See also: IRC log
<AxelPolleres> remark: Can the England access number also be made public in the agenda (England +44.117.370.6152), are hteir any other accesss number we haven't got?
<josb> access number of Zakim in France: +33.4.89.06.34.99
<ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept F2F10 minutes
ChrisW: Any objections to approving the F2F10 minutes?
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept F2F10 minutes
ChrisW: Any objections to approving the minutes from last week's telecon?
<ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept 3-Jun telecon minutes
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept 3-Jun telecon minutes
ChrisW: Any agenda ammendments?
ChrisW: Adrian, Jos, Mike, any news?
MikeD: Nothing from OWL
ChrisW: Sandro, has the OWL group discussed our responses?
Sandro: I don't think so
ChrisW: What about the joint OWL and RIF document that was going to address rif:text (or something similar to rif:text)?
Sandro: Nothing has happened on that
ChrisW: Axel, did you agree to work on this?
AxelP: I think we were going to get the first working draft out with the current version of rif:text, and then after that reconcile with OWL's treatment
<sandro> ACTION: Axel to work with Jie Bao (of OWL-WG) to put together draft on rif:text/owl:internationalizedText, due 27 June 2008 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-521 - Work with Jie Bao (of OWL-WG) to put together draft on rif:text/owl:internationalizedText, due 27 June 2008 [on Axel Polleres - due 2008-06-17].
<AxelPolleres> Can someone point me to a mail or draft page where owl:internationalizedText is referenced?
<AxelPolleres> ... or to an email.
<AxelPolleres> Editor's note: Although <tt>rif:iri</tt> is not a datatype, I left conversions from and to <tt>rif:iri</tt>s in the list of cast functions, to cover use cases in the context of RDF where you want to extract a string from an IRI denoting an RDF resource and vice versa.
<AxelPolleres> See also the use case mentioned in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Mar/0011.html
ChrisW: Email sent last week asking if people could make a meeting September 7-8 in either Boston or New York?
<Hassan> I will not attend either anyway
ChrisW: Does anyone here have a problem with that date?
<AxelPolleres> I definitly can't make that date... other obligations the week 7-11.
ChrisW: Axel, could you attend part of the meeting by phone if it were on September 7-8?
<AxelPolleres> possibly by phone
GaryHallmark: Anyone still interested in late August in Portland?
ChrisW: Late August doesn't work for me. Let's consider F2F12 in Portland.
<sandro> reminder people can use http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/users/my for their own actions
<trackbot> ACTION-519 Start work on response to http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_PPS3 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-511 Change REMOVE to RETRACT closed
ACTION-510 pending discussion
<trackbot> ACTION-508 Work out policies for pick (refraction, recency, priority, sequential) closed
<trackbot> ACTION-504 Add XML 1.0 statement to BLD closed
<trackbot> ACTION-503 Update BNF with base directive for relative IRI handling in PS closed
<trackbot> ACTION-501 Put text about "metadata should survive roundtripping out of RIF and back again" in Conformance section of BLD closed
Harold: Regarding the actions to edit BLD (Basic Logic Dialect) and FLD (Framework for Logic Dialects): MichaelK and I both made multiple updates, but we weren't coordinating, so we used different terminology
ACTION-499 pending discussion
<trackbot> ACTION-496 Update all examples for Presentation Syntax and XML syntax for curies and entities. Also add Prefix to presentation syntax. closed
<AdrianP> Yes, action-496 is done
<AdrianP> sorry I ment action 495 is done
<trackbot> ACTION-495 Respond to Dan2 (about well-formedness) closed
Christian: Where in the document is XML syntax for curies and entities defined?
Harold: (points to an example 6)
ChrisW: Presentation syntax should not have curies in them
Harold: I used prefixes
<Hassan> Are the contents of the IRI declarations for PS complete and fine?
JosB: Maybe we should mention that entities are optional, and also in example 6 we should expand one of the entities
<sandro> +1 jos, have one of the prefixes not turn into an entity, to show the correspondance is optional
Harold: Ok, will make that change
ChrisW: Editor's note (in action-487) should link to above issue
ChrisW: Re: Action-482 we discussed that DTB (Data Types and Built-ins) would contain a comprehensive list of all data types, and when defining a dialect the dialect designer would choose from the catalog of data types defined in DTB
ChrisW: In addition, a number of resolutions from F2F10 didn't have actions associated with them, so I want to confirm that they're done
ChrisW: AxelP, there was a resolution about xsd subtypes
AxelP: Yes, I made the update in DTB
Harold: BLD doesn't require any update for this item
ChrisW: My understanding that DTB would be a comprehensive catalog of data types and builtins, and so BLD would have to add a paragraph saying which of those from DTB that BLD uses
Harold: Ok, I understand
ChrisW: And so the new section needs an "at risk" comment on rif:text
<sandro> ACTION: Harold to ask Michael to update BLD with the DTB references, including "at risk" for rif:text [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-522 - Ask Michael to update BLD with the DTB references, including \"at risk\" for rif:text [on Harold Boley - due 2008-06-17].
