W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Webont April 25th Telecon - minutes for review.

From: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 19:24:39 +0100 (BST)
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0204251923050.7151-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

Please check the actions - I think I got them all.

>Apr 25, 2002

>Simultaneous IRC Chat
>irc:irc.w3.org (port 6665)

see http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/webont/2002-04-25.txt

>Chair: Schreiber

scribe libby.miller@bristol.ac.uk

>1) Join call/attendance/admin (10 min)

>- regrets: Dale, Hendler, McGuinness, Stein (tentative)

actual regrets: Dale, Hendler, McGuinness, Lassila, Decker, Herman ter
Horst, Harmelen, Heflin, Welty (though Hendler, Welty on irc)


Jonathan Borden, Jonathan@openhealth.org
Jeremy Carroll, Hewlett Packard Company jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com,jeremy_carroll@hp.com
Dan Connolly, W3C Team contact connolly@w3.org
Jos De Roo, Agfa-Gevaert N. V. jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Mike Dean mdean@bbn.com
Tim Finin, University of Maryland MIND Laboratory finin@cs.umbc.edu
Nicholas Gibbins, University of Southampton nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Pat Hayes, phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Ziv Hellman, <ziv@unicorn.com>, Unicorn Solutions Inc.
Ian Horrocks, Network Inference horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk
Enrico Motta, Ibrow e.motta@open.ac.uk
Leo Obrst, MITRE lobrst@mitre.org (until 5.09)
Peter Patel-Schneider, Lucent Technologies pfps@research.bell-labs.com
Marwan Sabbouh, MITRE ms@mitre.org
Guus Schreiber, Ibrow schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl
Michael Smith, Electronic Data System (EDS) michael.smith@eds.com (joined
at 16.27)
John Stanton, Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) StantonJ@ncr.disa.mil stantonj@ncr.disa.mil
Lynn Andrea Stein, lynn.stein@olin.edu
Evan Wallace, ewallace@cme.nist.gov, National Institute of Standards and
Andy Seaborne +3 from HP as observers

(zakim: JeremyCarrol, zivH Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace,
AndyS_etc? (muted), ??P62, NickG, DanC, LibbyM, MDean, PatH?, ??P16,
Enrico, ZivH, LynnS, TimFinin, Marwan.Sabbouh, M.Smith,
??P22 PeterPS has IanH)

Raphael Volz
David Trastour
Lynne R. Thompson
Ned Smith
Said Tabet
Larry Eshelman
Dieter Fensel
Bernard Horan
Francesco Iannuzzelli
Ruediger Klein
Laurent Olivry
Martin Pike
Shimizu Noboru

>2) ACTION item review (chair, 5 min)

>ACTION (Mar 28) Chairs to clarify OWL naming problem

CLOSED: ok to use 'OWL', no constraints (DanC)

>ACTION (Mar 28) Dan Connolly, Lynn Stein (prov.), Jos De Roo, to
> in RDF core discussions on construct for closed lists

CLOSED: the discussion has been started (but not finished)

>ACTION (Apr 9): Frank van Harmelen with Deborah McGuinness,
>  Mike Dean, Enrico Motta, Ziv Hellman, Raphael Volz, Ian Horrocks
>  Following polls on separation of language features between
>  level 1 (OWL-lite) and level 2 (OWL-full), a group was constituted to
>  revisit the level 1/2 conformance issue:
>  http://www.w3.org/2002/04/09-webont-irc#T14-08-19

ONGOING, next week's agenda - proposal just sent to the list.

>ACTION: (Apr 18) Dan Connolly to arrange a test repository on the
>  http://www.w3.org site
>  Already in progress:
>  http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/
>  just needs README, link to/from WG home page.


>ACTION: (Apr 18) Dan Connolly to arrange direct CVS access for
>  members [Jeremy Carroll, Jos de Roo] of the test focus area to that


>ACTION (Apr 18): Jeremy Carroll to notify the WG that issue


>  is now open; to propose to close it by removing qualified
>  restrictions  from the language

CLOSED - see telecon minutes. could be reopened if after publication
people create compelling use cases

>ACTION (April 18): Mike Smith: send to chairs how you'd like issue
>  then chairs to review and send to group; then issues list will
>  incorporate this process description.

CLOSED - see telecon minutes.

>ACTION (April 25): chairs: provide roll call data of ftf Adam.


>3) Face-to-face meeting record (chair, 5 min)

>For review: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html

>Consolidated record due two weeks after ftf.

CLOSED modulo minor changes to attendance record. RECORD APPROVED

>4) Issue submission and format (Mike Smith, 5 min)


>- short Q&A/feedback session

MikeS not present at this point. Format agreed on.

