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

Re: ADMIN: Minutes Dec 12

From: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:19:32 -0500
Message-ID: <3E01E384.C639A767@mitre.org>
To: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org, ewallace@clue.msid.cme.nist.gov

I had expressed regrets for the Dec. 12 telecon and possible regrets for the Dec.
5 telecon (which turned into actual regrets unfortunately).

Thanks,
Leo

Evan Wallace wrote:

> =====
>
> Executive Summary:
>
> DECISIONS:
>
> RESOLVED:
> - Open and Postpone Justification issue per Dan Connolly's email.
> - Accept items 1, 2, and 5 of Peter Patel-Scheider's proposed closure
>   for Issue 5.8 - datatypes.
> - Close Issue 5.13 by advising users in the documents that they can use:
>   application/xml, application/rdf+xml, application/owl+xml.
> - Close Issue 5.23 by resolving to not add hasValue to OWL Lite.
>
> NEW ACTIONS:
> - Mike Smith to add Postponed Justification issue to issue list.
> - Jeremy to create text to use in place of PPS item 3 in resolution to
> Issue 5.8 on datatypes.
> - Dan C to to communicate with XML schema group about URIs for
> XML datatypes.
> - Jonathon Borden to update media types document and pass to M Dean
> for use in editing Reference Document.
> - Dan C take media type registration request to IETF.
> - Ian to write up an explanation of known characteristics
> for decision procedures for OWL Lite and OWL DL.
>
> -----------------
>
> More detail:
>
> IRC:
> http://www.w3.org/2002/12/12-webont-irc
>
> AGENDA:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0106.html
>
> 1) ADMIN (15 min)
>
> 1.1 Role Call
>
> Dan Connolly, Marwan Sabbouh, Evan Wallace, Peter Patel-Schneider,
> Mike Smith, Ian Horrocks, Mike Dean, Tim Finin, Ruediger Klein, Jeremy
> Carroll, Jeff Heflin, Masahiro Hori, Jim Hendler, Ziv Hellman, Herman
> ter Horst, Deborah McGuinness, Jos De Roo, Pat Hayes, Frank van Harmelen,
> Jean-Francois Baget (irc), Nicholas Gibbins
>
> Late: Jonathan Borden
>
> Regrets: Guus Schreiber, Lynn Stein, Jonathan Dale, Larry Eshelman,
> John Stanton
>
> 1.2 Approval of Minutes of Dec 5 call
>
> PROPOSED to accept the following as a true record of the Dec 5
> telecon:
> http://www.w3.org/2002/12/05-webont-irc
>
> Dan prefered Jeremy's notes as sent in message
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0114.html
> subject to revision by Jeremy (link to previous meeting, and M Smith
> ammendment etc).
>
> ACCEPTED, see final version in subsequent message:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0172.html
>
> 1.3 Agenda Amendments
>
> Dan Connolly's Justifications issue, as described in his email
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0110.html
>
> 1.4   Telecon Schedule
>
> Next telecon: December 19
> Scribe:   Ian Horrocks, if present
>
> Question was raised: should we cancel Dec 26 telecon?
> No one objected.  Dec 26 meeting CANCELLED!
>
> 2 Jan 03 meeting NOT cancelled.
> Dan Connolly notes potential regrets for that meeting.
>
> 1.5  F2F Meeting Manchester
>
> Registration page:
> http://cgi.w3.org/Register/selectUser.pl?_w3c_meetingName=WebontManchester
>
> Local arrangements page:
> http://wonderweb.semanticweb.org/mcr-f2f.shtml
>
> Short discussion of plan for f2f: Hendler
>
> Jim Hendler reviewed plans for a meeting focus on implementation and
> interoperability experience with OWL.  In addition, detailed working
> draft editorial inspections will be undertaken.
>
> Mike Smith started a discussion on the preferred anchor pattern to use
> in preparing WDs for this.  Advice was: provide anchors for all
> language elements, and use same case for anchor strings as that used in
> wd text for human consumption.
>
> Insertiong of anchors and other preparations of the Working Drafts
> should be completed a week before the ftf (2 January 2003).
>
> 1.6 Report on Web Ontology Working Group Extension
> AC Vote period closed.  24 votes cast - 23 approve, 1 abstain
> Information passed on to W3M for decision
> If/when extension granted, members not yet re-enrolled will be informed
>
> 1.7 Webont schedule
>
> FTI: Current schedule:
> - LC to start directly after Man ftf (around Jan 15)
> - LC period 3-6 weeks
> - Man ftf and LC period to be used by WG to gather implementation
