- From: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 19:24:39 +0100 (BST)
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Please check the actions - I think I got them all. Libby >WEB ONTOLOGY WORKING GROUP >AGENDA/LOGISTICS >Apr 25, 2002 >CHAT INFO >Simultaneous IRC Chat >irc:irc.w3.org (port 6665) >#webont see http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/webont/2002-04-25.txt >Chair: Schreiber >Scribe: VOLUNTEER NEEDED scribe libby.miller@bristol.ac.uk >1) Join call/attendance/admin (10 min) >- regrets: Dale, Hendler, McGuinness, Stein (tentative) actual regrets: Dale, Hendler, McGuinness, Lassila, Decker, Herman ter Horst, Harmelen, Heflin, Welty (though Hendler, Welty on irc) present: Jonathan Borden, Jonathan@openhealth.org Jeremy Carroll, Hewlett Packard Company jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com,jeremy_carroll@hp.com Dan Connolly, W3C Team contact connolly@w3.org Jos De Roo, Agfa-Gevaert N. V. jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com Mike Dean mdean@bbn.com Tim Finin, University of Maryland MIND Laboratory finin@cs.umbc.edu Nicholas Gibbins, University of Southampton nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk Pat Hayes, phayes@ai.uwf.edu Ziv Hellman, <ziv@unicorn.com>, Unicorn Solutions Inc. Ian Horrocks, Network Inference horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk Enrico Motta, Ibrow e.motta@open.ac.uk Leo Obrst, MITRE lobrst@mitre.org (until 5.09) Peter Patel-Schneider, Lucent Technologies pfps@research.bell-labs.com Marwan Sabbouh, MITRE ms@mitre.org Guus Schreiber, Ibrow schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl Michael Smith, Electronic Data System (EDS) michael.smith@eds.com (joined at 16.27) John Stanton, Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) StantonJ@ncr.disa.mil stantonj@ncr.disa.mil Lynn Andrea Stein, lynn.stein@olin.edu Evan Wallace, ewallace@cme.nist.gov, National Institute of Standards and technology Andy Seaborne +3 from HP as observers (zakim: JeremyCarrol, zivH Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, AndyS_etc? (muted), ??P62, NickG, DanC, LibbyM, MDean, PatH?, ??P16, Enrico, ZivH, LynnS, TimFinin, Marwan.Sabbouh, M.Smith, ??P22 PeterPS has IanH) Missing: Raphael Volz David Trastour Lynne R. Thompson Ned Smith Said Tabet buswell Larry Eshelman Dieter Fensel Bernard Horan Francesco Iannuzzelli Ruediger Klein Laurent Olivry Martin Pike Shimizu Noboru >2) ACTION item review (chair, 5 min) >ACTION (Mar 28) Chairs to clarify OWL naming problem CLOSED: ok to use 'OWL', no constraints (DanC) >ACTION (Mar 28) Dan Connolly, Lynn Stein (prov.), Jos De Roo, to >participate > in RDF core discussions on construct for closed lists CLOSED: the discussion has been started (but not finished) >ACTION (Apr 9): Frank van Harmelen with Deborah McGuinness, > Mike Dean, Enrico Motta, Ziv Hellman, Raphael Volz, Ian Horrocks > Following polls on separation of language features between > level 1 (OWL-lite) and level 2 (OWL-full), a group was constituted to > revisit the level 1/2 conformance issue: > http://www.w3.org/2002/04/09-webont-irc#T14-08-19 ONGOING, next week's agenda - proposal just sent to the list. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0167.html >ACTION: (Apr 18) Dan Connolly to arrange a test repository on the > http://www.w3.org site > Already in progress: > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/ > just needs README, link to/from WG home page. CLOSED >ACTION: (Apr 18) Dan Connolly to arrange direct CVS access for >appropriate > members [Jeremy Carroll, Jos de Roo] of the test focus area to that >repository. ONGOING >ACTION (Apr 18): Jeremy Carroll to notify the WG that issue >http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues#unmentioned-qualified-restrictions > is now open; to propose to close it by removing qualified > restrictions from the language CLOSED - see telecon minutes. could be reopened if after publication people create compelling use cases >ACTION (April 18): Mike Smith: send to chairs how you'd like issue >raised > then chairs to review and send to group; then issues list will > incorporate this process description. CLOSED - see telecon minutes. >ACTION (April 25): chairs: provide roll call data of ftf Adam. CLOSED (?) >3) Face-to-face meeting record (chair, 5 min) >For review: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html >Consolidated record due two weeks after ftf. CLOSED modulo minor changes to attendance record. RECORD APPROVED >4) Issue submission and format (Mike Smith, 5 min) >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0197.html >- short Q&A/feedback session MikeS not present at this point. Format agreed on. >5) Issues 3.2 "Qualified restrictions" (chair, 10 min) >Discussion & decision on proposed resolution by Jeremy Carroll: >http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#unmentioned-qualified-restrictions ISSUE RESOLVED >6) Dark triple requirement (chair, 5 min) >Request from SWCG: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0233.html >- time line feasible? >- coordinator/lead needed for the "dark triple task force"? ACTION JonB to gether up email discussion on this issue, and put in one document, without adding anything as far as possible. JonB is issue owner. no dadline specified at this stage. All obligatons of the rest of the taskforce released till JonB ready. >7) GUIDE target results (Guus Schreiber, 20 min) >[Dan Connolly will chair this agenda item] >See proposal: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0266.html >Issues to be discussed: >- Agreement on initial output list for GUIDE >- Planning: when, who ACTION Pat Hayes, chris welty and evan wallace to examine issues with using UML as a presentation syntax for OWL. E.g. implications of the idea that UML incorporates assumptions about the number and types of attributes defined. >8) A.O.B (5 min) SCRIBE for next meeting is Tim Finin ADJOURNED full text of log: 15:01:07 <logger_1> logger_1 has joined #webont 15:01:07 <irc.w3.org> Users on #webont: logger_1 @las 15:27:11 <afs> afs has joined #webont 15:47:07 <connolly> connolly has joined #webont 15:48:14 <afs> afs has quit 15:54:17 <schreiber> schreiber has joined #webont 15:54:28 <afs> afs has joined #webont 15:58:56 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #webont 15:59:00 <connolly> Zakim, this will be WEBO 15:59:01 <Zakim> ok, connolly, I see SW_WebOnt()12:00PM already started 15:59:03 <connolly> connolly is now known as DanC 15:59:09 <Zakim> + +33.5.61.23.aaaa 15:59:12 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webont 15:59:14 <RRSAgent> * RRSAgent is logging 15:59:45 <DanC> DanC has changed the topic to: W3C WebOnt WG http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ 25Apr telcon 15:59:53 <Zakim> +Evan.Wallace 15:59:55 <Zakim> +John.Stanton 15:59:56 <DanC> agenda + 25 Apr http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0273.html 15:59:58 <Zakim> * Zakim notes agendum 1 added 16:00:16 <Zakim> +??P63 16:00:19 <Zakim> +??P62 16:00:38 <libby__> libby__ has joined #webont 16:00:40 <Zakim> +NickG 16:01:10 <Zakim> +DanC 16:01:23 <Zakim> +??P0 16:02:01 <Zakim> +??P12 16:02:03 <Zakim> +MDean 16:02:25 <schreiber> zakim, ??P11 is Guus 16:02:26 <Zakim> +Guus; got it 16:02:29 <DanC> Zakim, P12 is LibbyM 16:02:30 <Zakim> sorry, DanC, I do not recognize a party named 'P12' 16:02:36 <DanC> Zakim, ??P12 is LibbyM 16:02:37 <Zakim> +LibbyM; got it 16:03:04 <DanC> +JosD, LarryE 16:03:13 <DanC> +PeterPS, +IanH 16:03:15 <Zakim> +??P2 16:03:27 <DanC> Zakim, 33.5.61.23.aaaa is PeterPS 16:03:27 <libby__> i could scribe but need to eat somthing quicky first! 