>5) Issues 3.2 "Qualified restrictions" (chair, 10 min)

>Discussion & decision on proposed resolution by Jeremy Carroll:



>6) Dark triple requirement (chair, 5 min)

>Request from SWCG:


>- time line feasible?
>- coordinator/lead needed for the "dark triple task force"?

ACTION JonB to gether up email discussion on this issue, and put in one
document, without adding anything as far as possible.
JonB is issue owner. no dadline specified at this stage. All obligatons of
the rest of the taskforce released till JonB ready.

>7) GUIDE target results (Guus Schreiber, 20 min)

>[Dan Connolly will chair this agenda item]

>See proposal:

>Issues to be discussed:
>- Agreement on initial output list for GUIDE
>- Planning: when, who

ACTION Pat Hayes, chris welty and evan wallace to examine issues with
using UML as a presentation syntax for OWL. E.g. implications of the idea
that UML incorporates assumptions about the number and types of attributes

>8) A.O.B (5 min)

SCRIBE for next meeting is Tim Finin


full text of log:

15:01:07 <logger_1> logger_1 has joined #webont
15:01:07 <irc.w3.org> Users on #webont: logger_1 @las
15:27:11 <afs> afs has joined #webont
15:47:07 <connolly> connolly has joined #webont
15:48:14 <afs> afs has quit
15:54:17 <schreiber> schreiber has joined #webont
15:54:28 <afs> afs has joined #webont
15:58:56 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #webont
15:59:00 <connolly> Zakim, this will be WEBO
15:59:01 <Zakim> ok, connolly, I see SW_WebOnt()12:00PM already started
15:59:03 <connolly> connolly is now known as DanC
15:59:09 <Zakim> + +
15:59:12 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webont
15:59:14 <RRSAgent> * RRSAgent is logging
15:59:45 <DanC> DanC has changed the topic to: W3C WebOnt WG http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ 25Apr telcon
15:59:53 <Zakim> +Evan.Wallace
15:59:55 <Zakim> +John.Stanton
15:59:56 <DanC> agenda + 25 Apr http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0273.html
15:59:58 <Zakim> * Zakim notes agendum 1 added
16:00:16 <Zakim> +??P63
16:00:19 <Zakim> +??P62
16:00:38 <libby__> libby__ has joined #webont
16:00:40 <Zakim> +NickG
16:01:10 <Zakim> +DanC
16:01:23 <Zakim> +??P0
16:02:01 <Zakim> +??P12
16:02:03 <Zakim> +MDean
16:02:25 <schreiber> zakim, ??P11 is Guus
16:02:26 <Zakim> +Guus; got it
16:02:29 <DanC> Zakim, P12 is LibbyM
16:02:30 <Zakim> sorry, DanC, I do not recognize a party named 'P12'
16:02:36 <DanC> Zakim, ??P12 is LibbyM
16:02:37 <Zakim> +LibbyM; got it
16:03:04 <DanC> +JosD, LarryE
16:03:13 <DanC> +PeterPS, +IanH
16:03:15 <Zakim> +??P2
16:03:27 <DanC> Zakim, is PeterPS
16:03:27 <libby__> i could scribe but need to eat somthing quicky first!
16:03:29 <Zakim> sorry, DanC, I do not recognize a party named ''
16:03:34 <DanC> Zakim, + is PeterPS
16:03:35 <Zakim> +PeterPS; got it
16:03:39 <Zakim> + +1.850.202.aabb - is perhaps PatH?
16:03:43 <DanC> Zakim, PeterPS also has IanH
16:03:45 <Zakim> +IanH; got it
16:03:56 <mdean> mdean has joined #WebOnt
16:03:59 <DanC> Zakim, who's here?
16:04:00 <Zakim> I see Guus, ??P59, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, ??P63, ??P62, NickG, DanC, ??P0, LibbyM, MDean, ??P2, PatH?
16:04:01 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH
16:04:29 <DanC> Zakim, ??P2 is perhaps JeremyCarrol
16:04:30 <Zakim> +JeremyCarrol?; got it
16:04:35 <jhendler> jhendler has joined #webont
16:04:42 <DanC> Zakim, ??P59 is perhaps JosD
16:04:43 <Zakim> +JosD?; got it
16:04:50 <Zakim> +??P16
16:04:56 <DanC> Zakim, ??P0 is perhaps LeoO
16:04:58 <Zakim> +LeoO?; got it
16:05:00 <jhendler> JimH will be IRC only - till 12:45
16:05:13 <DanC> Zakim, who's here?
16:05:14 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, ??P63, ??P62, NickG, DanC, LeoO?, LibbyM, MDean, JeremyCarrol?, PatH?, ??P16
16:05:15 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH
16:05:19 <jhendler> Chris Welty regrets (will peek at irc from time to time)
16:05:30 <libby__> libby__ is now known as libbyscri
16:05:39 <libbyscri> there are observers from HP
16:06:09 <libbyscri> (they are here)
16:06:18 <DanC> Zakim, ??P63 is perhaps AndyS_etc
16:06:19 <Zakim> +AndyS_etc?; got it
16:06:27 <DanC> Zakim, who's here?
16:06:28 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, AndyS_etc?, ??P62, NickG, DanC, LeoO?, LibbyM, MDean, JeremyCarrol?, PatH?, ??P16
