W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > January 2007

Re: FW: RIF WG Minutes from 9 Jan. 2007 telecon

From: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:24:12 -0500
Message-ID: <45ACEE1C.1040904@gmail.com>
To: Alex Kozlenkov <alex.kozlenkov@betfair.com>
CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org


Alex,

You just need to clean up the section headings a bit (ie move them), as the first 
couple (at least) seem to label the sections before them.

-Chris

Alex Kozlenkov wrote:
> Big apologies for the omission. The minutes are attached this time.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Alex
> 
>  
> 
> *From:* public-rif-wg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Alex Kozlenkov
> *Sent:* 15 January 2007 09:27
> *To:* public-rif-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* RIF WG Minutes from 9 Jan. 2007 telecon
> 
>  
> 
> Iíve attached the draft of minutes for the 9 of January teleconference.
> 
>  
> 
> It would be good if the speakers had a look as sometimes the discussion 
> was way too fast for me to capture the salient points.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Alex Kozlenkov
> 
>  
> 
> Advanced Technology Group
> 
>  
> 
> Office: +44 (0)20 8834 6854
> 
> Yahoo! Messenger: alex.kozlenkov
> 
>  
> 
> Betfair Limited | Winslow Road | Hammersmith Embankment | London | W6 9HP
> 
> Company No. 5140986
> 
>  
> 
> The information in this e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is 
> intended only for the named recipient(s). The e-mail may not be 
> disclosed or used by any person other than the addressee, nor may it be 
> copied in any way. If you are not a named recipient please notify the 
> sender immediately and delete any copies of this message. Any 
> unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this 
> e-mail is strictly forbidden. Any view or opinions presented are solely 
> those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> In order to protect our email recipients, Betfair Group use SkyScan from
> MessageLabs to scan all Incoming and Outgoing mail for viruses.
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> In order to protect our email recipients, Betfair Group use SkyScan from
> MessageLabs to scan all Incoming and Outgoing mail for viruses.
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> W3C <http://www.w3.org/>
> 
> 
>   - DRAFT -
> 
> 
>   RIF Telecon 09 Jan 07
> 
> 
>     9 Jan 2007
> 
> Agenda <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jan/0036.html>
> 
> See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-irc>
> 
> 
>     Attendees
> 
> Present
>     Harold, ChrisW, Francois, FrankMcCabe, Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci,
>     csma, Dave_Reynolds, Deborah_Nichols, Jeff_Pan, Allen_Ginsberg,
>     AlexKozlenkov, Gary_Hallmark, StellaMitchell, agiurca, johnhall,
>     [IVML], igor, Michael_Kifer, Gerd_Wagner
> Regrets
>     PaulaLaviniaPatranjan, JosDeBruijn, LeoraMorgenstern, MichaelSintek
> Chair
>     Christian de Sainte-Marie
> Scribe
>     Alex, Alex Kozlenkov
> 
> 
>     Contents
> 
>     * Topics <#agenda>
>          1. Admin <#item01>
>          2. F2f <#item02>
>          3. Liason <#item03>
>          4. Technical Design <#item04>
>          5. UCR <#item05>
>          6. Technical Design <#item06>
>          7. RIFRAF <#item07>
>          8. Technical Design <#item08>
>     * Summary of Action Items <#ActionSummary>
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> <ChrisW> /topic #rif 09 Jan RIF agenda: 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jan/0036.html
> 
> <ChrisW> dave hirtle, you there?
> 
> <ChrisW> are you joining us today, dave?
> 
> <csma> david, could you scribe today, please?
> 
> <ChrisW> dave hirtle are you thjere?
> 
> <ChrisW> john hall? are you joining us today?
> 
> <johnhall> trying to get a phone connection
> 
> <csma> scribe: Alex
> 
> <ChrisW> Scribe: Alex Kozlenkov
> 
> <ChrisW> scribenick: AlexKozlenkov
> 
> Next meeting 16th of January
> 
> ChrisW: actions review
> 
> Chris: no admin actions
> 
> 
>       Admin
> 
> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept Dec 19th telecon minutes
> 
> csma: December 19th minutes approved
> 
> Deborah: There are additional notes from Harold
> ... we should wait for the new version
> ... the minutes will be published tomorrow
> 
> csma: action for F2F5
> 
> Sandro: the meeting page is not yet set up
> ... should be there in the next couple of days
> 
> <ChrisW> action 201 continued
> 
> csma: Allen, any news about the meeting?
