
     RESOLVED: regular telecon time Tuesday 11AM East US

     RESOLVED: Submissions for first draft of UC&R due Dec 21
     RESOLVED: Offers to host F2F3 in June can be made until Jan 31st.

     RESOLVED: there will be one document on RDF and OWL compat

ACTION: Allen&Dave update template clearly identifying what has changed
ACTION:   all Update use cases in light of updated template; by Dec 31st

     ACTION: harold to put a link to RuleML classification on wiki
     ACTION: chris clarify desiderata forlist of classifications
     ACTION: sandro update main web page re: meetings
     ACTION: sandro add link about wiki usage


Requests
========
     Please send use cases that illustrate the need for, or relate to:
     - OWL and RDF compatibility
     - classification of rule systems demonstrating differences in
       semantic approaches to rules.

     Please add links about classifying rule systems to the wiki.

     If you change a wiki page, please identify yourself,
     and the date of the change.

Detailed minutes
================

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2005Dec/0140

IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2005/12/20-rif-irc

RSS Agent's Minutes: http://www.w3.org/2005/12/20-rif-minutes

Wiki Page:
      http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/2005-12-20_Meeting

(note scribe did not know commands for RSS Agent minute collection)


Chair: Christian de Sainte-Marie
Scribe: Jeremy Carroll

1. ADMIN
--------
Roll call
.........

Present:
Hirtle, Sandro, DeborahNichols, PaulVincent, DIeterFensel, Christian, 
jeremy, AllenGinsberg, IanHorrocks, EnricoFranconi, PFPS, ChrisW, 
Giorgos_Stamou, Mike_Dean, Evan_Wallace, EdBarkmeyer, Ora_Lassila, 
BenjaminGrosof, Elisa_Kendall, aharth, Uli, Harold, Jing, Massimo, 
JimHendler, Bijan, hak, MarkusK, JohnHall, JosDeRoo, stabet, GerdWagner,
StanDevitt, kifer, msintek, Paula-Lavinia Patranjan, Francois Bry, 
Michael Kifer, Jeff Pan, vassilis tzouvaras, giorgos stoilos, 
GaryHallmar, holger lausen, Donald Chapin, axel polleres

(Scribe note: I am using Zakim/IRC identifiers for people here: I hope
no one is offended by whatever name they came out with)

Regrets:
DaveReynolds, GuizhenYang, JosDeBruijn, MinsuJang

Process points
..............

Muting:
It is better if people who are not talking mute themselves.
Conferees can mute themselves by dialing 61#. In that case, unmute is 60#.
Better: "Zakim, mute me" "Zakim, unmute me" in IRC.

Regrets:
Regrets policy is at:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2005Dec/0144
The scribe takes the regrets from the wiki at the beginning of
the meeting.
There should only be regrets if noone from the organization is
turning up, but no harm if regrets sent in this case.
Regrets should also be sent if there is an agenda item for which you
would like to contribute but will be late or absent. Please
e-mail the chairs in this case.

Zakim, IRC:
Please read: http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html

Scribing:
Please read: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
(note the current scribe has not, apologies for any deficiencies)
We keep a list of scribing:
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/ScribesList
This is a rotating list.
If you are at the top of the list, and attend a meeting, then
you must scribe. Once you have scribed you go to bottom of list.
There is no obligation to turn up if at top of list, but please
give regrets.


Conference call reservation size:
(taken under next agendum)
The call holds 40 people without operator intervention.
If you are not allowed in the call type "*0" to speak
to operator who can connect you.
This meeting filled up.

Meetings
........

     RESOLVED next meeting 3 January 2006
     RESOLVED regular telecon time Tuesday 11AM East US

     Discussion:
       Does not conflict with DAWG.
       Timezone is Eastern US, as with all W3C WGs, significant
when changing to summertime.
(see also end of item 2, concerning next f2f meetings)

Wiki Policy (discussion under agendum 5)
...........
If you change a wiki page, please identify yourself,
and the date of the change.
Discussion about how to make radical changes to a wiki
page, and what to do if you disagreed with a wiki page.
Possibly processes discussed were:
- use e-mail list for this discussion
- have a horizontal line on the wiki page and put discussion
   under the line
- have a separate page for discussion of each wiki page
The time ran out, before any resolution was reached.

ACTION: sandro add link about wiki usage




2. Recap of f2f
---------------

F2F resolution: Submissions for first draft of UC&R due Dec 20
is modified to
RESOLVED: Submissions for first draft of UC&R due Dec 21

Discussion of:
   RESOLVED: Chris coordinate classifcation
   RESOLVED: Sandro Coordinate OWL & RDF Compatibility
   ACTION: Use case editors publish first draft by Jan 17
   ACTION: Chris Classifications draft Jan 31

Jeremy queried 'publish', clarified as have editors' draft
ready for WG discussion.