16:06:29 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH
16:06:32 <Zakim> +Marwan.Sabbouh
16:06:37 <jhendler> * jhendler welcomes the observers. Sorry I cannot be there in person (voice?)
16:06:59 <DanC> Guus, you might as well copy/paste the regrets, no?
16:07:15 <libbyscri> regrets: dale, ??, heflin, hendler, lassila, mcguiness, patel-schnieder, leynn stein, ??
16:07:17 <Zakim> +??P26
16:07:29 <libbyscri> sorry, missed some of that
16:07:31 <DanC> Zakim, ??P26 is Enrico
16:07:33 <Zakim> +Enrico; got it
16:07:34 <Zakim> +??P27
16:07:51 <DanC> Zakim, ??P27 is ZivH
16:07:52 <Zakim> +ZivH; got it
16:07:54 <libbyscri> -----
16:07:58 <libbyscri> first agenda item
16:08:04 <DanC> Zakim, who's here?
16:08:05 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, AndyS_etc? (muted), ??P62, NickG, DanC, LeoO?, LibbyM, MDean, JeremyCarrol?, PatH?, ??P16, Marwan.Sabbouh, Enrico, ZivH
16:08:07 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH
16:08:41 <DanC> Guus debriefs from a meeting of W3C chairs.
16:08:42 <libbyscri> guus: tehre will be new rules for patents when we release new documents
16:09:13 <libbyscri> guus: danC talked about SW tools for tracking groups process, and Guus volunteered this grips as gunea pig
16:09:19 <libbyscri> s/grips/group
16:09:24 <libbyscri> ---action item review
16:09:40 <libbyscri> 1. clarifying nameing problem
16:09:53 <libbyscri> danc ok to use OWL after a meeting
16:09:59 <Zakim> +??P29
16:10:09 <libbyscri> DanC: with no constrints
16:10:17 <DanC> Zakim, ??P29 is LynnS
16:10:18 <Zakim> +LynnS; got it
16:10:27 <libbyscri> lynn stein is actually here
16:10:28 <libbyscri> ---
16:10:41 <libbyscri> action 2: RDF core discussion on closed lists
16:10:44 <Zakim> +Jonathan.Borden
16:10:52 <libbyscri> DanC: the discussion has started
16:11:02 <libbyscri> guus: when can it be closed?
16:11:05 <ircleuser> ircleuser has joined #webont
16:11:29 <libbyscri> guus: also an issue with RDFCore about dark triples
16:11:35 <DanC> # addressing requirements around daml:collection (rdfms-seq-representation) Dan Connolly (Fri, Apr 19 2002) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Apr/0334.html
16:11:42 <libbyscri> DanC: if action was to start discussion, action done, otherwise not
16:11:50 <libbyscri> action: done
16:11:55 <JonB> JonB has joined #webont
16:11:55 <libbyscri> ---
16:12:13 <ircleuser> ircleuser is now known as ChrisW
16:12:14 <libbyscri> action 3: proposal for separation of language features into 2 levels
16:12:33 <DanC> * DanC wonders about a pointer to that thing
16:12:37 <libbyscri> guus: proposal out today, anticipate email discussions, will be on agenda next week
16:12:43 <DanC> test repository http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/
16:12:57 <libbyscri> action 4? doe? missed that
16:12:58 <Zakim> +??P1
16:13:00 <libbyscri> ---
16:13:13 <libbyscri> action 5: danc to arrange CVS action - action continues
16:13:17 <DanC> Zakim, ??P1 is TimFinin
16:13:19 <Zakim> +TimFinin; got it
16:13:38 <libbyscri> next 2 actions done and on agenda
16:13:45 <libbyscri> ---
16:13:57 <timfinin> timfinin has joined #webont
16:13:59 <libbyscri> action f2f amstaerdam - don, sent to the list
16:14:06 <DanC> 3) Face-to-face meeting record (chair, 5 min)
16:14:07 <DanC> For review: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html
16:14:19 <jhendler> * jhendler JimH reviewed the document - approves
16:14:38 <libbyscri> DanC: jeremey and jos reviewed the meeting records
16:14:44 <libbyscri> ? glanced at it, no problems
16:15:07 <libbyscri> heh
16:15:22 <Zakim> -Marwan.Sabbouh
16:15:23 <libbyscri> [hiatus as some guy gets a wrong number]
16:15:45 <Zakim> +Marwan.Sabbouh
16:15:47 <libbyscri> guus: propose to accept the record, modulo a few changes in role call possibly
16:15:53 <libbyscri> ** record approved
16:15:58 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html  $Revision: 1.21 $ of $Date: 2002/04/24 17:48:08 $
16:16:01 <jhendler> * jhendler YAY!
16:16:12 <libbyscri> 4) issue submission and format
16:16:21 <DanC> Zakim, is Mike here?
16:16:22 <Zakim> DanC, I see MikeBallantyne? in WS_DescWG()11:00AM
16:16:23 <libbyscri> - as simple and transparant as possible
16:16:33 <libbyscri> mike smith whose acrtion it is not on telecon
16:16:49 <libbyscri> DanC: works fine for me
16:16:58 <DanC> it = http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0197.html