>     experiences
> - odds are low that a WebOnt ftf is required in March at Tech Plenary
>
> Jeremy Carroll:
>
>   Colleagues at HP believe Jeremy was too negative in his concerns
>   about schedule as expressed in email:
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0048.html.
>   He suggests a longer Last Call period (e.g. six weeks) may be
>   sufficient to address these concerns.
>
> Jim Hendler:
>
>   Chairs leaning toward lengthening Last Call period.  May go to last
>   call after Jan Face-to-face.
>
> Dan Connolly:
>
>   In light of above, do we need a face-to-face in March (in conjunction
>   with the Technical plenary)?
>
> Chairs and W3C contact to discuss this further off line.
>
> 2. ISSUES (60 min)
>
> Link to issues list:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html
>
> 2.1  Pending updates:
>
> ISSUE 5.14 Versioning Closed Dec. 05
> closing text at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0075.html
> (Versioning needs to go into the reference and maybe Guide documents)
> (Issues List also needs to reflect this change -EKW as scribe)
>
> 2.2 ACTIONS wrt. resolved issues
>
> ACTION Chris Welty will work on getting "The meaning of
> owl:ontology" explained better in Guide, other editors will see
> if their documents need changing (not obvious they do).
> [Continued]
>
> ACTION Jeremy to generate test Cases for 5.5. List Syntax or Semantics
> [Continued]
>
> ACTION Jeff Heflin will produce test cases for owl:imports
> See also message from Jeremy Carroll:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0228.html
> [Done]
>
> ACTION DanC to provide wording
> [Concerns Issue 5.9 - malformed D+O restrictions (closed)
> Dan would like to amend the proposal with some clear instructions to the
> guide that says "Don't do that".  Dan was actioned to write up a few
> sentences for the guide.]
> [Done - see email
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0127.html]
>
> ACTION: Deb/Change feature doc in accordance with 5.19 resolution
> (using MikeS's text)
> [Continued]
>
> ACTION: MikeDean/update reference appropriately for three
> sublanguages
> [Continued]
>
> ACTION: Deb/Change features for three sublanguages
> [Continued]
>
> 3.2 OPEN issues
>
> New issue: Justification
>
> RESOLVED by consensus to open and postpone this issue per Dan's email.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0110.html
> NEW ACTION: Mike Smith to add this to issue list
>
> [We have five open issues left]
>
> ** Issue 5.8 - datatypes
>
> Peter's proposal
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0265.html
>
> Pat Hayes -
>   Does bullet five prevent referenced literals?
>
> other discussion.
>
> Hendler put question on items 1, 2 and 5 of Peters message.
>
> RESOLVED
>  objections: none
>  abstentions: Mike Dean, Jeff Heflin
>
> Discussion of problems with 3:
>
> Prior email comments on this from Jeremy:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0278.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0115.html
>
> Jeremy summarized these comments, identifying a few XML Schema
> built-in non-list types which present problems for OWL (and RDF for
> that matter). [Had trouble hearing which, although I assume they were
> those discussed in email. -EKW as scribe]
>
> Discussion ensued, such as:
>  Dan: QNAMEs do not behave as RDF datatypes.
>
>  Jeremy:  We should specify XML schema datatypes that we will
>  support, but note that there are ones that we won't support.
>
>  Dan: It is worthwhile to include a note explaining why this was
>       not the complete XML list.
>
> NEW ACTION Jeremy:
>   Write up suggested text to address item 3.
>
> see html attached to a subsequent email from Jeremy:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/att-0174/01-fo.HTML
>
> Item 4:
>
> Chair's decision on part 4 of this proposal (out of scope)
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0104.html
>
> Discussion:
> Peter would hate not to use a solution that solves 99% of
> this problem.
>
> Dan points out that what we need to do is to include the XML Schema
> group in our solution group.  This potentially creates a schedule
> risk in order to "do the right thing."
>
> Jeremy has an action from last week to draft a message for wg
> consideration as a message to tag about item 4.
