W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > March 2003

MINUTES WEBONT TELECONF 27/02/2003

From: Jerome Euzenat <Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 10:18:40 +0100
Message-Id: <a05200f02ba88cdd037fa@[194.199.20.189]>
To: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>


WEB ONTOLOGY WORKING GROUP
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
February 27 2003

Chair: Jim Hendler
Scribe: Jean-François Baget

IRC LOG: http://www.w3.org/2003/02/27-webont-irc

1) ADMIN (15 min)

1.1 role call

Jean-Francois Baget, Jeremy Carroll, Mike Smith, Peter 
Patel-Schneider, Ziv Hellman, Herman Ter Horst, Ora Lassila, Tim 
Finin, yassar, Nicholas Gibbins, Ian Horrocks, Jim Hendler, Evan 
Wallace, Jeff Heflin, Hori Masahiro, Mike Dean, Jos De Roo, Marwan 
Sabbouh, Massimo Marchiori

regrets: Schreiber, Connolly, Bechhofer, Obrst

1.2 Approval of Minutes of last telecon

PROPOSED to accept the following as a true record of the Feb 20 telecon
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0348.html

RESOLUTION: approved

1.3 agenda ammendments

1.4 telecon schedule

Next telecon - March 13th  (note - no telecon March 6!)
Next Scribe - Herman Ter Horst

2.0 Action review

NOTE: Action list update is forthcomming, all items prefixed by "==" 
have not been recorded in these preliminary minutes

* Tech plenary
Chairs: Agenda needed for f2f plenary.
DONE - Hendler
Chairs: speaker phone at Tech plenary on Tuesday
DONE - Hendler

* Relation between RDFS and OWL Lite NEW ACTION: Jeremy to update his 
discussion of this issue, give quick comments.
== NEW ACTION: Guus to review, add to the Reference document as Appendix.
== NEW ACTION: Deb to add a paragraph to Overview doc.
== NEW ACTION: Jim, Pat to review

NEW ACTION: Relation between RDFS and OWL Lite: Jeremy write 
something for the coordinating group

*  RESPONSE TO RDFCore LC
Guus summary review of RDF Schema doc as proposal for the WG
DONE
Jim to send comments to RDF CORE
DONE

* OWL DL syntax
== NEW ACTION: Mike Smith to put (message Jan 04089) in issues document.
== NEW ACTION: Ian, Jeremy, Peter, Pat, Sean, Guus, Jos will work as task
force on discussion and return in 1 week with progress report

* DOCUMENT STATUS
Evan and Mike Dean to take MIME type and produce MIME type doc.
ACTION CONTINUED.

NEW ACTION: pfps to send Mike S. answer re: annotation questions

3.0 DOCUMENTS

3.1 Congratulations to those Editors who got their LCC drafts in on time

Overview - http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsis.htm

S&AS -
http://www-db.research.bell-labs.com/user/pfps/owl/

Use Cases -
http://www.cse.lehigh.edu/~heflin/webont/reqdoc/

Guide -
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/Guide.html

Requirements -
http://www.cse.lehigh.edu/~heflin/webont/reqdoc/

3.2 Status reports from those who didn't
Guide
Reference
Test

**   3.2.1 Datatype "conformance" issues - what goes in test?

Discussion about datatype conformance:
Questions:
1) what datatypes reasoners an handle ?
2) With what datatypes can they be sound and complete ?
3) Axioms required to start ?
Answer:
1) datatypes implementation issue, basic inheritance mechanism enough 
at the moment.
2) Contradictory with current sound and complete definition
3) New axioms required for each new datatype
Support for date, integers ?
Example of sound and complete reasoner for OWL lite without 
datatypes. What's is status ?
Proposal: support primitive datatypes, but not constructed ones.

NEW ACTION: Ian will look at section 4.2.2 of Test editor's draft and 
propose some wording for what is expected of datatypes

3.3 Special thanks to Mike Smith

Updated Issues List:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html


4.0 Discussion of DL Syntax issue (remaining time except for 2-3 minutes)

4.1  owl:foobar  (where foobar not in spec)

Summary of discussion about the treatment of an unknown element in 
the owl namespace:
For the moment, is it treated as a RDF triple ? (Noise problems)
It should be possible to give a warning then proceed. But, that 
should be reflected in the testcase doc.
Proposed: OWL will use the same solution for unused terms in the OWL 
namespace that RDF currently uses for the Rdf namespace (i.e. 
OWL:foober may be used in an ontology, but should generate a warning).
RESOLUTION: owl:foobar when foobar not known should generate a warning

4.2 everything else in that issue

Peter Patel-Schneider has written a message comparing S&AS with 
Jeremy's proposed syntax:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0373.html
  We will go through this point by point to get WG inputs w/respect to 
these differences
Received on Monday, 3 March 2003 04:20:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:58 GMT