W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > September 2009

Re: [ADMIN] Minutes of 1 September 09 telecon

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:10:51 +0100
Cc: <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <64CDDB7E-B8D9-4974-B55B-CA3C6545D360@deri.org>
To: <leora@cs.nyu.edu>
wasn't meant to be put into the minutes, but indeed as
an addendum to the minutes... I think all the issues have been  
discussed thereafter.

Axel

p.s.: regrets for today's call.

On 29 Sep 2009, at 14:50, Leora Morgenstern wrote:

> Axel,
>
> > For the records: There were some small changes on DTB and some
> > discussions about it:
> >
> > 1) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0002.html
> > 2) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0011.html
> > 3) I think I asked in the last TC whether we can/shall change the
> > non-uniformity of the list-functions in DTB, which have a  
> different format
> > (informal mappings only) to all the other functions and predicates  
> in
> > DTB.
>
> I checked the minutes of the August 25 telecon (which you scribed),  
> and
> indeed, it seems that you did bring this up.
>
> However, I have no recollection of this being discussed at the Sept. 1
> telecon, nor do my notes reflect it, so unless I hear from someone  
> that
> they do remember this being discussed at the Sept. 1 telecon, I  
> think it
> is best not to add this discussion to the minutes.
>
> > I could try to tackle that, but not before two weeks from now.
> >
> > With the resolution to go to CR, should I consider these
> > resolved/accepted?
>
> >
> > Axel
> >
> > p.s.: Belated regrets due to arrival of our child ;-).
>
> I have added you to the regrets list.
> Congratulations!
>
> >
> > Leora Morgenstern wrote:
> >>
> >> Attached are the minutes of the 1 September 2009 telecon.
> >>
> >> Please let me know of any corrections.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Leora
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D.
> >> Visiting Research Scientist, Courant Institute of Mathematical  
> Sciences
> >> http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora
> >>
> >>
> >>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> W3C <http://www.w3.org/>
> >>
> >>
> >>   RIF Telecon 1-Sept-09
> >>
> >>
> >>     01 Sep 2009
> >>
> >> Agenda
> >> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0037.html 
> >
> >>
> >> See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-irc>
> >>
> >>
> >>     Attendees
> >>
> >> Present
> >>     Harold Boley, Jos de Bruijn, Mark Dean, John Hall, Sandro  
> Hawke,
> >>     Stella Mitchell, Leora Morgenstern, Christian de Sainte Marie,
> >>     Chris Welty
> >> Regrets
> >>     Michael Kifer
> >> Chair
> >>     Chris Welty
> >> Scribe
> >>     Leora Morgenstern
> >>
> >>
> >>     Contents
> >>
> >>     * Topics <#agenda>
> >>          1. admin <#item01>
> >>          2. Liaison <#item02>
> >>          3. Action Review <#item03>
> >>          4. Exit Criteria <#item04>
> >>          5. Publications <#item05>
> >>          6. Implementations <#item06>
> >>          7. Test Cases <#item07>
> >>     * Summary of Action Items <#ActionSummary>
> >>
> >>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>       admin
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> Scribe: LeoraMorgenstern
> >>
> >>
> >>       Liaison
> >>
> >> sandro, chris: OWL, like RIF, relies on XSD 1.1., and that is  
> still in
> >> candidate recommendation.
> >>
> >> sandro: prognosis for XML schema datatypes is not promising.
> >> ... OWL will have an appendix referring to XML schema datatypes.
> >> ... and RIF can do something similar.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> next item
> >>
> >> Nothing else in liaison.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> next item
> >>
> >> <sandro> *ACTION:* sandro to make sure if OWL does a normative
> >> appendix for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also
> >> work for RIF. [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action01]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-903 - Make sure if OWL does a normative
> >> appendix for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also
> >> work for RIF. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-09-08].
> >>
> >>
> >>       Action Review
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> close action-902
> >>
> >> <trackbot> ACTION-902 Look at message from Nick B. and check FLD
> >> schema closed
> >>
> >> close action-898
> >>
> >> <trackbot> ACTION-898 Answer faq 3.9 closed
> >>
> >>
> >>       Exit Criteria
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Exit_Criteria
> >>
> >> <johnhall> zakim ??p0 is me
> >>
> >> <johnhall> P0
> >>
> >> <johnhall> zakim P0 is me
> >>
> >> <johnhall> Thanks Jos
> >>
> >> Chris: The exit criteria for RIF are listed at
> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Exit_Criteria
> >>
> >> Sandro: I am concerned that Chris's revision to my proposal ---
> >> namely, reducing the requirement from implementing a dialect of  
> FLD to
> >> merely specifying the dialect --- is putting the bar too low.
> >> ... I don't think it's too high a burden to require an  
> implementation.
> >>