>
> NEW ACTION Dan - to communicate with XML schema group about URIs for
> XML datatypes.
>
> ** Issue 5.13 - Internet media type for OWL
>
> ACTION: chairs, to ask Jonathan Borden re: wording to close 5.13 - DONE
>
> Proposal to close  (As per last week's request for changes):
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0057.html
>
> Discussion:
> Jonathan changed entailment parameter to a URI per suggestion
>
> Dan skeptical that a test could be defined to demonstrate use
> of this parameter.
>
> Mike Dean: doesn't know how to tag his current data with this
> parameter.
>
> Jonathon: How do you tell what entailments are licensed for an OWL
> document without this.
>
> general: some discussion about inferring from vocabulary.
>
> Frank van Harmelan : It's not just the vocabulary that suggests intention,
> it is also the way the vocabulary is put together.
>
> Hendler: We some way to declare intent for our usage of OWL.
>
> Dan convinced that it is worth having mime types for OWL Lite and
> OWL DL (OWL Full is default entailment).
>
> PHayes: use semantic extension vocabulary.
>
> Dan's proposal: 4 mime types (same as 30 Oct mail?)
>    xml
>    rdf+xml
>    owl-lite
>    owl-dl
> ???owl-full???
>
> Dan explanation of http protocol  --client states preference.
>
> Mike Dean best practice: anything that uses OWL namespace should use
>  owl mime type.
>
> Jim Hendler - proposal
>   advise users in the documents that they can use:
> application/xml, application/rdf+xml, application/owl+xml
>
> Straw poll - Pat Hayes objected
>   Pat hayes then suggests changing app/owl+xml to app/owl+rdf+xml
>
> Reference document or Guide would be the target for this advice.
>
> Called question as proposed by JH above, not with Pat's change.
> RESOLVED
>  objections: none
>  abstentions: Dan Connolly, Frank van Harmelen, Jeremy Carroll, Pat
>  Hayes, Jos De Roo
>
> NEW ACTION:
>  Jonathon Borden to update document and pass to M Dean for use
> in editing Reference Document.
>
> NEW ACTION:
>  Dan C take media type registration request to IETF
>
> ** Issue 15.23: add hasValue to Owl Lite
>
> [sound and completeness discussion]
>
> A great deal of email discussion took place prior to this meeting on
> the subject of how the inclusion of hasValue in OWL Lite would affect
> the implementation of OWL Lite reasoners.  Two of the strongest voices
> on each side of this debate: Ian Horrocks and Jim Hendler continued
> this discussion by phone.  This revealed some details with regard to
> prior implementations that may have not been fully understood.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0160.html
> Describes this.  This sets the background for the discussion on this
> at the telecon.
>
> Ian asserts that - There are known decision procedures for OWL Lite
> that are sound, complete and terminating.  Implementations exist for
> this.  Addition of hasValue would break this property.
>
> Note that because OWL DL includes both hasValue and oneOf, decision
> procedures for OWL DL reasoning are not _currently known_ to have these
> properties.
>
> NEW ACTION Ian Horrocks to write an explanation of this situation
>
> Given this information about known repercussions of including hasValue
> in OWL language subsets, the chair took a straw pole concerning
> leaving hasValue out of OWL Lite.  No one responded that they could
> not live with such an action.
>
> The question was put:
>   Close Issue 5.23 by resolving to not add hasValue to OWL Lite.
> RESOLVED.
>  objections: none
>  abstentions: Dan Connolly, Jos De Roo, Jonathan Borden, Jeremy Carroll,
>  Deb McGuinness, Mike Dean, Pat Hayes, Jeff Heflin, Jim Hendler?
>
> Discussion about the OWL DL feature set and implementation of OWL DL
> reasoners was not entertained during the telecon, but was welcomed at
> a future time (in subsequent email or when scheduled for subsequent
> telecons).

--
_____________________________________________
Dr. Leo Obrst  The MITRE Corporation
mailto:lobrst@mitre.org Intelligent Information Management/Exploitation
Voice: 703-883-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S W640
Fax: 703-883-1379       McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2002 10:19:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:56 GMT