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

Re: ADMIN: Update 2 of Minutes of July 25 Telecon

From: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 13:10:03 -0400
Message-ID: <3D4576EB.7E634904@mitre.org>
To: W3C Web Ontology WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

If there are any more corrections to the minutes of the July 25th Telecon,
please forward them to me, and I will batch them as Update 3.

Thanks,
Leo

Leo Obrst wrote:

> Updated  regrets.
>
> =====
>
> MINUTES OF JULY 25 TELECON
>
> Chair: Jim Hendler
> Scribe: Leo Obrst
>
> 1. ADMIN:
>
> 1.1) ROLL CALL
>
> Present:
>
> Buswell
> Carroll
> Connolly
> De Roo
> De Roure
> Dean
> Finin
> Gibbins
> Heflin
> Hellman
> Hendler
> Klein
> Marchiori
> McGuinness
> Obrst
> Patel-Schneider
> Michael Smith
> Stanton
> Stein
> Thompson
>
> Regrets:
>
> Jonathan Dale
> Larry Eshelman
> Pat Hayes
> Libby Miller
> Marwan Sabbouh
> Guus Schrieber
> Frank van Harmelen
> Evan Wallace
> Chris Welty
>
> 1.2) ACTION ITEM REVIEW
>
> ACTION: DanC to raise an issue wrt rdfs:subclassof and
> owl:subclassoff
> STATUS: DONE
>
> ACTION: Connoly to get the OK'd for the OWL URI by the W3C
> webmaster/director;
> STATUS: DONE
>
> ACTION: Pat will attempt to take abstract syntax, and Peter's MT and
> the mapping into RDF and will write a model theory in the Connolly
> style (i.e. as an extension to RDF MT) and see if he can identify
> the exact issues. Target deadline: three weeks (July 25). - change of
> due date to Aug 1.
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: Guus will generate a structure in which the examples should
> appear by July 11. Done
>
> This will also include one example.
> Evan Wallace and Larry Eshelman: contribute examples
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: Evan will writeup a description of a recent OMG meeting that
> concerned UML and OWL, and the process he is running at OMG, and
> will post that to the WG.
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION (all): send to WebOnt mailing list a short
> description of the tools you have available.
> or that you will use to help tools.
> STATUS: WITHDRAWN
>
> ACTION (Raphael): will make a large ontology available to test
> readers.
> STATUS: CONTINUED.
>
> ACTION: Hendler produce test for issue 4.2
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: ChrisW to propose resolution of 3.4 and 4.1
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: connolly review abstract syntax
> STATUS: DONE
>
> ACTION: chairs - find photo of face to face example from the
> discussion of model theory.
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: Dan C. to work with Pat H to reconcile the issues of missing
> discussion of model theory in the log
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: Jim H will set up a straw poll based on the offers - this
> will include choices of Dec/Jan and place
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: Deb - add "property" to make sure we are using same terms.
> STATUS: DONE
>
> ACTION: Deb to make sure names are same between her document and Mike's.
>
> STATUS: DONE
>
> ACTION: DanC to review Deb's final edits of feature document.
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: Mike will summarize changes in email to the list. (by next week)
>
> STATUS: CONTINUED
>
> ACTION: Peter - will review appendix C.
> STATUS: DONE
>
> ACTION: JimH to draft press release - solicits input ASAP from WG
> members.
> STATUS: WITHDRAWN. Maybe around next f2f. W3C needs 1 month notice.
>
> 1.3) FACE TO FACE UPDATES:
>
>   f2f4  update (Jeremy)
>
> Jeremy will give updates about hotels, etc. in 2 weeks.
> Web page: Dan will coordinate. F2F host will put up local web page.
>
> ACTION: Dan Connolly will set up F2F registering.
> ACTION: Jeremy will put up a web page by next telecon.
>
>   f2f5 update  (REMEMBER BIDS DUE BY THURS.)
>     Bids: U. Manchester
>           US NY region (IBM)
>           US DC region (DARPA/UMCP/UMBC - not confirmed)
>           US FL region (U W. Fl)
> NEW:      US DC/Boston region (MITRE)
>    straw poll to be held
>     date: Mid Jan (poss late Dec)
>
> Lynn: if we have 4 choices equally, would like to have eastern US as one
> choice.
> ACTION: Lynn and Dan to get on phone for details of straw poll.
> Jeremy: alternate between Europe and US?
> Jim: Jan is looking better than Dec. Will put on straw poll.
>
> 2) DOCUMENT UPDATE:
>   Status of three WDs
>
>    Features – Deb
> Deb: Action from f2f, all other actions done, don’t want to drop section
> 2 (per
> Peter’s request), did some other reorganization that Peter had
> requested.
> All edits are final.
> Formatting status: not validated fully yet.
> Dan is allowed to do edit markup.
>
>    Reference – Mike Dean
> Mike: ready to publish. A few comments yet to address, no text for class
>