> >> Chris: I think it's an unnecessary burden.
> >> ... Regarding Sandro's point that someone can just flip through FLD
> >> and figure out how to have some sort of (trivial?) instantiation:
> >> Someone can also just say that they have an implementation.
> >>
> >> Sandro: Shouldn't they at least have to show that they can read and
> >> write XML?
> >>
> >> Chris: Implementation tests the dialect, not FLD.
> >>
> >> Sandro: I won't object; just wanted to make the point.
> >>
> >> Harold: Should we also require a syntax and semantics for the  
> dialect
> >> specification?
> >>
> >> Chris thereupon made that change to the Exit Criteria.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept
> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799
> >> <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799 
> >
> >> as RIF CR Exit criteria
> >>
> >> <josb> +1
> >>
> >> <StellaMitchell> +1
> >>
> >> <Harold> +1
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> +1
> >>
> >> <sandro> +1
> >>
> >> <LeoraMorgenstern> +1
> >>
> >> <johnhall> +1
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept
> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799
> >> <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799 
> >
> >> as RIF CR Exit criteria
> >>
> >>
> >>       Publications
> >>
> >> Chris: Editors need to make changes to their Last Call documents:  
> BLD,
> >> PRD,
> >>
> >
> >> , SWC, FLD, Core
> >> ... Needs to be done by next week's meeting.
> >> ... Assignments: Jos, SWC; Chris,
> >>
> >
> >> ; Christian, PRD; Harold, BLD, FLD, Core.
> >>
> >> Sandro: Even if no changes have been made, one needs to note in the
> >> document that there have been no changes since Last Call draft.
> >>
> >> <sandro> target publication date: Setp 17
> >>
> >> <sandro> try to approve WD pubs of Test and UCR on Sept 15.
> >>
> >> <sandro> PROPOSED: Our Last Call drafts (Core, BLD, PRD, DTB,  
> SWC, and
> >> FLD) are ready to be published as Candidate Recommendations
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> +1
> >>
> >> <sandro> +1 (W3C)
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> (IBM)
> >>
> >> <Harold> +1 (NRC)
> >>
> >> <josb> +1 (FUB)
> >>
> >> <johnhall> +1 (OMG)
> >>
> >> <StellaMitchell> +1 (self)
> >>
> >> <LeoraMorgenstern> +1 (self)
> >>
> >> <sandro> RESOLVED: Our Last Call drafts (Core, BLD, PRD, DTB,  
> SWC, and
> >> FLD) are ready to be published as Candidate Recommendations
> >>
> >> Sandro: Note that the statement of no changes or changes to last  
> call
> >> drafts is CRITICAL PATH, and therefore should be done today or  
> tomorrow.
> >>
> >> <sandro> "Change since the 3 July draft...." or "Changes since the
> >> Second Last Call draft of 3 July..."
> >>
> >> <josb> tomorrow is fine for SWC changes statement
> >>
> >>
> >>       Implementations
> >>
> >> Chris: Since we have moved last call documents to candidate
> >> recommendation, we are now in the call for implementations period.
> >> ... We had originally talked about a two-month period for
> >> implementations.
> >> ... To get out of CR, we need implementations.
> >>
> >> Sandro: Yes, those are in the exit criteria.
> >>
> >> <sandro>
> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/How_to_Submit_an_Implementation_Report
> >>
> >> Sandro: we want to point people to the above wiki page.
> >>
> >> Chris: Now is the time to follow up with people who indicated in  
> the
> >> comments that they would be interested in providing an  
> implementation.
> >> ... We need to get commitments from these people that they will do
> >> this in this period.
> >> ... Let's begin by making a list of people who will do  
> implementations.
> >>
> >> csma: ILOG is working on an implementation. A month ago, we had a
> >> first prototype running, so we probably have more going on now.
> >>
> >> sandro: I don't know if I'll get one done.
> >>
> >> Chris: Someone in the XML group at IBM made a RIF-based rule  
> storage
> >> system. Really a demo of XML X-query technology, but they did take
> >> some rules and translated them to RIF, and stored them in RIF- 
> XML, and
> >> queried them.
> >> ... question: does that count as a RIF implementation?
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action02]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - try
> >>
> >> Sandro: Mike Dean has an implementation.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Chris to try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded  
> in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action03]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-904 - Try to dig up XML RIF store [on
> >> Christopher Welty - due 2009-09-08].
> >>
> >> mdean: RIF implementation is in progress.
> >>
> >> Chris: Silk will be an implementation of BLD.
> >>
> >> csma: Gary mentioned he was doing something, but I don't know the
> >> status of it now.
> >> ... will send Gary a message, asking for status.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to ask Gary about status of
> >> implementation [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action04]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-905 - Ask Gary about status of
> >> implementation [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08].
