W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > October 2008

RE: [Admin] Agenda for RIF telecon 14 October

From: Changhai Ke <cke@ilog.fr>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:30:32 +0200
Message-ID: <3E5E1A634BBD5C4A94C4D4A6DE0852E701A5D67C@parmbx02.ilog.biz>
To: "Christian de Sainte Marie" <csma@ilog.fr>, "RIF WG" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>


I plan not to join the first part, I think that I won't contribute so
On the other hand, I'm very interested in the "Frame vs. objects
discussion". So I thought about joining the telecon for this topic,
let's say at 17:45, is this time fine? Thanks.


-----Original Message-----
From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Christian de Sainte Marie
Sent: lundi 13 octobre 2008 17:19
Subject: [Admin] Agenda for RIF telecon 14 October

AGENDA Teleconference
W3C Rules Interchange Format (RIF) Working Group
14 October 2008

North America and Europe are in the summer time:
1500 UTC, 0800 (West US) 1100 (East US) 1600 (London) 1700 (Paris)

Duration: *90 min*

*Agenda summary*
1. Admin (5 mn)
*PROPOSED:* accept minutes of telecon October 7 [1]
*PROPOSED:* accept minutes of F2F11 [2] [3]
2. Liaison (5 mn)
3. Public comments [4] (5 mn)
4. Action review [5] [6] (5 mn)
5. Review action 577 (weak VS strong safety) [7] [8] (10 mn)
6. Test Cases [9] [10] (30 mn)
*PROPOSED:* Approve some test cases (to be determined during the
7. PRD/BLD/FLD: Frames VS objects [11] [12] (30 mn)
8. AOB

[2] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-26
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-27
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/
[5] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/open
[6] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/pendingreview
[7] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/577
[8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html
[9] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/TCS
[10] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case
[11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0030.html
and following thread
[12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0031.html


*Detailed agenda*

Bridges: +1.617.761.6200 (US), +33 4 89 06 34 99 (F) or +44.117.370.6152
Conference code: 74394# ('RIFWG')
IRC Chat: irc:irc.w3.org (port 6665), #rif
Web-based IRC (member-only): [http://www.w3.org/2001/01/cgi-irc]


Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
Scribe: Stuart Taylor
See Scribes List [http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/ScribesList]

Please note that RIF WG telecons are for attendance only by Working
Group Participants and guests invited by the chairs.

1. ADMIN (5 min)

- Roll call (please read before telecon the following)
RIF Regrets Policy:
Using Zakim:
Telecon Etiquette:
Action/Issues Tracker:

- Agenda amendments

PROPOSED: accept minutes of telecon October 7 [1]

PROPOSED: accept minutes of F2F11 [2] [3]

2. Liaison (5 min)

- Review active liaisons:
PRR (OMG) - Paul Vincent
OWL (W3C) - Sandro Hawke
HCLS (W3C IG) - Adrian Paschke

3. Public comments (5 mn)

- Status of responses to public comments [4]

4. Action review (5 mn)

- Review actions due [5] and pending review [6]

5. Review action 577 (Write down the definitions of strict and weak
safety of a ruleset) [7] (10 mn)

- Review Axel's action (see also Axel's email [8] and following thread)

6. Test Cases [9] [10] (30 mn)

PROPOSED: Approve some test cases (to be determined during the telecon)

7. Frames (in BLD/FLD) VS objects (in PRD) [11] [12] (30 mn)

- Gary raised [11] the issue of the difference in te semantics of
frames, as adopted in BLD and FLD, and the semantics of objects, as used
in many PR systems (essentially: properties in frames are multi-valued
and attributes in objects are single-valued). There have been
suggestions, recently (e.g. [12]) that the cost of using frames to
represent objects in PRD might overweight the benefits, which is a clear
threat to the unity of RIF and the interoperability between different

- The objectives of the discussion are to clarify, in particular:
 * what is the actual impact of that difference?
 * to what degree PRD and BLD/FLD can use different semantics, and the
interoperability still be preserved (by some kind of semantic or
syntactic trick)?
 * if not, what would be the impact of changing the semantics of frames
in BLD/FLD to an object-like one (regardless of the impact on LC)?

8. AOB
- Next meeting: 21 October 2008 (pick scribe!)
Received on Monday, 13 October 2008 16:31:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:53 UTC