- From: Hassan Aït-Kaci <hak@ilog.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:13:49 -0700
- To: W3C RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Hassan Aït-Kaci wrote: > Dear RIF members, > > Here are the minutes of today's telecon for which I was the scribe. > Please review and send me your comments by the end of Friday August > 22, as I will be taking off Aug. 23-31 on vacation. > > NB: there were three unidentified callers: > > +1.914.784.aaaa > +0493516aabb > +1.503.533.aacc +1.503.533.aacc has been identified (Gary Hallmark - thanks). The other two, please claim your number (esp. if your name is not listed). > Please identify yourselves. Also: there were no regrets posted for this meeting even though is was a small one (15 attendees). Vacation, I know. But still: no posted regrets. -hak > Thanks. > > -hak > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > W3C <http://www.w3.org/> > > > - DRAFT - > > > RIF Telecon 19-Aug-08 > > > 19 Aug 2008 > > Agenda <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0078.html> > > See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-irc> > > > Attendees > > Present > Mike_Dean, josb, MichaelKifer, Sandro, JeffP, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, > +1.914.784.aaaa, ChrisW, Stella_Mitchell, LeoraMorgenstern, > Dave_Reynolds, +0493516aabb, AdrianP, AxelPolleres, +1.503.533.aacc, > GaryHallmark > Regrets > Chair > Chris Welty > Scribe > Hassan_Ait-Kaci > > > Contents > > * Topics <#agenda> > 1. Admin <#item01> > 2. Liaison <#item02> > 3. Action review <#item03> > 4. F2F11 <#item04> > 5. Core <#item05> > 6. Test Cases <#item06> > 7. External review <#item07> > * Summary of Action Items <#ActionSummary> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Admin > > <ChrisW> Scribe: Hassan > > <ChrisW> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/att-0075/12-August-08-rif-minutes-revised.htm > > <ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept minutes of Aug 12 telecon > > <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept minutes of Aug 12 telecon > > > Liaison > > Sandro: OWL WG meeting a few weeks ago: go to last call in Oct 08. Draft > due next month. > > <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec > > <sandro> see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-text/ > > Axel: reporting on rdf:text > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* chris to figure out how to link to rdf:text comments > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action01] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-559 - Figure out how to link to rdf:text > comments [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-08-26]. > > <AxelPolleres> sandro will add a link to > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec with the > mailinglist address to solicit feedback? > > Axel: still open issues remaining; on his (Axel's) side nothing new to tell > > > Action review > > <AdrianP> > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/PRD#Rules_instantiation:_INSTANTIATE > > <AxelPolleres> I completed ACTION-552, see > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0074.html > > <AdrianP> currently the semantics does not account for pattern formula > associated with an enclosing Forall > > > F2F11 > > No suggestion for hotels > > ChrisW: try hotels in Brooklyn or even Queens using public trans. to get > lower rates > > > Core > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* chris to put DTB review on agenda for next week > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action02] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-560 - Put DTB review on agenda for next week > [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-08-26]. > > <ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0067.html > > ChrisW: What should CORE be? > > BLD intersected PRD = CORE? > > DaveReynolds and GaryHallmark agree on this def > > ChrisW: Assume this is so (CORE *is* the intersection) - how do we > define this language? > > GaryHallmark: decidability or tractability issues for CORE are not > relevant for RIF > > ChrisW: What does such an intersection look like? > > GaryHallmark: we could extract the syntax from the common grammar rules > > <AdrianP> core production rule syntax, i.e. without negation; only > assert in the head and without the special pattern formula in the forall > > GaryHallmark: intended semantics overlap is a fuzzy concept; make things > that are relevant or not more explicit > > AdrianP: Suggests a specific language... will work it out (for the > condition language) > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* apaschke to document the BLD/PRD syntax intersection > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action05] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-561 - Document the BLD/PRD syntax intersection > [on Adrian Paschke - due 2008-08-26]. > > <AdrianP> yes > > ChrisW: Handling of external functions; skolem functions as well; > subclassing also > > DaveReynolds: prefers that CORE stay minimal and not have membership and > subclass > > ChrisW: Who would disagree as a maximal intersection of PRB and BLD? > > Jos: how useful a language would that be? > > ChrisW: a maximal intersection of PRB and BLD would make interchange easier > > Jos: yes, but there may be other uses for CORE > > ChrisW: so it should be easy to "implement" > > <AdrianP> other uses e.g. the integration of CORE + ontologies. > Decidability is often a requirement for many