> 
> Allen: Hotel is the main issue. Comfort Inn is good
> ... free shuttle from Dallas airport
> ... the information will be put up shortly
> ... Dulles the bets place to fly
> 
> Sure, my fault obviously
> 
> It's not Texas :-)
> 
> <ChrisW> despite attempts by the president...
> 
> Allen: the page will have to have nationalities registered on the 
> meeting web
> 
> Deborah: we need to have nationalities for security procedures
> ... all requirements will be checked shortly
> 
> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Allen to check information needed for foreign 
> visitors, deadline for reg [recorded in 
> http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action01]
> 
> <rifbot> Created ACTION-206 - Check information needed for foreign 
> visitors, deadline for reg [on Allen Ginsberg - due 2007-01-16].
> 
> <johnhall> SBVR - nothing new
> 
> 
>       F2f
> 
> csma: Liaisons, nothing new from OMG
> 
> 
>       Liason
> 
> Slots and constraints discussion
> 
> 
>       Technical Design
> 
> csma: Michael Kifer is not here
> 
> 
>       UCR
> 
> ChrisW: start first with the use cases and requirements
> ... proposes action review
> 
> csma: action 132
> 
> <ChrisW> action 132 closed
> 
> johnwall: finished as reported two meetings ago
> 
> <ChrisW> action 144 continued
> 
> csma: 144 continued
> 
> <ChrisW> action 167-168 closed
> 
> <Allen> yes
> 
> <igor> ok
> 
> csma: 167/168 closed: definition of "covers"
> ... 169: glossary
> 
> <ChrisW> action 169 continued
> 
> Hassan: continued, but proposes other should contribute
> 
> <ChrisW> action 169 closed
> 
> csma: closes the action waiting for a new responsible
> ... 197
> 
> Allen: cleared and ready apart from small details in UC1
> 
> csma: takes up an action on UC1 motivation for linking to requirements
> 
> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to clean up UC 1 requirements motivation 
> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action02]
> 
> <rifbot> Created ACTION-207 - Clean up UC 1 requirements motivation [on 
> Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2007-01-16].
> 
> <ChrisW> action 197 closed
> 
> <ChrisW> action 205 closed
> 
> csma: 205, new definition of covers added to UCR
> 
> <Allen> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/UCR/Introduction
> 
> csma: question: any objections tro the proposed definition linked above
> 
> <ChrisW> "One of the critical factors for a successful RIF is that it be 
> useful for interchange of rules among the set of rule languages it is 
> intended to cover. Section 5, Coverage, deals with the issue of how to 
> characterize the space of rule languages in such a way that clear and 
> principled decisions as to what the RIF will (and will not) cover can be 
> made. We note that in this document we deliberately refrain from 
> defining the notion of "coverage" in a rigorous manner,
> 
> <igor> didn't Sandro propose an alternative?
> 
> <ChrisW> Proposed: Accept definition of covers and close Issue-22
> 
> Allen: altrernative Sandro's proposal is actually included based on 
> e-mail exchange
> 
> csma: definition is approved and issue closed
> 
> <Deborah_Nichols> chris, yes, I can
> 
> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: Accept definition of covers and close Issue-22
> 
> ChrisW: it is approved by consensus
> 
> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* deborah to update issues list to reflect resolution 
> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action03]
> 
> <rifbot> Created ACTION-208 - Update issues list to reflect resolution 
> [on Deborah Nichols - due 2007-01-16].
