- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:52:58 +0100
- To: leora@cs.nyu.edu
- CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org
For the records: There were some small changes on DTB and some discussions about it: 1) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0002.html 2) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0011.html 3) I think I asked in the last TC whether we can/shall change the non-uniformity of the list-functions in DTB, which have a different format (informal mappings only) to all the other functions and predicates in DTB. I could try to tackle that, but not before two weeks from now. With the resolution to go to CR, should I consider these resolved/accepted? Axel p.s.: Belated regrets due to arrival of our child ;-). Leora Morgenstern wrote: > > Attached are the minutes of the 1 September 2009 telecon. > > Please let me know of any corrections. > > Best regards, > Leora > > > > -- > Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D. > Visiting Research Scientist, Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences > http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > W3C <http://www.w3.org/> > > > RIF Telecon 1-Sept-09 > > > 01 Sep 2009 > > Agenda > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0037.html> > > See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-irc> > > > Attendees > > Present > Harold Boley, Jos de Bruijn, Mark Dean, John Hall, Sandro Hawke, > Stella Mitchell, Leora Morgenstern, Christian de Sainte Marie, > Chris Welty > Regrets > Michael Kifer > Chair > Chris Welty > Scribe > Leora Morgenstern > > > Contents > > * Topics <#agenda> > 1. admin <#item01> > 2. Liaison <#item02> > 3. Action Review <#item03> > 4. Exit Criteria <#item04> > 5. Publications <#item05> > 6. Implementations <#item06> > 7. Test Cases <#item07> > * Summary of Action Items <#ActionSummary> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > admin > > <ChrisW> Scribe: LeoraMorgenstern > > > Liaison > > sandro, chris: OWL, like RIF, relies on XSD 1.1., and that is still in > candidate recommendation. > > sandro: prognosis for XML schema datatypes is not promising. > ... OWL will have an appendix referring to XML schema datatypes. > ... and RIF can do something similar. > > <ChrisW> next item > > Nothing else in liaison. > > <ChrisW> next item > > <sandro> *ACTION:* sandro to make sure if OWL does a normative > appendix for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also > work for RIF. [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action01] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-903 - Make sure if OWL does a normative > appendix for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also > work for RIF. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-09-08]. > > > Action Review > > <ChrisW> close action-902 > > <trackbot> ACTION-902 Look at message from Nick B. and check FLD > schema closed > > close action-898 > > <trackbot> ACTION-898 Answer faq 3.9 closed > > > Exit Criteria > > <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Exit_Criteria > > <johnhall> zakim ??p0 is me > > <johnhall> P0 > > <johnhall> zakim P0 is me > > <johnhall> Thanks Jos > > Chris: The exit criteria for RIF are listed at > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Exit_Criteria > > Sandro: I am concerned that Chris's revision to my proposal --- > namely, reducing the requirement from implementing a dialect of FLD to > merely specifying the dialect --- is putting the bar too low. > ... I don't think it's too high a burden to require an implementation. > > Chris: I think it's an unnecessary burden. > ... Regarding Sandro's point that someone can just flip through FLD > and figure out how to have some sort of (trivial?) instantiation: > Someone can also just say that they have an implementation. > > Sandro: Shouldn't they at least have to show that they can read and > write XML? > > Chris: Implementation tests the dialect, not FLD. > > Sandro: I won't object; just wanted to make the point. > > Harold: Should we also require a syntax and semantics for the dialect > specification? > > Chris thereupon made that change to the Exit Criteria. > > <ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799 > <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799> > as RIF CR Exit criteria > > <josb> +1 > > <StellaMitchell> +1 > > <Harold> +1 > > <ChrisW> +1 > > <sandro> +1 > > <LeoraMorgenstern> +1 > > <johnhall> +1 > > <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799 > <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799> > as RIF CR Exit criteria > > > Publications > > Chris: Editors need to make changes to their Last Call documents: BLD, > PRD, > > , SWC, FLD, Core > ... Needs to be done by next week's meeting. > ... Assignments: Jos, SWC; Chris, > > ; Christian, PRD; Harold, BLD, FLD, Core. > > Sandro: Even if no changes have been made, one needs to note in the > document that there have been no changes since Last Call draft. > > <sandro> target publication date: Setp 17 > > <sandro> try to approve WD pubs of Test and UCR on Sept 15. > > <sandro> PROPOSED: Our Last Call drafts (Core, BLD, PRD, DTB, SWC, and > FLD) are ready to be published as Candidate Recommendations > > <ChrisW> +1 > > <sandro> +1 (W3C) > > <ChrisW> (IBM) > > <Harold> +1 (NRC) > > <josb> +1 (FUB) > > <johnhall> +1 (OMG) > > <StellaMitchell> +1 (self) > > <LeoraMorgenstern> +1 (self) > > <sandro> RESOLVED: Our Last Call drafts (Core, BLD, PRD, DTB, SWC, and > FLD) are ready to be published as Candidate Recommendations > > Sandro: Note that the statement of no changes or changes to last call > drafts is CRITICAL PATH, and therefore should be