application scenarios > > <GaryHallmark> PRD has no equality in the head, so neither does Core > > ChrisW: Jos would an Easy-To-Implement core bigger or less? > > Jos: it would be less > > GaryHallmark: it would be good to itemize "things" that make this hard > ... disjunction? > > <AdrianP> disjunction in the body can be split into two rules, so there > is no need to have it in Core > > DaveReynolds describes features that he'd wish for CORE (a la Jena) > > ChrisW: another aspect is to relate it to existing languages > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Dave to open CORE issues on tracker [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action06] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-562 - Open CORE issues on tracker [on Dave > Reynolds - due 2008-08-26]. > > ChrisW: More on Core? > > No more on core > > > Test Cases > > <AdrianP> the discussion points: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0056.html > > ChrisW: shooting for one-month after the F2F to have the final draft ready > > <StellaMitchell> yes > > <StellaMitchell> about how many test cases by then? > > ChrisW: review of the approach? > > Discussing format of the document > > <AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case > > StellaMitchell: Test Case Number of Results as an example > > AdrianP: explains what a query is in the context on the test case > > Jos: Why do you need such a concept as a "query"? > > <AxelPolleres> I made some comments on test cases and "query" answers in > my mail. > > Jos: proposes a simpler scheme instead based on logical entailment > > ChrisW: we have not defined what a query is > > <AxelPolleres> +1 to jos because enumerating "answers" is not possible, > especially if there are infinite answers. > > Jos: exactly: so better not use it > > AdrianP: we need it because entailment is not enough in certain test cases > > Jos: argues against the need > > <AxelPolleres> ... also, we'd need a defined output format, etc. > > ChrisW: I think Adrian is referring more to a unit test > > <AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case > > ChrisW: does not like the arrow of the frame notation > > (Test case Positive Entailment Test) > > ChrisW: understands the notation Premiss -> Conclusion > > <AxelPolleres> no. > > <AxelPolleres> no arbitrary condition... > > ChrisW: hesitant to define a whole new language for just test cases > > <AxelPolleres> ... I was suggesting such more general built-ins some > time ago. > > <DaveReynolds> positive and negative entailment tests seem like the main > ones to me > > <GaryHallmark> can a BLD expert comment on the "answer" to > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/PositiveEntailment_Entail_everything > > Axel: agrees - need a new language for the queries, the output, etc ... > > ChrisW: try to focus on entailment > > StellaMitchell: question on the exact nature of the test cases > > <josb> Gary: Indeed, A(t), for any ground term t, is entailed > > ChrisW: test cases should use things that are expressible in BLD > > <josb> If you say everything is in A, you can derive that everything is in A > > ChrisW: let's keep it simple > > <AxelPolleres> I would have more comments when it comes to test cases > for core... but I don't know whether this is in scope of the discussion > now and whether I haven't said all in the mails yet on this topic. > > ChrisW: Jos and Michael - please think up some test cases for BLD > > Jos: also w/ RDF and OWL - will do > > <StellaMitchell> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC_test1 > > ChrisW: anyone else please as well > > <AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Built-Ins_numeric_add > > <AdrianP> a test case for each DTB built-in > > <josb> many > > StellaMitchell: do we need things like shown in "Built-Ins numeric add" > test case? > > ChrisW: this looks more like what I was imagining ... > > StellaMitchell: do we need to verify that all the builtins are implemented? > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* chris to add "test case for every builtin?" to issues > list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action07] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-563 - Add \"test case for every builtin?\" to > issues list [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-08-26]. > > <AdrianP> usually test cases a simple, at least from the point of view > of test-driven development in agile programming > > <ChrisW> areck jos > > Jos: wonders if test cases for consistency checking are needed? > > <josb> "a"="b" > > <AxelPolleres> jos, could you specify an example for where builtins > cause inconsistency?!? > > <AdrianP> beside entailment tests we currently have syntax tests > > <AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Negative_Syntax_free_vars > > ChrisW and Axel do not believe so > > StellaMitchell: it was question to have some consistency checks where > they are needed > > <AdrianP> I listed some categories of potential test cases here > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Test#Categories_of_RIF_Test_Cases > > <josb> Axel: currently not sure whether there is anything besides > equality that can cause inconsistency, but I suspect there is > > Sandro: agrees that as much consistency check should be done (necessary > conditions, not sufficient) > > <AdrianP> inconsistency e.g. in PRD due to negation > > Sandro: discusses the format of the tests (for nested tables) and how to > simplify it > > AdrianP: asks a question about