ChrisW: Another resolution was that we would add pred:numeric-less-or-equal, pred:numeric-greater-or-equal, pred:numeric-not-equal to DTB
AxelP: This is done - these operators were added for each data type
ChrisW: Does the BLD just need to list data types, and it is implied that it supports all builtins for each data type that it supports?
Sandro: Yes, I think so
ChrisW: So adding those predicates wouldn't impact the BLD text
ChrisW: Another resolution was to remove symbol space ids in RIF
JosB: This meant symbol space ids must now be IRIs
AxelP: This is done
<ChrisW> modify Presentation Syntax to include "Const ::= STRING" (allowing "chat" as short for "chat"^^xs:string).
AxelP: Harold, you can just copy updated const grammar from DTB
<josb> very good!
ChrisW: There was a resolution about syntax for rif:local
AxelP: Yes, these updates are made
ChrisW: We had a resolution to add xsd:double
ChrisW: There was a resolution on XML syntax for ordered=yes
ChrisW: Resolution to point people to Dublin core for metadata properties
ChrisW: Any other discussion on actions?
ChrisW: This is about the response to
... this is our only outstanding public comment
... Jos has made a pass at it on the wiki, and now I will finish it
... Jos, do you want to discuss your response to Peter here?
JosB: I don't think we need to; you can review the web page
JosB: Also, on a different public comment - Dan Connolly responded to my response, and said that it addressed his concerns (although he found it counter-intuitive)
AdrianP: Last telecon we discussed requirements and stopped at the OWL data requirement (5.2.7)
ChrisW: Should we continue through the rest of the list?
ChrisW: We were a little stalled on coverage (5.1.6) and there was some discussion on the mailing list
Sandro: No one objected to the last text that I proposed
Sandro: That section was updated since last week, but it is more verbose than we need
ChrisW: It needs to be reworded using standard language of requirements
<sandro> The RIF dialect targetting a group of similar rule languages must support, at a minimum, interchange of rules using all the features which are common to all the major rule languages in that group.
<AdrianP> ok sound good and compact
<sandro> (as full replacement for 5.1.6)
ChrisW: I'd change "must" to "should"
Sandro: All the other requirements use must, except for the implementability requirement
ChrisW: But this (5.1.6) is a fuzzy requirement
<ChrisW> Straw poll: prefer must/should in 5.1.6
<sandro> strawpoll: must vs should on that 5.1.6 text
<AdrianP> +1 for must
<josb> don't care
<csma> +/- must/should
<Harold> +0.8 for must
<csma> or could be should/must
<AxelPolleres> +1 for mould
<Hassan> +1 for mould
<AdrianP> the general requirements should describe fundamental properties
<ChrisW> not mould, mold
<AxelPolleres> These people from the US have this tendency to drop "u"s from English words...
ChrisW: Straw poll not conclusive. Wording of 5.1.6 is left up to the editor's discretion
ChrisW: Requirement 5.2.6 - looks fine
<ChrisW> RIF must cover OWL knowledge bases as data where compatible with RIF semantics.
ChrisW: Requirement 5.2.7 - looks fine
ChrisW: Requirement 5.2.8
<ChrisW> RIF must cover RDF triples as data where compatible with Phase 1 semantics.
<AdrianP> RIF must cover RDF triples as data where compatible with RIF semantics.
<ChrisW> PROPOSED: reword 5.2.8 to "RIF semantics"
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: reword 5.2.8 to "RIF semantics"
ChrisW: Requirement 5.2.9
Sandro: I commented on this requirement in the above email - I don't know what this requirement means
<sandro> The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined from the contents of the document, without out-of-band data.
<sandro> The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined by the content of the document, without out-of-band data.
<AxelPolleres> makes sense
<Harold> Re 5.2.9: The XML Schema's location will differentiate between dialects.
<sandro> PROPOSED: replace 5.2.9 with re-wording: "The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined by the content of the document, without out-of-band data."