> 
> <csma> sandro, are you here? We are discussing issue 12
> 
> Dave: Sandro's objections are not critical
> 
> csma: RIF is the base of SWRL
> ... is the core question
> 
> DaveReynolds: can live with that
> 
> csma: we prefer that RIF will be the basis of SWRL
> 
> Sandro: OK with that, perhaps a third path could be found
> 
> csma: we would not work on that
> ... RIG WG is not responsible for this
> ... proposes to accept Sandro's proposal
> 
> ChrisW: proposes to put it back to next week
> 
> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to put resolution of issue-12 on next weeks 
> agenda [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action04]
> 
> <rifbot> Created ACTION-209 - Put resolution of issue-12 on next weeks 
> agenda [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2007-01-16].
> 
> csma: the text will be added to UCR
> 
> Dave: probably into the Introduction
> 
> Sandro: we could put it into the UCR now
> 
> csma: still let us wait for a week before adding it
> ... close to the third version of UCR
> 
> <ChrisW> Who is IVML?
> 
> Allen: make a note about specific features in RIFRAF
> 
> csma: could be for the next draft
> ... it is for the time when RIFRAF is complete
> ... Version 3 should be released before the end of the month
> 
> 
>       RIFRAF
> 
> csma: action review on RIFRAF quickly before returning to the Technical 
> Design
> ... All ontologizing actions are continued
> 
> <ChrisW> all RIFRAF actions continued
> 
> 
>       Technical Design
> 
> csma: all actions are continued
> ... back to the Technical Design
> 
> Mic
> 
> MichaelKifer: summary on the issues
> ... two styles: relational and OO
> ... relational is less general, no explicit object id
> ... relational can be converted to OO
> 
> MichaelKifer, in general, the opposite may not be possible
> 
> MichaelKifer, OO uses binary and unary predicates with object ids as 
> first arguments
> 
> MichaelKifer: this means going baack to relational notation is not possible
> 
> <ChrisW> Michael, please stop breathing into the phone
> 
> csma: confused because all the information in the OO slotted notation 
> can be expressed in relational notation by combination of binary predicates
> ... conversely, adding information is not possible that is introducing 
> object id that is not in the relational model
> 
> MichaelKifer: going back is problematic because there is no place for 
> object-id
> 
> csma: refers to his example in e-mail
> ... object id can be made explicit
> ... in relational notation
> 
> MichaelKifer: relational slotted notation is more restricted
> ... id is uniquely implied there by the values
> 
> <Harold> Michael, what Christian seems to say is 
> oid:Class{s1-v1,...,sN->vN} can be simulated via 
> Class{s0->oid,s1-v1,...,sN->vN}.
> 
> csma: is of opinion it is an important issue
> 
> <csma> acq francois
> 
> <Zakim> Francois, you wanted to translation oriented to relational.
> 
> Francois: OO has implicit ids vs. the ones that should be made explicit 
> in the relational case
> 
> <MichaelKifer> Harold, the point is that Class{s0->oid,s1-v1,...,sN->vN} 
> in the relational notation is an object with id that is different from oid.
> 
> FrankMcCabe: object is the query itself
> ... no handle as blank nodes in RDF
> 
> <ChrisW> Adrian, are you here?
> 
> <Harold> Michael, the (relational) 'key' is a local id only.
> 
> Harold: perhaps the dimension for slotted notations should be 
> reconsidered for RIFRAF
> 
> <Hassan> I agree with Frank. Michael seemed to agree. Slotted notation 
> should be out of CORE and left to each dialect to be specified as 
> constraints.
> 
> <GaryHallmark> all the rule languages I'm interested in are slotted 
> because they bind to "real world" data -- relational data, XML data, or 
> Java data
> 
> <GaryHallmark> -1 for not addressing this up front in a common way in CORE
> 
> MichaelKifer: including slots or constraints affects roundtripping
> ... based on this understanding it should be agreed on where it is
> 
> <GerdWagner> q
> 
> GaryHallmark: better to have a common way of representing slots
> 
> <MichaelKifer> my understanding is that slotted or not slotted impacts 
> only the roundtrip point. in fact, any syntactic feature beyond plain 
> unsorted predicate calculus (including constraints) is a round trip issue
> 
> <Harold> Closed slots can be introduced without introducing oids at the 
> same time, which is what we need for Phase 1.