> >>
> >> csma: I think Adrian is working with tibco on an implementation  
> of PRD.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group
> >>
> >> Sandro: maybe we should have a RIF Dev mailing list, similar to  
> OWL dev?
> >>
> >> <sandro> *ACTION:* sandro request creation of public-rif-dev  
> [recorded
> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action05]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-906 - Request creation of public-rif- 
> dev [on
> >> Sandro Hawke - due 2009-09-08].
> >>
> >> Chris: Rolf Gruetter has said that his group at WSL needs to have
> >> disjunction in rule heads.
> >>
> >> Note: Gruetter did not say anything about his group actually
> >> developing an implementation
> >>
> >> csma: OntoBroker has some sort of implementation of BLD
> >>
> >> Chris: Alexander Riazanov working on an implementation that  
> converts
> >> BLD to TPTP.
> >>
> >> Harold: He has been on vacation; but I'll try to talk to him  
> about that.
> >> ... There needs to be some web page on implementation of OntoBroker
> >>
> >> Sandro: Or better yet, send in an implementation report, as my wiki
> >> page specifies.
> >> ... Doing that is very quick.
> >>
> >> Chris: Currently the public information about OntoBroker's
> >> implementation is inconsistent. ontoprise web page says there's a  
> RIF
> >> implementation and links to OntoBroker web page, but OntoBroker's  
> web
> >> page says nothing.
> >> ... What about Tom Gordon. Is he an implementor?
> >>
> >> Harold: I don't think he's an implementor. He has a system LKIF,  
> which
> >> is for legal knowledge.
> >> ... I don't believe he will implement RIF: he has more of a
> >> theoretical interest in whether one can represent legal knowledge
> >> using RIF.
> >>
> >> <sandro> Chime
> >>
> >> <sandro> Chimezie Ogbuji
> >>
> >> Discussion also on Adreas Abecker's comments and Chimezie Ogbuji's
> >> comments.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> Nick Bassiliades
> >>
> >> Harold: Nick Bassiliades has been following RIF; does defeasible
> >> rules; unclear as to whether he'll actually do an implementation  
> of RIF.
> >>
> >> <sandro> CR dreadline Oct 23rd, friday before the conferences....
> >>
> >> Sandro: Let's make deadline for implementations October 23, so  
> people
> >> will be able to announce it before the rules conferences.
> >>
> >> Chris: We'll revisit this topic at each telecon.
> >>
> >> csma: will restart work on RIF XML soon.
> >>
> >>
> >>       Test Cases
> >>
> >> Chris: Axel had made an all built-ins test case
> >> ... And that test case seems to indeed include /all/ built-ins
> >>
> >> Stella: I think it would be better to split it up somehow.
> >>
> >> Chris: Perhaps by data-type?
> >> ... There are definitely some typos, like "listeral" instead of
> >> "literal"
> >>
> >> Stella: Perhaps organize it by string predicates, number  
> predicates,
> >> etc?
> >>
> >> <josb> (I wanted to say exactly what Chris just said)
> >>
> >> Sandro: what's the problem with it being so big?
> >>
> >> Stella: If it fails, it's hard to figure out why.
> >> ... can we split it by positive guards, negative guards, etc?
> >>
> >> Sandro: We can group it by the things people are most likely to
> >> implement
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Stella to refactor All Builtins testcase  
> [recorded
> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action06]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-907 - Refactor All Builtins testcase [on
> >> Stella Mitchell - due 2009-09-08].
> >>
> >> Stella: I can refactor the all built-ins case
> >> ... There are all sorts of issues still to be dealt with, with  
> respect
> >> to the test cases.
> >> ... Especially with all the changes in the documents, the
> >> specifications, etc.
> >> ... We need more than 15 minutes to go through this.
> >>
> >> <StellaMitchell>
> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jul/0026.html
> >>
> >> Chris: Let's make this a priority for the next telecon, since the  
> set
> >> of test cases will be very important to the implementors.
> >> ... What do we do with unapproved test cases? Require changes? Drop
> >> them?
> >> ... We do need an Assert/Retract case
> >>
> >> csma: We need an Assert /Retract case that is different from a  
> Modify.
> >> ... I don't have a case in mind, but it probably should be a  
> negative
> >> case; that you can't assert something about an object that you've
> >> retracted.
> >> ... I had a discussion with Adrian about this. He initially didn't
> >> agree; then we had a discussion, including Changhai Ke and Gary,  
> who
> >> agreed with me. But Adrian has not replied, and therefore there has
> >> been no conclusion.
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to fix/update AssertRetract test case
> >> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif- 
> minutes.html#action07]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-908 - Fix/update AssertRetract test  
> case [on
> >> Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08].
> >>
> >> csma: I need to get a consensus on this, and then either modify the
> >> test case myself, or get someone to do it.
> >> ... I think the assert test case is fine.