16:17:05 <libbyscri> (I can't paste, will someone paste the url of are mike's mesage?)
16:17:13 <libbyscri> thanks
16:17:29 <libbyscri> ? no description of the issue in the test case?
16:17:46 <libbyscri> MikeD - here was a link to the email where issue was discussied
16:17:55 <libbyscri> - the new format will sort this out
16:18:11 <libbyscri> gusu: all happy with the formt?
16:18:24 <libbyscri> ...idea is the process will be more issue driven from now on.
16:18:29 <libbyscri> [nothing]
16:18:38 <DanC> --- 5) Issues 3.2 "Qualified restrictions" (chair, 10 min)
16:18:51 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#3.2-Qualified-Restrictions
16:18:59 <libbyscri> Jeremy Carroll
16:19:33 <libbyscri> Jeremy: started this issue to exercise the process of testcases. thougt uncontroversial. not so
16:20:00 <DanC> I unzipp'd jeremy's test files into http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/qualified-cardinality-constraints/
16:20:05 <libbyscri> ...now trying to test whether there is consensus in the group about wanting qualified cardinality constraints
16:20:13 <DanC> e.g. http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/qualified-cardinality-constraints/error001.owl
16:20:26 <JonB> q+
16:20:27 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB on the speaker queue
16:20:29 <libbyscri> ....basically they're not very useful...
16:20:36 <JosD> JosD has joined #webont
16:20:49 <libbyscri> ...should not be closed if substantive disagreemnet at this stage
16:21:06 <DanC> Guus, ask anybody who wants to speak against the proposal to speak up, please.
16:21:10 <libbyscri> ...mikeD responded
16:21:29 <libbyscri> mikeD: wouldnt object to keeping it in, not putting up a big fight...keep it open
16:22:08 <libbyscri> Ian: doesn't know of any/many convincing uyses of it in ontologies. sometimes necessary for formal encodings of other languages
16:22:24 <jhendler> q+
16:22:24 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB, Jhendler on the speaker queue
16:22:27 <libbyscri> ...makes implementations a bt harder, tho not more complex
16:22:38 <libbyscri> ...but we know how to do it
16:23:07 <libbyscri> Guus proposes to close this issue for now - drop qualified restrictions (scribe missed a bit here)
16:23:25 <DanC> * DanC ack JonB
16:23:26 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue
16:23:54 <libbyscri> JonB dissented in email, wanted adequate discussion - thought should be discussion itf stuff removed from Daml+oil
16:24:02 <libbyscri> ...as per charter
16:24:35 <libbyscri> MikeD and JonB were intereste din what Ian had to say, Ian lukewarm?, can support it
16:24:36 <JosD> JosD has quit
16:24:46 <jhendler> * jhendler if my queue slot comes up - I'll type in and someone can read on phone...
16:24:46 <libbyscri> jonB - so how did it et into Daml+oil?
16:25:10 <libbyscri> ?? says doesn't thinkdaml+oil driven at that stage by use cases
16:25:39 <libbyscri> peter - tho no use  cases, there were inetntions and desires
16:25:46 <JonB> q-
16:25:46 <libbyscri> (?? was patH)
16:25:47 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue
16:25:48 <DanC> jimh, what is it?
16:25:50 <jhendler> I believe these are the most complained about issue in D+O -- certainly hardest to explain - I believe it was a artifact of something that didn't end up being important
16:26:09 <DanC> * DanC read that out
16:26:27 <JosD> JosD has joined #webont
16:26:30 <jhendler> We had discussed before as a synactc shortcut -- if still needed someone should explain
16:26:37 <libbyscri> jeremy: we can take it out now, and then review if people complain - see if they can come up with usecases
16:26:45 <jhendler> (end of me)
16:26:50 <libbyscri> jonB?: happy to drop it
16:26:54 <JonB> yes
16:27:16 <libbyscri> guus: agree resolution to this issue?
16:27:33 <libbyscri> jeremy - testcases associated with this issue?
16:27:41 <libbyscri> jos, danc, they're ok by us
16:27:42 <Zakim> +M.Smith
16:28:14 <Enrico> Enrico has joined #webont
16:28:32 <libbyscri> guus: proposed to decide that we resolve to decde this issue: qualified restrcitions are not part orf OWL
16:28:41 <libbyscri> issue: resolved! ***
16:29:11 <DanC> ==== 6) Dark triple requirement (chair, 5 min)
16:29:12 <libbyscri> ----
16:29:58 <libbyscri> guus:  a message from SWCG- needed issues about dark triples from us clearly in one message