> 
> csma: action on GaryHallmark t oprovide examples with rules where 
> slotted notation is useful
> 
> <agiurca> There are many examples of rules with slots. See for example 
> JBoss Rules
> 
> <csma> +1 to chrisw
> 
> GerdWagner: refers to his previous e-mails with examples of JBoss Rules
> 
> <agiurca> Must be a common understanding of what is a slot
> 
> <agiurca> F-Logic examples: 
> http://oxygen.informatik.tu-cottbus.de/rewerse-i1/?q=node/22
> 
> <GerdWagner> see 
> http://oxygen.informatik.tu-cottbus.de/rewerse-i1/?q=node/24
> 
> <sandro> The nature of the Core -- whether it should have Option 
> Features -- is a different discussion!
> 
> <Francois> Sorry, Friends, I have to leave.
> 
> <Francois> bye.
> 
> <Zakim> ChrisW, you wanted to say i'm not sure having objects in rules 
> and slotted notation are the same
> 
> ChrisW: having named roles is not the same as OO representation
> 
> <Harold> Chris, I agree calling them 'keyword arguments' can remove the 
> confusion.
> 
> <Hassan> Yes Chris !
> 
> ChrisW: these are separate ideas possibly due to the term "slotted" used 
> for both
> 
> <agiurca> In F-Logic : X:person[ancestor->>Y:person] . How this 
> translate to RIF?
> 
> <Harold> What I called 'closed slots' could be called 'keyword arguments'.
> 
> <csma> acq hassan
> 
> <agiurca> JBoss Rules Column: i : Item(actualDeliveryDate : 
> actualDeliveryDate, scheduledDeliveryDate : scheduledDeliveryDate ) is 
> another example in favor of slots
> 
> Hassan: agree on the same datastructure and then sugar it into any form 
> )in dialects)
> 
> <Harold> Hassan, the nice thing with 'keyword arguments' is we don't 
> need extra semantics: this simple case we need in Phase 1 can be 
> 'de-sugared', as you say.
> 
> Hassan: agrees with Gerd that a convenience will be useful
> 
> <Harold> In CLP terminology, 'keyword arguments' are very special kind 
> of constraints. In Phase 2 we can generalize this in the light of full CLP.
> 
> MichaelKifer: can Hassan clarify his proposal for the convenience in the 
> core
> 
> Hassan: if 80% of clients agree on the model even if it is not perfect, 
> this syntax will be good to have
> 
> csma: concerned about the remaining 20%. Would it be too bad for them
> 
> Hassan: the convenince will be ignored by the 20%
> 
> <GerdWagner> there is no 100% coverage goal!
> 
> Hassan: the convenience notaiton would be able to be converted to the 
> universal constraints notation and then it can be accepted by the 
> remaining 20% of the systems
> 
> <MichaelKifer> i don't understand hak's arg: what is the point of having 
> slotted notation in the core, but not giving it a semantics
> 
> ChrisW: taking up again the relational to OO roundtripping
> 
> <Harold> Chris, I proposed a round-trip between positional and slotted 
> arguments, or better between non-keyword and keyword arguments.
> 
> ChrisW: how do we lose the relational tuples if it went to the OO and back
> 
> <Harold> Round-tripping between relational and OO is much harder.
> 
> ChrisW: are we giving up anything in that LangA goes to Core then to 
> LangB and back it could be problematic
> 
> csma: UC1 is such example
> 
> <agiurca> We need to use object oriented notation. Then the roundtrip is 
> possible.
> 
> <Harold> oid:Class{s1-v1,...,sN->vN} ==> Class{s0->oid,s1-v1,...,sN->vN} 
> ==> oid:Class{s1-v1,...,sN->vN} has some problems, as Michael mentioned.
> 
> MichaelKifer: will work with csma on his example on this roundtripping
> 
> ChrisW: the core will have a keyword syntax
> 
> Chris: ... available to it
> 
> <DaveReynolds> possibly, depends on what it says about signatures
> 
> csma: consensus on that: have keyword arguments
> ... ... in the core
> 
> csma; takes up notion of RIF compliance
> 
> <GerdWagner> alex please add "keyword arguments in the sense of OO slots"
> 
> <ChrisW> consensus that we should have "keyword" syntax with what 
> Michael called "OO semantics"
> 
> <Hassan> What is an optional feature?