<sandro> RESOLVED: replace 5.2.9 with re-wording: "The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined by the content of the document, without out-of-band data."
ChrisW: Requirement 5.2.10 - looks fine
ChrisW: requirement 5.2.11 - looks fine
ChrisW: Requirement 5.2.12
Sandro: Change 'should' to 'must'
<sandro> PROPOSED: in 5.2.12 change to "must" support ability to merge rule sets
<sandro> RESOLVED: in 5.2.12 change to "must" support ability to merge rule sets
<sandro> PROPOSED 5.2.13 change "will" to "must"
<sandro> PROPOSED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must"
<Harold> In BLD rule sets are called groups.
<Harold> groups can be identified with our new (* ... *) syntax.
<sandro> PROPOSED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must" & remove parenthetical comment
<sandro> RESOLVED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must" & remove parenthetical comment
<sandro> RESOLVED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must" & remove parenthetical comment: RIF must support the identification of rule sets.
Sandro: We don't clarify what we mean by "objective"
<sandro> "Objectives" to "Anticipated Future Requirements"
<sandro> PROPOSED: drop 5.3 Objectives
Harold: Can we say more about the 2 use cases that motivated it?
<Hassan> +1 on dropping this - "future requirement" means nothing as far as we are concerned
Christian: Frame or atom could point directly to a part of an XML document based on an XML schema or DTD
Christian: Using XML schema as data models in RIF documents we can use that capability to use an XML document as data
<Harold> DTB could have an XML-'open' data type: it would only need to be well-formed, not valid wrt our XSD -- such 'any' types are supported by XSD.
ChrisW: Does anyone object to dropping this reqjuirement?
AdrianP, Christian: I would like to keep this requirement
Sandro: Why are we choosing to call out this one of many possible future requirements?
<Harold> "5.3.1 XML data" is there because of many XML-based appls, incl. Web Services.
Christian: I think it's in a separate section because Sandro said it's a phase 2 requirement
Sandro: One requirement for last call is that we meet all our requirements
ChrisW: Change 'must' to 'should'?
ChrisW: Christian, do you have reasonable expectation that this requirement would be met by PRD (Production Rule Dialect)?
<Harold> Yes, PRD could have such an XML-'open' data type.
<AdrianP> The implementation of this requirement in the schema is very easy
ChrisW: So, I think it can be a regular requirment with 'must' changed to 'should'
<sandro> PROPOSED: Maybe 5.3.1 be 5.2.14 and make it a SHOULD instead of MUST.
<sandro> PROPOSED: Move 5.3.1 be 5.2.14 and make it a SHOULD instead of MUST. (support XML as data)
<sandro> RESOLVED: Move 5.3.1 be 5.2.14 and make it a SHOULD instead of MUST. (support XML as data)
<sandro> ACTION: apaschke to update UCR to reflect resolutions in today's meeting (2008-06-10) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-523 - Update UCR to reflect resolutions in today's meeting (2008-06-10) [on Adrian Paschke - due 2008-06-17].
<GaryHallmark> Christian, I see XML data as a tree of frames with constraints on its structure which could be achieved in theory by embedding XML (Schema) axioms into RIF
ChrisW: Adrian, anything else to discuss on UCR?
ChrisW: All the documents need an acknowlegement section
ChrisW: It is customary to list by name all members of working group, but this group is large with many inactive members. So we can use other criteria to come up with the list of WG members to acknowledge
<sandro> "The regular attendees at Working Group meetings at the time of publication were:"
<AxelPolleres> THere are means to kick out non-active members. I think we should put the non-active people in "bad standing"
<AxelPolleres> i.e. contact their AC Reps.
Harold: Some people made contributions early on and then didn't attend calls
Sandro: We can have several criteria for selecting contributers and several different types of acknowledgements
<sandro> Sandro: the "acknowledgements" section should have this Regular Attendees bit, PLUS thanks for all the reviews, PLUS any other thanks the editors feel appropriate to give.
<csma> ACTION: sandro to start the wiki page for the active members of the WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-524 - Start the wiki page for the active members of the WG [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-06-17].
<sandro> ACTION: Sandro create wiki page for inclusion in pubs, listing active members of WG at current time. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-525 - Create wiki page for inclusion in pubs, listing active members of WG at current time. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-06-17].
ChrisW: Any other business?
ChrisW: Any support for adjourning?
<sandro> ACTION-524: done
<trackbot> ACTION-524 Start the wiki page for the active members of the WG notes added