16:30:11 <Zakim> +??P22
16:30:16 <libbyscri> ...concise and agreed upon statement
16:30:44 <JonB> q+
16:30:46 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler, JonB on the speaker queue
16:30:51 <libbyscri> DanC: important to propose a solution too
16:30:59 <jhendler> q-
16:31:00 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB on the speaker queue
16:31:06 <libbyscri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0233.html
16:31:41 <libbyscri> guss - the solution sepatae from issue. the solution was not part of the request of the grop. guus is sure wasnt
16:31:49 <libbyscri> danc sure was part fothe request
16:32:13 <libbyscri> patH: was it expected that the taskforce reach consensus on the recommended solution
16:32:23 <libbyscri> DanC: has to be acceptable to this group
16:32:40 <libbyscri> ...the poiunt a for this group to be happy
16:32:58 <libbyscri> patH - enumerate all the possible solutions, to show there are some
16:33:08 <libbyscri> DanC: essential to pick some that are acceptable
16:33:20 <libbyscri> patH has a new proposal
16:34:00 <libbyscri> guus: go back to webont ...and get a requirement [missed some, sorry]
16:34:13 <libbyscri> DanC: examples supposed to be of how it is solved
16:34:28 <libbyscri> guus: we discussed some solutions at the f2f
16:34:36 <libbyscri> DanC: but some are not acceptable to the group
16:34:45 <jhendler> my understanding is that RDF Core asked us to propose 1, and only 1, solution.
16:35:00 <libbyscri> jeremy thought he'd heard that multiple files were acceptable....
16:35:13 <JonB> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0290.html
16:35:21 <libbyscri> guus: thinks the problem is the requirements, and this is what rdfcore want
16:35:32 <libbyscri> jeremy thinks understanding theserequirements much better recently
16:36:11 <libbyscri> patH's email: we do it in OWL and RDFCore doesnt have to worry about it
16:36:34 <jhendler> q+
16:36:35 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB, Jhendler on the speaker queue
16:36:40 <libbyscri> janB: if this proposal is acceptable....
16:36:48 <JonB> q-
16:36:50 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue
16:37:09 <libbyscri> pps: 'allowable' == within charter - 'acceptable' is whether WG agrees on it
16:37:39 <libbyscri> jeremy - in RDFCore discussion is whether model theory discussion of dark triples be retained for a ?book?
16:37:59 <libbyscri> ...if webont wants them, rdfcore should not rule it out
16:38:14 <libbyscri> pps? still needs to be endorsed by RDFCore
16:38:37 <libbyscri> jeremy - need to say why we want RDFCore to endorse it
16:38:54 <ChrisW> q
16:39:00 <DanC> I'm pretty sure 2002Apr/0290.html is a proposal that Owl be incomplete w.r.t. RDF Core semantics. I don't like that. (I'm pretty sure I can make it into an entailment test)
16:39:10 <ChrisW> zakim, q
16:39:11 <Zakim> I don't understand 'q', ChrisW.  Try /msg Zakim help
16:39:27 <JonB> chrisw do q+
16:39:29 <DanC> it's q+, ChrisW, but I'm not sure Guus can see Zakim's queue
16:39:42 <libbyscri> patH: strcilty, doesnty need to be in the model theory, but then rdf/webont would not quite be in sync, though this could be handled by owl
16:39:52 <libbyscri> ...for most users arcane distinction
16:40:13 <libbyscri> patH: would prefer that RDFCore is left alone
16:40:19 <ChrisW> danc, I understand, but this is all we've got...
16:40:30 <libbyscri> jeremy: would switch sides in rdfcore debate if went  this way
16:40:35 <libbyscri> guus: conclusions?
16:40:40 <ChrisW> (oops)
16:41:08 <libbyscri> patH: [sorry, missed some] coordination thing between groups
16:41:28 <libbyscri> ? thinks that danc doesn't like this option
16:41:34 <DanC> ?=JonB
16:41:39 <libbyscri> thanks
16:42:02 <libbyscri> ....thinks important that danc as webont and rdfcore person important he is happy
16:42:24 <libbyscri> jeremy is not happy about endorsing any proposal yet, not clear what WG wants yet.
16:42:42 <jhendler> I don't care what solution - but I want to know how we will (i) reach consensus, (ii) get someone to volunteer to edit - if it doesn't end up in document, we didn't do anything (from outside world perspective) - esp. if we go with "owl-only" solution.  Do we have a volunteer?
16:42:55 <libbyscri> ...need specific requirements. don't know what the entailments are
16:43:15 <libbyscri> jeremy posted a msg today with test cases and disfferent approaches