done today or tomorrow. > > <sandro> "Change since the 3 July draft...." or "Changes since the > Second Last Call draft of 3 July..." > > <josb> tomorrow is fine for SWC changes statement > > > Implementations > > Chris: Since we have moved last call documents to candidate > recommendation, we are now in the call for implementations period. > ... We had originally talked about a two-month period for implementations. > ... To get out of CR, we need implementations. > > Sandro: Yes, those are in the exit criteria. > > <sandro> > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/How_to_Submit_an_Implementation_Report > > Sandro: we want to point people to the above wiki page. > > Chris: Now is the time to follow up with people who indicated in the > comments that they would be interested in providing an implementation. > ... We need to get commitments from these people that they will do > this in this period. > ... Let's begin by making a list of people who will do implementations. > > csma: ILOG is working on an implementation. A month ago, we had a > first prototype running, so we probably have more going on now. > > sandro: I don't know if I'll get one done. > > Chris: Someone in the XML group at IBM made a RIF-based rule storage > system. Really a demo of XML X-query technology, but they did take > some rules and translated them to RIF, and stored them in RIF-XML, and > queried them. > ... question: does that count as a RIF implementation? > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action02] > > <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - try > > Sandro: Mike Dean has an implementation. > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Chris to try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action03] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-904 - Try to dig up XML RIF store [on > Christopher Welty - due 2009-09-08]. > > mdean: RIF implementation is in progress. > > Chris: Silk will be an implementation of BLD. > > csma: Gary mentioned he was doing something, but I don't know the > status of it now. > ... will send Gary a message, asking for status. > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to ask Gary about status of > implementation [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action04] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-905 - Ask Gary about status of > implementation [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08]. > > csma: I think Adrian is working with tibco on an implementation of PRD. > > <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group > > Sandro: maybe we should have a RIF Dev mailing list, similar to OWL dev? > > <sandro> *ACTION:* sandro request creation of public-rif-dev [recorded > in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action05] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-906 - Request creation of public-rif-dev [on > Sandro Hawke - due 2009-09-08]. > > Chris: Rolf Gruetter has said that his group at WSL needs to have > disjunction in rule heads. > > Note: Gruetter did not say anything about his group actually > developing an implementation > > csma: OntoBroker has some sort of implementation of BLD > > Chris: Alexander Riazanov working on an implementation that converts > BLD to TPTP. > > Harold: He has been on vacation; but I'll try to talk to him about that. > ... There needs to be some web page on implementation of OntoBroker > > Sandro: Or better yet, send in an implementation report, as my wiki > page specifies. > ... Doing that is very quick. > > Chris: Currently the public information about OntoBroker's > implementation is inconsistent. ontoprise web page says there's a RIF > implementation and links to OntoBroker web page, but OntoBroker's web > page says nothing. > ... What about Tom Gordon. Is he an implementor? > > Harold: I don't think he's an implementor. He has a system LKIF, which > is for legal knowledge. > ... I don't believe he will implement RIF: he has more of a > theoretical interest in whether one can represent legal knowledge > using RIF. > > <sandro> Chime > > <sandro> Chimezie Ogbuji > > Discussion also on Adreas Abecker's comments and Chimezie Ogbuji's > comments. > > <ChrisW> Nick Bassiliades > > Harold: Nick Bassiliades has been following RIF; does defeasible > rules; unclear as to whether he'll actually do an implementation of RIF. > > <sandro> CR dreadline Oct 23rd, friday before the conferences.... > > Sandro: Let's make deadline for implementations October 23, so people > will be able to announce it before the rules conferences. > > Chris: We'll revisit this topic at each telecon. > > csma: will restart work on RIF XML soon. > > > Test Cases > > Chris: Axel had made an all built-ins test case > ... And that test case seems to indeed include /all/ built-ins > > Stella: I think it would be better to split it up somehow. > > Chris: Perhaps by data-type? > ... There are definitely some typos, like "listeral" instead of "literal" > > Stella: Perhaps organize it by string predicates, number predicates, etc? > > <josb> (I wanted to say exactly what Chris just said) > > Sandro: what's the problem with it being so big? > > Stella: If it fails, it's hard to figure out why. > ... can we split it by positive guards, negative guards, etc? > > Sandro: We can group it by the things people are most likely to implement > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Stella to refactor All Builtins testcase [recorded > in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action06] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-907 - Refactor All Builtins testcase [on > Stella Mitchell - due 2009-09-08]. > > Stella: I can refactor