See also: IRC log
<ChrisW> MInutes for June 23: http://www.w3.org/2009/06/23-rif-minutes.html
<ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept June 23 meeting minutes
<josb> Hey, that was my birthday!
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept June 23 meeting minutes
<ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-rif-minutes.html
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept Aug 25 meeting minutes
<ChrisW> ACTION: leora update Sept 1 minutes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-910 - Update Sept 1 minutes [on Leora Morgenstern - due 2009-09-22].
ChrisW: Sandro, update on OWL?
Sandro: RIF and OWL 2 both use
xsd 1.1, xsd 1.1 looks like won't get out of CR until Jan next
year
... this is a problem and we might have found an acceptable
compromise:
...OWL will refer normatively to xsd 1.0 as
ammeded by 1.1, and until such time as 1.1 become a
recommendation any features of OWL that depend on it are
optional
ChrisW: Will those items be called out explictly?
Sandro: No
ChrisW: Is it OK for RIF to go to PR if xsd 1.1 is in PR?
Sandro: Yes
... above plan with respect to to OWL should work for RIF too
Christian: Sandro, did you say we are not likely to go to rec before January?
Sandro: Yes, but it could likely be sooner also
ChrisW: We still plan to leave the CR
deadline where we originally set it -- even though the
beginning was pushed back a week
... ....it's near the end of October, and so four weeks is
reasonable
... if we don't get the required implementations, we'll have to
extend
Sandro: We use xpath heavily, so xpath people may have comments on the way we are using them
action 909 continued
<ChrisW> close action-905
<trackbot> ACTION-905 Ask Gary about status of implementation closed
action 904 continued
action-903 continued
close action-901
<trackbot> ACTION-901 Contact WL for response closed
<ChrisW> ACTION: gary to respond to laun [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-911 - Respond to laun [on Gary Hallmark - due 2009-09-22].
close action-900
<trackbot> ACTION-900 Update with text and examples by end of Aug (XML data document) closed
<ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_FAQ
close action-897
<trackbot> ACTION-897 Ask jos and axel to answer 3.10 and 3.11 closed
<AxelPolleres> answer to 3.11 is fair enough :-)
Sandro modified that case since Jos originally wrote it also
<ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/MalformedLists
people couldn't agree on what was entailed and what was not entailed
JosB: Discussing malformed list test case, per action-896
close action-896
<trackbot> ACTION-896 Ask Jos about http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/MalformedLists closed
<AxelPolleres> drop the "@@@ ..." part you mean, yes?
close action-893
<trackbot> ACTION-893 Change implementation page closed
close action-894
<trackbot> ACTION-894 Add possible/potential implemenations on the Wiki page (labeled as potential implementations) closed
ChrisW: Christian, are you planning to put an ILOG entry on the implementations page?
<ChrisW> ACTION: Chris to send email about implementation reports [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-912 - Send email about implementation reports [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-09-22].
Christian: Yes.
Sandro: And an email should be sent whenever a new implementation is added to the page, per the instructions for submitting an implementation report
<ChrisW> ACTION: christian to send ilog implementation report [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-913 - Send ilog implementation report [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-22].
close action-875
<trackbot> ACTION-875 Contact Evan Wallace (then Edward Barkmeyer). closed
Christian: I have a questions about
Changhai's action-791
... he wrote some examples, but he is concerned about adding
them to official test cases because he thinks they are
different from the others
ChrisW: He should upload them and we'll review them
<AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Sep/0039.html on action-733
ChrisW: We had a slight snafu, forgot to send email about CR to the chairs mailing list
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Sep/0040.html
ChrisW: We've now asked if they could review/respond within the week
Christian: There was a new public comment, what shall we do about it?
<AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2009Sep/0003.html
AxelP: That comment is about an ambiguity in our grammar because we allow unicode strings in some places where I think we shouldn't
<AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0003.html
<AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#rPN_PREFIX
<AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#rPN_LOCAL
AxelP: I think for variables,
prefixes, etc, we should have more constrained productions (as
in sparql)
... in the PS
ChrisW: Should we fix this?
AxelP: Yes, I think we need to
<AxelPolleres> Name ::= UNICODESTRING
<AxelPolleres> Var ::= '?' UNICODESTRING
AxelP: He is particularly
complaining about the above 2 productions
... I think we should make them more constrained
ChrisW: Who should make this change?
<AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/DTB#Shortcuts_for_Constants_in_RIF.27s_Presentation_Syntax
<AxelPolleres> # LocalName, cf. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names11-20060816/#NT-LocalPart
AxelP: Is it acceptable in our
spec to just point to productions in other specs?
... (as DTB currently does)
Harold: I think Axel's approach is good
Sandro: Since this only affects the PS, names will still be unrestricted in XML, right?
