- From: Leora Morgenstern <leora@cs.nyu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:22:53 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "Axel Polleres" <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Cc: leora@cs.nyu.edu, public-rif-wg@w3.org
What exactly does an addendum to the minutes mean? Can you give examples in previous minutes? Also, why put this as an addendum into the Sept. 1 minutes if indeed it was discussed on August 25? I would be happy to make the changes; I'm just not sure that the discussion would fit into the Sept. 1 minutes, especially since both the referenced emails, and the threads they engendered, don't seem to have any postings between August 17 and September 15. Leora > wasn't meant to be put into the minutes, but indeed as > an addendum to the minutes... I think all the issues have been > discussed thereafter. > > Axel > > p.s.: regrets for today's call. > > On 29 Sep 2009, at 14:50, Leora Morgenstern wrote: > >> Axel, >> >> > 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 checked the minutes of the August 25 telecon (which you scribed), >> and >> indeed, it seems that you did bring this up. >> >> However, I have no recollection of this being discussed at the Sept. 1 >> telecon, nor do my notes reflect it, so unless I hear from someone >> that >> they do remember this being discussed at the Sept. 1 telecon, I >> think it >> is best not to add this discussion to the minutes. >> >> > 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 ;-). >> >> I have added you to the regrets list. >> Congratulations! >> >> > >> > 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/ >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D. >> http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora >> >> > > -- > Dr. Axel Polleres > Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, > Galway > email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/ > > > > > -- Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D. http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 14:23:42 UTC