ACTION: sandro update main web page re: meetings

The next f2f meetings will be in Feb and June.
The Feb meeting will be at the W3C all group meeting:
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/TPOverview.html#Future
Whether on mon/tues or thurs/fri will be decided
by all group meeting organizers.

For next f2f around june, location is to be decided.
If you are willing to host please send to chairs list.
We discussed arranging near WWW conference, of 23-26May
(see http://www2006.org )

Also see:
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/F2F3

RESOLVED: Offers to host F2F3 in June can be made until Jan 31st.


3. Use Case & Requirements
--------------------------

http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Use_Cases

Long discussion in IRC log.
Main theme was that there is information that would be helpful
that was not listed in the template, and has not been gathered
for the use cases already gathered.

In more detail:
There are currently 22 use cases listed.
David and Allen are editing, they have not had time to assess these
use cases.
They will create the first editors draft based on these use cases
and on any discussion on the Wiki or the mailing list.
They have editorial discretion to merge or not include use cases.
On-going interactive discussion about the document is welcome.


The main discussion concerned what other information should
be included:
   Hassan suggested adding links between use cases, with rationale,
as a step towards classifying and grouping.
   Some are related because of what they are dealing with.
   We want highly relevant use cases. The editors' job will be easier
with a classification, on multiple dimensions, including
requirements for interchange, business area, rule languages/systems
used.
   Jim Hendler expressed a need for an indication of business need,
current status (whether a use case is currently deployed etc).
   Allen suggested that identifying requirements that emerge from
the use case might be helpful.
   ChrisW added that identifying the rule language(s)/system(s) used
would be helpful; or the type of rules being used (e.g. production
rules)

Hassan also expressed difficulty in seeing a pattern in the use
cases and hoped that adding links would help classify them.


The conclusion of this discussion is that the editors need to revise
the template, and everyone who has submitted a use case needs to
revise it in light of the revisions to the template.
A deadline of 31 Dec was agreed for this additional information.
A request to allow e-mail discussion of revised template was
denied by the chair, noting time constraints, and length of
discussion at telecon.


The template could be updated to include:
- link their use case to others with explanations of criteria
- show implementation status,
- business need
- real world status
- rule languages/systems used by actors
- rule languages/system that already support this use case
- linking to OWL & RDF Compatibility  [*]
- linking to rule system classification issues [*]

* discussion of these points was later in the meeting

ACTION: AllenAndDave update template clearly identifying what has changed
ACTION: everyone Update use cases in light of updated template; by Dec 31st

The action on the editors is urgent.


-----
The chair proposed a 30 minute extension to widespread objection;
a 15 minute extension was agreed.


4. OWL & RDF Compatibility
--------------------------

[http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/OWL_Compatibility]
[http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/RDF_Compatibility]

Sandro is impressed with the quality of the contributions.
Peter F. Patel-Schneider is concerned that the current lists
lack structure. This will be discussed next year.

The due date for an editor's draft of this document was
explicitly not decided.

Discussion was curtailed; the chair initially wanted to
continue discussion on Jan 3rd, possibly scheduling an additional
call for technical discussion. Sandro hoped that technical
discussion would be held on main call.
Some SW people will not be present on 3rd Jan (notably
Peter F. Patel-Schneider), so maybe not a good time
for this discussion.

ChrisW noted that there were few use cases illustrating
the need for compatibility, and requested more.

The chair asked if two pages means two notes. They do not.
The F2F breakout had consensus that one document was desired
with two sections.

RESOLVED: there will be one document on RDF and OWL compat

(modulo any new information)


5. Classification
-----------------

http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Rulesystem_Arrangement_Framework

If there are existing articles on classifying rule systems please post
links to web pages.
Benjamin has added one such link, and will add more.
Chris reuested use cases that demonstrate differences in semantic
approaches to rules.

Collect survey references
Classification use cases that demonstrate differences in different
semantic approaches to rules.

Further discussion:
   - digression clarified that phase 1 is full horn, not function-free
     horn
   - Peter F. Patel-Schneider requested that the disiderata for the
     list on the wiki be clarified
   - harold talked about RuleML classification (not scribed well)
   - Benjamin discussed tension between classifying rules
     as opposed to rule systems
   - Benjamin (and others) discussed wiki policy (see agendum 1)
   - how important is classification in phase 1 (discussion curtailed)


ACTION: harold to put a link to RuleML classification on wiki
ACTION: chris clarify desiderata forlist of classifications



6. AOB - out of time, no items had been noted
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 20:59:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:25 GMT