> >> ... However, there is no XML for it.
> >>
> >> Chris: do we have anything to generate XML for PRD?
> >>
> >> csma: Not yet.
> >>
> >> <StellaMitchell> jacc
> >>
> >> Stella: can the XML be generated automatically using a tool like  
> jacc?
> >>
> >> Chris: What about the other PRD test cases? Won't this be a problem
> >> for all of them?
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to check into XML syntax for PRD test
> >> cases [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action08]
> >>
> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-909 - Check into XML syntax for PRD test
> >> cases [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08].
> >>
> >> Chris: 2 remaining open issues in Working Group:
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> PROPOSED: close issue-37 as it is addressed by the draft  
> note
> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
> >>
> >> <StellaMitchell> +1
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> +1
> >>
> >> <johnhall> +1
> >>
> >> <csma> +1
> >>
> >> <sandro> +1
> >>
> >> <josb> +1
> >>
> >> <mdean> +1
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: close issue-37 as it is addressed by the draft  
> note
> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> PROPOSED: close issue-38 as it is addressed by the draft  
> note
> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> +1
> >>
> >> <csma> +1
> >>
> >> <sandro> +1
> >>
> >> <mdean> +1
> >>
> >> <johnhall> +1
> >>
> >> <LeoraMorgenstern> +1
> >>
> >> <josb> +1
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: close issue-38 as it is addressed by the draft  
> note
> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
> >>
> >> <StellaMitchell> +1
> >>
> >> <ChrisW> NEXT MEETING IN TWO WEEKS!
> >>
> >>
> >>     Summary of Action Items
> >>
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Chris to try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action03]
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to ask Gary about status of  
> implementation
> >> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif- 
> minutes.html#action04]
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to check into XML syntax for PRD test
> >> cases [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action08]
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to fix/update AssertRetract test case
> >> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif- 
> minutes.html#action07]
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* sandro request creation of public-rif-dev  
> [recorded
> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action05]
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* sandro to make sure if OWL does a normative  
> appendix
> >> for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also work for
> >> RIF. [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action01]
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Stella to refactor All Builtins testcase  
> [recorded
> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action06]
> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in
> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action02]
> >>
> >> [End of minutes]
> >>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl
> >> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm>
> >> version 1.135 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
> >> $Date: 2009/09/01 16:31:33 $
> >>
> >>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>     Scribe.perl diagnostic output
> >>
> >> [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
> >> This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
> >> Check for newer version at
> >> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
> >> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/>
> >>
> >> Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
> >>
> >> Succeeded: s/tipco/tibco/
> >> Found Scribe: LeoraMorgenstern
> >> Inferring ScribeNick: LeoraMorgenstern
> >> Default Present: Leora_Morgenstern, ChrisW, Sandro, Harold,
> >> Stella_Mitchell, +39.047.101.aaaa, josb, johnhall, csma, Mike_Dean
> >> Present: Leora_Morgenstern ChrisW Sandro Harold Stella_Mitchell
> >> +39.047.101.aaaa josb johnhall csma Mike_Dean
> >> Regrets: MichaelKifer
> >> Agenda:
> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0037.html
> >> Got date from IRC log name: 01 Sep 2009
> >> Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html
> >> People with action items: chris christian sandro stella try
> >>
> >> WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
> >> You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [End of scribe.perl
> >> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm>
> >> diagnostic output]
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Axel Polleres
> > Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of  
> Ireland,
> > Galway
> > email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D.
> http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora
>
>

-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland,  
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 14:11:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 29 September 2009 14:11:41 GMT