16:43:18 <DanC> JimH, it's awkward for you to try to chair from IRC. Guus is doing OK, I think.
16:43:50 <libbyscri> jeremy do youhave a reference for that?
16:44:00 <jhendler> * jhendler Guus does great, I just can't stay quiet :->
16:44:18 <libbyscri> JonB: does jonb's inheritable disease e.g. illustrate that issue?
16:44:51 <libbyscri> jeremy: not really. some alllow you to state there is a circular definition but don;t know what it is.
16:45:04 <libbyscri> ?missed a bit of detail here, sorry
16:45:36 <libbyscri> guus: would like to have this discussion n a more proceedural sense
16:46:15 <libbyscri> ...would like a statement from the taskforce people whether they are willing to work on a consolidated solution, by may 6, and after. and a volunteer to edit
16:46:30 <libbyscri> ...ok? volunteer?
16:46:46 <libbyscri> patth: good idea but off email next few weeks
16:47:07 <libbyscri> guus: jeremy, jonb, patH, pps?....more
16:47:24 <libbyscri> jonb could edit it but doesnt feel quite competent
16:47:54 <libbyscri> guus: thinks jonb should do it, and not feeling understand it is a good thing. patH agrees jonb good
16:48:14 <libbyscri> jonB agrees to do it
16:48:41 <libbyscri> ian: we seem to be spending an incredible amount of time on this. not convinced this analysis of options is that useful
16:49:02 <libbyscri> pps: can't particpate by may 6.
16:49:17 <libbyscri> ...can't commit to anything over next 2 weeks
16:49:50 <libbyscri> ?  we already have a nearly infitite amount of text - one document would be a start
16:49:59 <libbyscri> ian: this has been tried a number of times
16:50:08 <libbyscri> ? so what's the problemwith the existing ones?
16:50:30 <libbyscri> jeremy - no agreemnt on some of the constraints about the solutions, hence test cases....
16:51:00 <libbyscri> patH  this is the job of the whole working group, not just a test case
16:51:21 <libbyscri> jeremy - at least find ut which testcases the WG feels strongly about
16:51:50 <libbyscri> ? think its obvious that we need somethign like dark triples
16:52:18 <schreiber> (this was mike smith)
16:52:24 <libbyscri> ....we need to say to rdfcore that we need this, so we're goingto do it in any case
16:52:30 <libbyscri> jeremy: not convinced need it
16:52:37 <libbyscri> thanks
16:53:01 <libbyscri> jeremy, danc, both think that don't need dark triples
16:53:33 <libbyscri> mikeS: do patH and pps, agree with what jeremy says?
16:53:45 <libbyscri> pah: not sur understand it, pps, not sure viable
16:54:46 <libbyscri> patH: still in process of trying to understand it...[discussion of message] - not a particular proposal
16:55:03 <libbyscri> ....talking absout messages of today from jeremy
16:55:37 <libbyscri> jeremy: axiomatic....? anyone got the reference?
16:56:18 <libbyscri> chairs concerned that 80% of email abot this issue. ooking for a proposal to stremline this so don't dominate all the conversioans
16:56:42 <DanC> I suggest we make JonB issue owner, release the obligations of the rest of the "task force", and let JonB coordinate the issue until it looks ready for resolution.
16:56:51 <libbyscri> ....possible for jonBto gather upo the discussion and put in a document to start the thread. not adding anything
16:57:07 <libbyscri> JonB: will try not to mess up adding anything
16:57:19 <libbyscri> DanC: would be happy with jonb as issue owner
16:57:33 <libbyscri> guus: timeline is unfeasibale
16:57:58 <libbyscri> DanC: no need for  adeadline. either we make it for rdfcore last core ot not
16:58:04 <libbyscri> guus: may 20 - SW cood group
16:58:09 <libbyscri> DanC: useful
16:58:23 <libbyscri> ? out of loop may 10-17
16:58:30 <DanC> ?=JonB
16:58:31 <libbyscri> path: out from 6-10 may
16:58:34 <libbyscri> thanks
16:58:40 <JonB> * JonB away 10-17 may
16:58:55 <libbyscri> * everyone happy with this proceedural proposal
16:59:03 <libbyscri> ------
16:59:19 <libbyscri> 7) Guide target results - guus
16:59:25 <DanC> * DanC hears buzzing... went away
16:59:47 <libbyscri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0266.html
16:59:48 <DanC> guus's msg http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0266.html
16:59:56 <libbyscri> danc chairing temporarily
17:00:08 <libbyscri> 3 things on it:
17:00:47 <libbyscri> 1: presentation syntaxes. we will work on 2 prsentation syntaxes till recommendation - UML and and XML
