- From: Changhai Ke <cke@ilog.fr>
- Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:30:32 +0200
- To: "Christian de Sainte Marie" <csma@ilog.fr>, "RIF WG" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Hello, I plan not to join the first part, I think that I won't contribute so much. On the other hand, I'm very interested in the "Frame vs. objects discussion". So I thought about joining the telecon for this topic, let's say at 17:45, is this time fine? Thanks. Changhai -----Original Message----- From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Christian de Sainte Marie Sent: lundi 13 octobre 2008 17:19 To: RIF WG Subject: [Admin] Agenda for RIF telecon 14 October AGENDA Teleconference W3C Rules Interchange Format (RIF) Working Group 14 October 2008 North America and Europe are in the summer time: 1500 UTC, 0800 (West US) 1100 (East US) 1600 (London) 1700 (Paris) Duration: *90 min* *Agenda summary* 1. Admin (5 mn) *PROPOSED:* accept minutes of telecon October 7 [1] *PROPOSED:* accept minutes of F2F11 [2] [3] 2. Liaison (5 mn) 3. Public comments [4] (5 mn) 4. Action review [5] [6] (5 mn) 5. Review action 577 (weak VS strong safety) [7] [8] (10 mn) 6. Test Cases [9] [10] (30 mn) *PROPOSED:* Approve some test cases (to be determined during the telecon) 7. PRD/BLD/FLD: Frames VS objects [11] [12] (30 mn) 8. AOB [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/att-0017/2008- 10-07-minutes.html [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-26 [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-27 [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/ [5] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/open [6] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/pendingreview [7] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/577 [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html [9] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/TCS [10] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Aug/0030.html and following thread [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0031.html ------------------- *Detailed agenda* Bridges: +1.617.761.6200 (US), +33 4 89 06 34 99 (F) or +44.117.370.6152 (GB) Conference code: 74394# ('RIFWG') IRC Chat: irc:irc.w3.org (port 6665), #rif Web-based IRC (member-only): [http://www.w3.org/2001/01/cgi-irc] *PLEASE POST REGRETS* TO [http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/TeleconRegrets] Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie Scribe: Stuart Taylor See Scribes List [http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/ScribesList] Please note that RIF WG telecons are for attendance only by Working Group Participants and guests invited by the chairs. 1. ADMIN (5 min) - Roll call (please read before telecon the following) RIF Regrets Policy: [http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/RegretsPolicy] Using Zakim: [http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/UsingZakim] Telecon Etiquette: [http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/TeleconEtiquette] Action/Issues Tracker: [http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/] - Agenda amendments PROPOSED: accept minutes of telecon October 7 [1] PROPOSED: accept minutes of F2F11 [2] [3] 2. Liaison (5 min) - Review active liaisons: PRR (OMG) - Paul Vincent OWL (W3C) - Sandro Hawke HCLS (W3C IG) - Adrian Paschke 3. Public comments (5 mn) - Status of responses to public comments [4] 4. Action review (5 mn) - Review actions due [5] and pending review [6] 5. Review action 577 (Write down the definitions of strict and weak safety of a ruleset) [7] (10 mn) - Review Axel's action (see also Axel's email [8] and following thread) 6. Test Cases [9] [10] (30 mn) PROPOSED: Approve some test cases (to be determined during the telecon) 7. Frames (in BLD/FLD) VS objects (in PRD) [11] [12] (30 mn) - Gary raised [11] the issue of the difference in te semantics of frames, as adopted in BLD and FLD, and the semantics of objects, as used in many PR systems (essentially: properties in frames are multi-valued and attributes in objects are single-valued). There have been suggestions, recently (e.g. [12]) that the cost of using frames to represent objects in PRD might overweight the benefits, which is a clear threat to the unity of RIF and the interoperability between different branches. - The objectives of the discussion are to clarify, in particular: * what is the actual impact of that difference? * to what degree PRD and BLD/FLD can use different semantics, and the interoperability still be preserved (by some kind of semantic or syntactic trick)? * if not, what would be the impact of changing the semantics of frames in BLD/FLD to an object-like one (regardless of the impact on LC)? 8. AOB - Next meeting: 21 October 2008 (pick scribe!)
Received on Monday, 13 October 2008 16:31:17 UTC