the all built-ins case > ... There are all sorts of issues still to be dealt with, with respect > to the test cases. > ... Especially with all the changes in the documents, the > specifications, etc. > ... We need more than 15 minutes to go through this. > > <StellaMitchell> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jul/0026.html > > Chris: Let's make this a priority for the next telecon, since the set > of test cases will be very important to the implementors. > ... What do we do with unapproved test cases? Require changes? Drop them? > ... We do need an Assert/Retract case > > csma: We need an Assert /Retract case that is different from a Modify. > ... I don't have a case in mind, but it probably should be a negative > case; that you can't assert something about an object that you've > retracted. > ... I had a discussion with Adrian about this. He initially didn't > agree; then we had a discussion, including Changhai Ke and Gary, who > agreed with me. But Adrian has not replied, and therefore there has > been no conclusion. > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to fix/update AssertRetract test case > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action07] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-908 - Fix/update AssertRetract test case [on > Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08]. > > csma: I need to get a consensus on this, and then either modify the > test case myself, or get someone to do it. > ... I think the assert test case is fine. > ... However, there is no XML for it. > > Chris: do we have anything to generate XML for PRD? > > csma: Not yet. > > <StellaMitchell> jacc > > Stella: can the XML be generated automatically using a tool like jacc? > > Chris: What about the other PRD test cases? Won't this be a problem > for all of them? > > <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to check into XML syntax for PRD test > cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action08] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-909 - Check into XML syntax for PRD test > cases [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08]. > > Chris: 2 remaining open issues in Working Group: > > <ChrisW> PROPOSED: close issue-37 as it is addressed by the draft note > on RIF combination with XML Data > > <StellaMitchell> +1 > > <ChrisW> +1 > > <johnhall> +1 > > <csma> +1 > > <sandro> +1 > > <josb> +1 > > <mdean> +1 > > <ChrisW> RESOLVED: close issue-37 as it is addressed by the draft note > on RIF combination with XML Data > > <ChrisW> PROPOSED: close issue-38 as it is addressed by the draft note > on RIF combination with XML Data > > <ChrisW> +1 > > <csma> +1 > > <sandro> +1 > > <mdean> +1 > > <johnhall> +1 > > <LeoraMorgenstern> +1 > > <josb> +1 > > <ChrisW> RESOLVED: close issue-38 as it is addressed by the draft note > on RIF combination with XML Data > > <StellaMitchell> +1 > > <ChrisW> NEXT MEETING IN TWO WEEKS! > > > Summary of Action Items > > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Chris to try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action03] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to ask Gary about status of implementation > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action04] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to check into XML syntax for PRD test > cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action08] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to fix/update AssertRetract test case > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action07] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* sandro request creation of public-rif-dev [recorded > in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action05] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* sandro to make sure if OWL does a normative appendix > for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also work for > RIF. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action01] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Stella to refactor All Builtins testcase [recorded > in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action06] > *[NEW]* *ACTION:* try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action02] > > [End of minutes] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl > <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> > version 1.135 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>) > $Date: 2009/09/01 16:31:33 $ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Scribe.perl diagnostic output > > [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.] > This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 > Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/> > > Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) > > Succeeded: s/tipco/tibco/ > Found Scribe: LeoraMorgenstern > Inferring ScribeNick: LeoraMorgenstern > Default Present: Leora_Morgenstern, ChrisW, Sandro, Harold, Stella_Mitchell, +39.047.101.aaaa, josb, johnhall, csma, Mike_Dean > Present: Leora_Morgenstern ChrisW Sandro Harold Stella_Mitchell +39.047.101.aaaa josb johnhall csma Mike_Dean > Regrets: MichaelKifer > Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0037.html > Got date from IRC log name: 01 Sep 2009 > Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html > People with action items: chris christian sandro stella try > > WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. > You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. > > > > [End of scribe.perl > <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> > diagnostic output] -- Dr. Axel Polleres Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 17:54:16 UTC