17:01:02 <libbyscri> ....UML covers part of it, XML covers all of it
17:01:03 <DanC> I've done some UML-ish stuff with DAML+OIL: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/infoset/ http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/infoset/infoset-diagram.svg
17:01:28 <DanC> * DanC q?
17:01:29 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue
17:01:43 <jhendler> q-
17:01:44 <Zakim> * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
17:01:48 <libbyscri> ? have we determined what the normative syntax is to be?
17:01:56 <libbyscri> DanC: yes, amstaerdam f2f, RDF/XML
17:02:17 <libbyscri> guus: agreement on item 1?
17:02:44 <libbyscri> ? clarification on uml syntax?
17:02:50 <DanC> A UML Presentation Syntax for OWL Lite
17:02:50 <DanC> Author: Guus Schreiber
17:02:50 <DanC> Created:: April 3, 2002
17:02:50 <DanC> Last update: April 19, 2002
17:02:53 <DanC> http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/docs/owl-uml/owl-uml.html
17:03:10 <libbyscri> guus: describes UML - useful for frame-based
17:03:35 <libbyscri> patH: uml incorporates assumptions about the nature of the set heirarchty, incorporating those as well?
17:04:02 <libbyscri> ....often very strict assumptions in uml about data and metadta...do we want to incorporate this?
17:04:24 <libbyscri> guus: no. uml as is taught in books, uml distilled etc, doesnt contain this stuff
17:05:08 <libbyscri> DanC: e.g. height and weight attribtes, uml assiumes that's all there is, so if you want to add another, uml types will look at you funny
17:05:25 <libbyscri> guus: no, depends on the cardinality fo the attribute
17:05:43 <libbyscri> ...yes, will look funny
17:05:56 <libbyscri> DanC: we'll have to make a spcecial note about this
17:06:19 <libbyscri> guus: a grphical editor to generate xml, then likely that it won't be complete
17:07:00 <libbyscri> guus: second issue - language primer or walkthough
17:07:27 <libbyscri> ...the guide shoudl particpate in this because typically one of the main documents to explain the language
17:07:37 <libbyscri> ...very realistic examples important
17:07:46 <libbyscri> [yey!]
17:08:09 <libbyscri> ...both realistic and a reamontological example, and so convince people useful thing to do
17:08:29 <libbyscri> ...not toy examples, preferably from usecases we have, and with necessary depth
17:08:42 <libbyscri> DanC: its a goal, might be difficult
17:08:47 <ChrisW> We should be very careful about examples - they tend to become canonical
17:09:17 <libbyscri> ...coud be part of guide as far as I'm concerned. danc and lynn stein did the walkthrough originally
17:09:23 <Zakim> -LeoO?
17:10:09 <libbyscri> LynnS - would like to help edit, bput probably not the right person to code up real examples. but maybepwoplw couild explain this
17:10:16 <DanC> yes, Chris, I used to shy away from examples for that reason; I now think it's better to go for it, lest the spec (i.e. W3C materials) become irrelevant, and folks just learn from the examples in the books.
17:10:43 <libbyscri> libby agrees with guus
17:10:45 <JosD> JosD has quit
17:10:50 <libbyscri> guus thinks one of most important docs
17:10:51 <las> * las couldn't hear (libby?) the previous speaker....walkthrough wasn't useful, but didn't hear why.
17:11:03 <DanC> * DanC hear buzz
17:11:07 <ChrisW> I don't mean avoid them, I mean be careful.  They are more important to "get right" than the NL text.
17:11:14 <DanC> yup
17:11:27 <libbyscri> las, the examples seemed rather toy examples when I  got down to trying to use daml
17:11:41 <las> * las agrees about the walkthrough being too simple; it was exactly what could be done then, but not at all what we need now.
17:12:00 <libbyscri> sorry, don't mean tot be rude. I do have some examples I could give you
17:12:11 <libbyscri> scribe can't hear at all
17:12:39 <Zakim> -JeremyCarrol?
17:12:43 <jhendler> * jhendler agrres with las (and Libby) my students use walkthrough to get started, but didn't have enough for complex cases and instances
17:13:02 <jhendler> * jhendler but did great with "basic" DAML
17:13:12 <libbyscri> [hiatus with a loud noise, posible a mobile near to phone]
17:13:27 <las> libby, I agree about the old walkthrough (not insulted at all -- that's what we were in a position to do then), but think someone else has to code up the real examples.  My contribution could be to take code and explain it, but it won't be to build a big app.