> expressions. OWL link, examples. Latest RDF core decisions not yet made.
>
> Dan: XML syntax?
> Mike will leave these in. Maybe change to editorial note (Mike will do).
>
> Mike: will do final edits, will be done in next day or so. Cross-links
> not yet
> done, and status.
>
>    Abst Syntax – Peter
> Peter: No change since last Thurs. No IP policy yet for the WG (Dan will
> do?)
> Any resolutions made today will be incorporated.
> Dan: tomorrow is best guess for all 3 publications to be published.
> ACTION: Dan will send mail to the WG when W3C publishes the documents.
> ACTION: Jim will solicit reviews for appropriate working groups. By Aug.
> 15
>
>     Process issues (if any) – Dan
> Dan: has to point to patent disclosures, but since none yet, will point
> to
> nothing, but make sure if you have a patent in the works, notify DAN.
>
> 3) PROPOSAL TO CLOSE ISSUES 3.4 AND 4.1
>         (UniqueProperty and UnambiguousProperty)
>       Welty
>
> Proposal:
> OWL FunctionalProperty
> OWL InverseFunctionalProperty
>
> Many: Welty’s proposal is good.
> Jim: add 1-1 property?
> Peter: later
> Jim: straw poll: any objections? Mike: but can be 0-0 or 1-1.
> Resolution: unanimous. Adopted Chris Welty’s proposal. So, will go with
> what we
> have, not yet include 1-1.
> STATUS: RESOLVED.
>
> See Chris Welty’s proposals:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jul/0170.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jul/0169.html
>
> See Mike Smith’s Issues document:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I3.4-UnambiguousProperty
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I4.1-UniqueProp-BadName
>
> ACTION: Mike Smith will close this out.
> Jim: someone has to do the TEST case.
> ACTION: Jeremy to do TEST case.
> ACTION: Deb, Mike, Peter to reflect this change in their documents,
> prior to
> release.
>
> 4) PROPOSAL TO CLOSE ISSUE 2.4  (oneOf)
>
> Ian was invited to discuss this, but nothing much showed up yet.
> Deb: he is still working on this.
> Dan: cardinality and oneOf interaction test case? Has anyone else seen
> this?
> Jeremy: has seen some, look hairy.
> Jim: no one has suggested we don’t have oneOf. Should we remove? It’s
> currently
> heavily used.
>
> Straw Poll: No objections. No abstentions. PROPOSAL PASSES. Issue is
> CLOSED.
> STATUS: RESOLVED.
>
> ACTION: Jim to write up a test case.
>
> Should we have oneOf in OWL-Lite?
> Jeremy: Feature vs. Issue driven test cases?
> Dan: just use of oneOf. Entailment test.
> Jeremy: test cases to be in a hierarchy structure? Prefer to see
> feature-based
> test cases higher view.
> Jim: today we are closing everything that could affect the 3 docs. Next
> week,
> talk about next documents. August 15th: semantic issues. Probable cancel
> of Aug.
> 8th.
>
> 5) PROPOSAL TO CLOSE ISSUE 4.6 (equivalentTo)
>
> Jim: email looks like other opinions. Is there a consensus?
> Peter: 2 issues: 1) same individual as  (2 names denote same) implies
> same class
> as and same property as (follows RDF view). Same property does not
> denote same
> individual.
> Dan: doesn’t affect the documents.
> ACTION: Peter will send out longer note and people to reply. Peter: by
> next
> week.
> ACTION: Jim will REMOVE proposal to close issue.
>
> Class as instance discussion.
> Peter: model theory has a weak view of class as instance.
> Property defined-by attached to class. Average price property?
> First is not a property of the extension.
> Jim: can we close 4.6 because it’s subsumed by this issue (classes as
> instances). No, so just leave separate.
>
> 6) OPENING OF ISSUE 5.20 (SHOULD OWL PROVIDE SYNONYMS FOR RDF
> AND RDFS OBJECTS?)
>
> Jim: opening this issue, discuss, get feedback, send to email.
> Peter: nothing substantive; legalistic: D+O pulls into D+O namespace,
> but RDF
> will not pull into the RDF/S namespace (but RDF/S does not have
> capability).
>
> OWL:PROPERTY: same denotation? RDFS:PROPERTY? Not to have the former in
> the OWL
> namespace when they’re both equivalent.
> Issue: will RDF tool understand what OWL:PROPERTY is?
>
> Jim: at the last F2F, no resolution.
> Namespace of the identifier should be the definitive identifier. If we
> have a
> different model theory (different from RDF), then have a different
> namespace
> (i.e., OWL namespace).
> Do we need a separate model theory for OWL? Yes, for things not in the
> other
> language. If we extend RDF/s, need to have a model theory for this.
> Much discussion.
>
> 7) AOB
>    next telecon: Aug. 1
>    next scribe: Mike Smith
>
> Aug. 8 meeting: cancelled.
>
> --
> _____________________________________________
> 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

--
_____________________________________________
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 Monday, 29 July 2002 13:10:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:51 GMT