editing the test cases > ... using a standard syntax or XML > > StellaMitchell: yes we need an official format > > <GaryHallmark> stella: nice to be able to enter tests in presentation > syntax and then auto convert to XML > > <StellaMitchell> did Hassan write a program to convert PS to XML? > > Sandro: discusses how to organize the wiki to automate all this > ... using RDF data and XHTML tables > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* hassan to finish PS to XML conversion based on LC BLD > grammar [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action08] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-564 - Finish PS to XML conversion based on LC > BLD grammar [on Hassan Ait-Kaci - due 2008-08-26]. > > Sandro: discussing using Pres. Syntax and then generate XML form > > ChrisW: how do we ensure that all versions of the same syntax are kept > consistent with one another? > ... the idea is to keep all the wiki versions of the same thing be kept > consistent (in PS or XML) > > Sandro: there are ways to do that ... > > ChrisW: test metadata and the submission process? > > AdrianP: describes the current submission process ... > > ChrisW: what about an editorial process? > > AdrianP: yes > > ChrisW: how - email? wiki? > > <LeoraMorgenstern> I think email submission is fine. > > Sandro: not sure of ways to do that ... > > <LeoraMorgenstern> If it's emailed to the WG, we will have a record of > it, but still not allow access to the wiki. > > Sandro: ... from the wiki > > <LeoraMorgenstern> In any case, we have to vet and modify the examples, > so there will be work involved in any case with exernal submissions. > > Sandro: let us use email for now > > <LeoraMorgenstern> I agree Sandro; I don't think we'll get many email > submissions > > ChrisW: we'll review this again next week > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* sandro to get CVS access for TCG [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action09] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-565 - Get CVS access for TCG [on Sandro Hawke > - due 2008-08-26]. > > ChrisW: giving a pat on the back of Adrian et al... > > > External review > > <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_PPS4 > > ChrisW: external review from Peter Patel-Schneider > > <ChrisW> who is on the phone? > > Jos: perhaps Michael should respond > > <sandro> grrr > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Chris to ask MK to look at PFPS4 [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action10] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-566 - Ask MK to look at PFPS4 [on Christopher > Welty - due 2008-08-26]. > > <AdrianP> ok > > <StellaMitchell> ok > > <sandro> Is this page public? http://www.w3.org/Systems/Accounts/w3t/ > > ChrisW: saying something wise ... ;-) > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* chris to ask axel to look at 2cnd to last comment on > PFPS4 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action11] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-567 - Ask axel to look at 2cnd to last comment > on PFPS4 [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-08-26]. > > <AdrianP> Sandro, no it is not public > > <josb> +1 > > +1 to adjourn > > > Summary of Action Items > > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Adrian to document the BLD/PRD syntax intersection > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action04] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* AdrianP to document the BLD/PRD syntax intersection > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action03] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* apaschke to document the BLD/PRD syntax intersection > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action05] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* chris to add "test case for every builtin?" to issues > list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action07] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* chris to ask axel to look at 2cnd to last comment on > PFPS4 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action11] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Chris to ask MK to look at PFPS4 [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action10] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* chris to figure out how to link to rdf:text comments > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action01] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* chris to put DTB review on agenda for next week > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action02] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Dave to open CORE issues on tracker [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action06] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* hassan to finish PS to XML conversion based on LC BLD > grammar [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action08] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* sandro to get CVS access for TCG [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2008/08/19-rif-minutes.html#action09] > > [End of minutes] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl > <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> > version 1.133 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>) > $Date: 2008/08/19 16:26:45 $ > -- Hassan Aït-Kaci * ILOG, Inc. - Product Division R&D http://koala.ilog.fr/wiki/bin/view/Main/HassanAitKaci
Received on Wednesday, 20 August 2008 23:15:37 UTC