> 
> Will do Chris
> 
> <Harold> Take Gary's recursion discussion, as an example.
> 
> <ChrisW> "implementing the core" means translating in/out of it
> 
> <Hassan> Then it is necessary to have such options if we adopt the 
> 80%/20% convenience slotted syntax.
> 
> <Harold> The core could have optional feature recursive="yes" vs. 
> recursive="no" (I think recursive="yes" should be the default, so we 
> would have a 'negative' optional feature).
> 
> MichaelKifer: implementing the core is not yet fully defined
> 
> ChrisW: the question is not about implementing but about translating
> 
> <ChrisW> we are out of time
> 
> <ChrisW> we are out of time
> 
> <csma> almost
> 
> <johnhall> Sorry, I have another meeting
> 
> csma: implementing a dialect and compliance
> 
> AlexKozlenkov: we need both defintions
> 
> csma: no consensus yet on this
> 
> <sandro> +1 adjourn
> 
> <Hassan> +1 to adjourn
> 
> <GerdWagner> bye
> 
> <agiurca> -agiurca
> 
> <agiurca> quit
> 
> <ChrisW> oops
> 
> <ChrisW> hits the wrong button
> 
> <csma> anything else you wanted to discuss?
> 
> <ChrisW> no
> 
> <ChrisW> see you tomorrow
> 
> <csma> let's talk tomorrow, then
> 
> <csma> bye
> 
> <ChrisW> ciao
> 
> 
>     Summary of Action Items
> 
> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Allen to check information needed for foreign 
> visitors, deadline for reg [recorded in 
> http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action01]
> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to clean up UC 1 requirements motivation 
> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action02]
> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to put resolution of issue-12 on next weeks 
> agenda [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action04]
> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* deborah to update issues list to reflect resolution 
> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html#action03]
>  
> [End of minutes]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl 
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> version 
> 1.127 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
> $Date: 2007/01/09 17:35:45 $
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>     Scribe.perl diagnostic output
> 
> [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
> 
> This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
> Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
> 
> Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
> 
> Succeeded: s/Dallas/Dulles/
> Succeeded: s/kifer/Kifer/
> Succeeded: s/CrisW/ChrisW/
> Succeeded: s/thrid/third/
> Succeeded: s/convenince/convenience/
> Succeeded: s/CfhrisW/Chris/
> Succeeded: s/conformance/compliance/
> Succeeded: s/translatingf/translating/
> Found Scribe: Alex
> Found Scribe: Alex Kozlenkov
> Found ScribeNick: AlexKozlenkov
> Scribes: Alex, Alex Kozlenkov
> Default Present: Harold, ChrisW, Francois, FrankMcCabe, Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, csma, Dave_Reynolds, Deborah_Nichols, Jeff_Pan, Allen_Ginsberg, AlexKozlenkov, Gary_Hallmark, StellaMitchell, agiurca, johnhall, [IVML], igor, Michael_Kifer, Gerd_Wagner
> Present: Harold ChrisW Francois FrankMcCabe Sandro Hassan_Ait-Kaci csma Dave_Reynolds Deborah_Nichols Jeff_Pan Allen_Ginsberg AlexKozlenkov Gary_Hallmark StellaMitchell agiurca johnhall [IVML] igor Michael_Kifer Gerd_Wagner
> Regrets: PaulaLaviniaPatranjan JosDeBruijn LeoraMorgenstern MichaelSintek
> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jan/0036.html
> Got date from IRC log name: 9 Jan 2007
> Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-rif-minutes.html
> People with action items: allen christian deborah
> 
> WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
> You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.
> 
> 
> 
> [End of scribe.perl 
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> 
> diagnostic output]

-- 
Dr. Christopher A. Welty                    IBM Watson Research Center
+1.914.784.7055                             19 Skyline Dr.
cawelty@gmail.com                           Hawthorne, NY 10532
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty
Received on Tuesday, 16 January 2007 15:24:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:35 GMT