<ChrisW> ACTION: axel to replace name, var, and dialect by ncname in all BNF grammars [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-914 - Replace name, var, and dialect by ncname in all BNF grammars [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-09-22].
<AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0002.html
<AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0013.html
<AxelPolleres> open issues...
<ChrisW> ACTION: axel to respond to damasio after change to syntax [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-918 - Respond to damasio after change to syntax [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-09-22].
<AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0002.html
AxelP: I just realized that there is a problem in DTB about prefix directives that MichaelK pointed out that I have not done yet
<AxelPolleres> Axel to put IRIs within <...> in the Prefix directive
<AxelPolleres> ACTION: Axel to put IRIs within <...> in the Prefix directive in DTB [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action10]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-919 - Put IRIs within <...> in the Prefix directive in DTB [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-09-22].
<AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0013.html
Axel: And another item that might need discussion: see email above
<AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=DTB&diff=10665&oldid=10495
Axel: Above diff shows my proposed change
ChrisW: How to we handle variable-
arity predicates in DTB?
... concat, for example
AxelP: Xpath version of concat
uses a sequence but xpath version of string-join does not
... I don't have a strong opinion on what fix we should adopt;
I chose the simplest one
ChrisW: Michael expressed an opinion about
this but he isn't here
... AxelP, could you respond to MichaelK's email saying we discussed
it in the telecon and describing the approach you took
AxelP: Sandro, would you review
the list functions if I rework them to make them uniform with
other functions in DTB
... I'm talking about writing the semantics in terms of
mappings
<ChrisW> ACTION: axel to look at informal list mappings [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action11]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-920 - Look at informal list mappings [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-09-22].
Christian: I responded to DaveR's and
GaryH's reviews, and I think there is a fair amount of work left
to implement their comments
... so I don't think we can publish in this round
... when would be the next opportunity to publish the RIF
XML-DATA document?
ChrisW: Any Tuesday or Thurs we can publish. When do you think you could have it ready?
Christian: I could update it by next
week, but would DaveR and GaryH be able to rereview it
then?
... if I have it ready next week, and GaryH and DaveR review in a
week, we could publish in 2 weeks
GaryH: Yes, I can review it
DaveR: Yes
<ChrisW> ACTION: christian to update xml data document by 1 week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-915 - Update xml data document by 1 week [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-22].
<ChrisW> ACTION: gary to review changes to xml document by 2 weeks [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-916 - Review changes to xml document by 2 weeks [on Gary Hallmark - due 2009-09-22].
<ChrisW> ACTION: dave to review changes to xml document by 2 weeks [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-917 - Review changes to xml document by 2 weeks [on Dave Reynolds - due 2009-09-22].
<AxelPolleres> for the records: my review is not yet complete
ChrisW: DaveR, do you know of other reviewers for this document?
DaveR: Jos, maybe
<ChrisW> ACTION: josb to review the OWL2RL by 1 week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action12]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-921 - Review the OWL2RL by 1 week [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-09-22].
ChrisW: Any other discussion on
OWL-RL?
... we need two reviewers for this if we're going to publish
it
... Mike, could you review this?
MikeDean: Yes
<Harold> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Guide
<ChrisW> ACTION: chris to link RIF intro from home page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action13]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-922 - Link RIF intro from home page [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-09-22].
<ChrisW> ACTION: Chris to review RIF Guide [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action14]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-923 - Review RIF Guide [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-09-22].
<Harold> Sandro, http://www.w3.org/TR/ seems to be a huge area of W3C documents.
<Harold> ... including Recently Published Working Drafts
<sandro> level of indirection: http://www.w3.org/2009/owl-test-cases
<sandro> owl 1 test cases: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/
<Harold> (and Recently Published Group Notes).
<sandro> owl 2 test document: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-conformance/
ChrisW: It may be a good idea to actually include the test cases in the text of the test document. I'd like to see a version of that, to see what it looks like.
Harold: The test document shouldn't point to a wiki (the test cases listing page) because the wiki isn't permanent
ChrisW: Need two reviewers for test cases
<ChrisW> ACTION: mdean to review test cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action15]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-924 - Review test cases [on Mike Dean - due 2009-09-22].
Mike Dean: Can review test document
<ChrisW> ACTION: leora to review RIF Guide [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action16]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-925 - Review RIF Guide [on Leora Morgenstern - due 2009-09-22].
Leora: I can review the RIF intro, so Mike D doesn't have to review both
<ChrisW> ACTION: sandro to review test cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html#action17]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-926 - Review test cases [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-09-22].
Leora: I am currently working on this and need to do more before it's ready for review
Sandro: You're not updating the requirements, right?
ChrisW: Because that would require working group approval
Leora: I'm not changing the requirements
ChrisW: Next telecon in 2 weeks, on September 29th