17:13:33 <libbyscri> on to 3) - how to do it doc
17:13:52 <libbyscri> las, sure
17:14:13 <libbyscri> various modelling issues
17:14:26 <libbyscri> defined classes would be useful to discuss.
17:14:45 <libbyscri> guss: doesn't have to be a long document, but should make it easier for people to use the langauge
17:15:01 <libbyscri> ..." if I had more time it would have been shorter"
17:15:04 <JonB> * JonB agrees strongly about usefulness of discussing defined vs. primitive classes
17:15:11 <libbyscri> ...anything missing from this list?
17:15:44 <libbyscri> danc wuld like to exaplin to users the issue of things an dtheir names - concept-terms
17:15:46 <DanC> in how-to-do-it: yes, good list. pls add things vs. their names.
17:16:38 <libbyscri> guus: there was a complaint that not using this terminology, good point
17:16:52 <DanC> thins vs. their names: i.e. explain why not do: author "Fred". do: author [ name "Fred"].
17:17:38 <libbyscri> guus: nede to start workign on it quickly for it to be feasible, een if we have to chnge the document along the line
17:17:54 <libbyscri> danc/path think that uml issue would be good for preople to start looking at.
17:18:03 <libbyscri> path - ok if 2-3 weeks
17:18:15 <libbyscri> DanC: need more people
17:18:26 <libbyscri> evan? volunteers
17:18:36 <ChrisW> me
17:18:53 <libbyscri> DanC: volunteers for riting pats of the document?
17:19:13 <libbyscri> chrisW volunteers for UML thing (sorry)
17:19:17 <JonB> * JonB wrote a non-XML syntax
17:19:31 <libbyscri> ..as did pps
17:19:47 <libbyscri> scribe has lost count of volunteers, is confused
17:20:17 <libbyscri> patH, chrisW, ?evan??
17:20:25 <DanC> Zakim, who's here?
17:20:26 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, AndyS_etc? (muted), ??P62, NickG, DanC, LibbyM, MDean, PatH?, ??P16, Enrico, ZivH, LynnS, Jonathan.Borden, TimFinin,
17:20:28 <Zakim> ... Marwan.Sabbouh, M.Smith, ??P22
17:20:29 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH
17:20:33 <libbyscri> ** people like Guus's suggestions
17:20:58 <libbyscri> looking for a scribe voluneteer. danc proposes to cancel unless a volunteer
17:20:59 <jhendler> * jhendler must go now - glad to hear we have volunteers. Good call - yay Guus and "see" you all next week
17:21:05 <libbyscri> seeya
17:21:14 <DanC> TimF volunteers to scribe
17:21:16 <libbyscri> tim finin volunteers scribe next week
17:21:22 <jhendler> jhendler has left #webont
17:21:23 <Zakim> -Marwan.Sabbouh
17:21:23 <Zakim> -M.Smith
17:21:24 <Zakim> -Evan.Wallace
17:21:25 <Zakim> -??P62
17:21:25 <libbyscri> adjourned
17:21:27 <ChrisW> ciao tutti
17:21:27 <Zakim> -TimFinin
17:21:27 <Zakim> -Enrico
17:21:27 <Zakim> -PatH?
17:21:29 <Zakim> -AndyS_etc?
17:21:29 <libbyscri> bye!
17:21:31 <Zakim> -??P16
17:21:32 <Zakim> -NickG
17:21:34 <Zakim> -PeterPS
17:21:36 <Zakim> -John.Stanton
17:21:38 <Zakim> -ZivH
17:21:40 <Zakim> -LynnS
17:21:42 <timfinin> timfinin has left #webont
17:21:43 <Zakim> -DanC
17:21:45 <Zakim> -MDean
17:21:48 <Zakim> -Jonathan.Borden
17:21:49 <Zakim> -LibbyM
17:21:51 <Zakim> -Guus
17:21:57 <Zakim> -??P22
17:21:59 <DanC> so libby, you'll make sure there are clearly recorded ACTIONS on those folks that volunteered to review the UML bit, yes?
17:22:05 <Zakim> -JosD?
17:22:05 <ChrisW> ChrisW has left #webont
17:22:07 <Zakim> SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has ended
17:22:20 <libbyscri> sure, except that I wasn't sure if tehre were 2 or 3
17:22:31 <libbyscri> people that is
17:22:47 <libbyscri> maybe you mean now...
17:23:18 <afs> afs has left #webont
17:23:38 <JonB> JonB has left #webont
17:23:47 <schreiber> chris welty and evan wallace volunteered
17:24:13 <schreiber> thanks, libby, for scribing
17:24:54 <schreiber> schreiber has quit
17:25:39 <libbyscri> ACTION patH, ChrisW, ?someone, possibly Evan? to examine issues with using UML as a presentation syntax for OWL. the idea that UML incorporates assumptions about the number and types of attributes defined
17:25:57 <libbyscri> no probs, I'll send cleaned up minutes around
17:26:42 <libbyscri> regrets - stefan decker
17:27:58 <las> * las regrets for next week....don't know where that info goes...
17:39:43 <libbyscri> regrets ora
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 14:26:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:49 GMT