See also: IRC log
Christian: Any agenda ammendments? ...none
Christian: We will approve minutes from last week's telecon at the next telecon, since we just received them today
Christian: The minutes from June 23 meeting are missing
Sandro: I believe Hassan was the scribe on June 23 - it was a short meeting
Christian: Any news from liaisons?
Sandro: OWL's implementation report is delayed
<trackbot> ACTION-895 Ask participants of RuleML-2008 which did RIF demos to send comments closed
action-893, action-892 continued
<trackbot> ACTION-889 Answer FAQ 4.1 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-888 Answer FAQ 4.3 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-887 Answer FAQ 4.2 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-886 Answer FAQ 4.3 - 4.4 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-883 Answer FAQ 3.7 closed
Christian: FAQs 3.9, 3.10, and 3.11 have not been assigned. Are there any volunteers?
Leora: I can do 3.9
ACTION: csma to ask jos and axel to answer 3.10 and 3.11 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/28-rif-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-897 - Ask jos and axel to answer 3.10 and 3.11 [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-08-04].
ACTION: leora to answer faq 3.9 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/28-rif-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-898 - Answer faq 3.9 [on Leora Morgenstern - due 2009-08-04].
<trackbot> ACTION-858 Announce to KR, ask about AAAI, check commonsense closed
<trackbot> ACTION-857 Announce to RR, XSB, F-Logic, Flora, Lprolog closed
<trackbot> ACTION-891 Post media-type registration to IETF lists closed
<trackbot> ACTION-890 Answer FAQ 3.8 closed
<trackbot> ACTION-870 Contact MOZ closed
<trackbot> ACTION-874 Contact Guido Governatori. closed
<trackbot> ACTION-859 Annoucne to swi-prolog closed
<trackbot> ACTION-863 Contact Jos de Roo closed
Christian: We have had two new public comments since last week. One is from Ontoprise about OntoBroker support of RIF
Christian: What constitutes an implementation report?
Sandro: I will check into what questions we need to ask them
Harold: Can you ask them if I can create a link to advertise OntoBroker support?
Christian: I will ask that, and the other questions
<sandro> ACTION: sandro to look for a template for implementation reports [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/28-rif-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-899 - Look for a template for implementation reports [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-08-04].
Christian: The other email to the public list has two fairly minor comments; we can see from the comments that he reviewed the spec.
ChrisW: We'll need to respond to that email. I will start the wiki page to organize the responses to the public comments
ChrisW: We need to provide evidence to the AC that there is community interest in RIF...public comments are one indication of that, and there are also other ways it can be shown
Christian: Public comment period was to end at the end of this week...do we want to extend this?
ChrisW: Christian, do you expect industry comments on PRD, or implementation commitments?
Christian: Mark Proctor is interested in doing an implementation. CTIC also interested in doing an implementation, and ILOG/IBM, Oracle, Adrian-with-Tibco...
ChrisW: commitment to do an implemention is even more powerful than public comments
ChrisW: And what about the academic rules community...is there interest in RIF?
MichaelK: Yes, have seen interest. there is some confusion among people about who can send reviews/comments
Christian: So, do we have enough of a story to move to the next step?
Sandro: We should send a reminder that the deadline is approaching
ChrisW: We planned on having 3 weeks to put together CR case
Harold: Do we need to make it more clear that anyone in the public can comment?
Sandro: It is already stated in all the documents
<sandro> "We'd appreciate a comment from anyone who has taken the time to read the draft"
<AdrianP> I will remind the CEP community to send comments
<AdrianP> the CEP community is very interested in rules, reaction rules
Christian: Then we prepare our case and send a request to move to CR?
Sandro: Yes, here's an example
Christian: So we are looking at end of August, early Sept to move to CR
Christian: An ILOG employee pointed out to me that UCR doesn't have PRD examples
Leora: Also, there are other shortcomings of UCR - it should be redone
Christian: That's much more work than that I was suggesting
AdrianP: original goal of UCR was to show how rules can be used
<LeoraMorgenstern> the problem with UCR is that
<LeoraMorgenstern> (1) the examples that we do have aren't covered by dialects like BLD and PRD
<LeoraMorgenstern> (2) we don't have non-trivial examples of what RIF can be used for.
ChrisW: Is anyone willing to work on this?
Leora: Yes, I would work on the UCR examples. I could use help from Harold and Michael about non-trivial applications of BLD
ChrisW: One use case supported at the Core level is mapping between data sources
Leora: Good point.
<Harold> Another non-trivial use case: Dave's OWL 2 RL rules in RIF.
<LeoraMorgenstern> Thank you, Harold.
Christian: I will probably not be able to attend a telecon until Aug 25th or the week after that
Sandro: I'll be on vacation Aug 11
ChrisW: We should meet within the next 2 weeks to discuss CR. I can do a telecon aug 11
Christian: Next telecon wil be on August 11, ChrisW can attend, Sandro maybe, Christian maybe
ChrisW: and the subsequent meeting will be on August 25th
Christian: I have updated the "RIF Combination with XML data" document since last week. Here's the link:
Christian: I still need to do more work on the xpath/xquery part of the specification. The document is currently not easy to read because it assumes deep familiarity with XDM (xpath/xquery data model)
Christian: DaveR and GaryH have looked over the document - any further comments from them?
DaveR: basically what I said in my email (link below)
Sandro: I'm sorry I didn't have a chance to look at this yet. How do you deal with XML element names? just concatenating?
Sandro: This may be ugly because in the XML world, namespace names do not always end with punctuation
DaveR: In the current proposal, he has 2 versions for each case, but needs extra details about the qname
Christian: I would like to avoid being tied to a specific syntax for handling an XML data source
Christian: Gary commented that we didn't consider using functions and predicates, but only frames, but I don't think that's a problem because frames can be written as predicates
GaryH: I think we need extra hints along with the import - I don't think we can automatically detect what will be the best encoding
Sandro: another possibility is that we could generate all the mappings that might be useful
Christian: Yes, I prefer this option
GaryH: Sounds good
DaveR: What is the argument for multiple mappings? It would be better for interoperation if there is only one mapping.
GaryH: For example, ordering will be lost in the frames mapping. Different mappings are better for different situations
<AdrianP> a general query construct woul be helpful, not just for integrating XML data, but e.g. SQL queries, SPARQL queries, XQuery/XPath queries, ...
GaryH: With multiple representations, we may have a problem when translating back to XML
ChrisW: Christian, can you update the document by the end of August?
<ChrisW> ACTION: csma to update with text and examples by end of Aug (XML data document) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/07/28-rif-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-900 - Update with text and examples by end of Aug (XML data document) [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-08-04].
ChrisW: Anything else?