16:03:29 <Zakim> sorry, DanC, I do not recognize a party named '33.5.61.23.aaaa' 16:03:34 <DanC> Zakim, +33.5.61.23.aaaa is PeterPS 16:03:35 <Zakim> +PeterPS; got it 16:03:39 <Zakim> + +1.850.202.aabb - is perhaps PatH? 16:03:43 <DanC> Zakim, PeterPS also has IanH 16:03:45 <Zakim> +IanH; got it 16:03:56 <mdean> mdean has joined #WebOnt 16:03:59 <DanC> Zakim, who's here? 16:04:00 <Zakim> I see Guus, ??P59, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, ??P63, ??P62, NickG, DanC, ??P0, LibbyM, MDean, ??P2, PatH? 16:04:01 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH 16:04:29 <DanC> Zakim, ??P2 is perhaps JeremyCarrol 16:04:30 <Zakim> +JeremyCarrol?; got it 16:04:35 <jhendler> jhendler has joined #webont 16:04:42 <DanC> Zakim, ??P59 is perhaps JosD 16:04:43 <Zakim> +JosD?; got it 16:04:50 <Zakim> +??P16 16:04:56 <DanC> Zakim, ??P0 is perhaps LeoO 16:04:58 <Zakim> +LeoO?; got it 16:05:00 <jhendler> JimH will be IRC only - till 12:45 16:05:13 <DanC> Zakim, who's here? 16:05:14 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, ??P63, ??P62, NickG, DanC, LeoO?, LibbyM, MDean, JeremyCarrol?, PatH?, ??P16 16:05:15 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH 16:05:19 <jhendler> Chris Welty regrets (will peek at irc from time to time) 16:05:30 <libby__> libby__ is now known as libbyscri 16:05:39 <libbyscri> there are observers from HP 16:06:09 <libbyscri> (they are here) 16:06:18 <DanC> Zakim, ??P63 is perhaps AndyS_etc 16:06:19 <Zakim> +AndyS_etc?; got it 16:06:27 <DanC> Zakim, who's here? 16:06:28 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, AndyS_etc?, ??P62, NickG, DanC, LeoO?, LibbyM, MDean, JeremyCarrol?, PatH?, ??P16 16:06:29 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH 16:06:32 <Zakim> +Marwan.Sabbouh 16:06:37 <jhendler> * jhendler welcomes the observers. Sorry I cannot be there in person (voice?) 16:06:59 <DanC> Guus, you might as well copy/paste the regrets, no? 16:07:15 <libbyscri> regrets: dale, ??, heflin, hendler, lassila, mcguiness, patel-schnieder, leynn stein, ?? 16:07:17 <Zakim> +??P26 16:07:29 <libbyscri> sorry, missed some of that 16:07:31 <DanC> Zakim, ??P26 is Enrico 16:07:33 <Zakim> +Enrico; got it 16:07:34 <Zakim> +??P27 16:07:51 <DanC> Zakim, ??P27 is ZivH 16:07:52 <Zakim> +ZivH; got it 16:07:54 <libbyscri> ----- 16:07:58 <libbyscri> first agenda item 16:08:04 <DanC> Zakim, who's here? 16:08:05 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, AndyS_etc? (muted), ??P62, NickG, DanC, LeoO?, LibbyM, MDean, JeremyCarrol?, PatH?, ??P16, Marwan.Sabbouh, Enrico, ZivH 16:08:07 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH 16:08:41 <DanC> Guus debriefs from a meeting of W3C chairs. 16:08:42 <libbyscri> guus: tehre will be new rules for patents when we release new documents 16:09:13 <libbyscri> guus: danC talked about SW tools for tracking groups process, and Guus volunteered this grips as gunea pig 16:09:19 <libbyscri> s/grips/group 16:09:24 <libbyscri> ---action item review 16:09:40 <libbyscri> 1. clarifying nameing problem 16:09:53 <libbyscri> danc ok to use OWL after a meeting 16:09:59 <Zakim> +??P29 16:10:09 <libbyscri> DanC: with no constrints 16:10:17 <DanC> Zakim, ??P29 is LynnS 16:10:18 <Zakim> +LynnS; got it 16:10:27 <libbyscri> lynn stein is actually here 16:10:28 <libbyscri> --- 16:10:41 <libbyscri> action 2: RDF core discussion on closed lists 16:10:44 <Zakim> +Jonathan.Borden 16:10:52 <libbyscri> DanC: the discussion has started 16:11:02 <libbyscri> guus: when can it be closed? 16:11:05 <ircleuser> ircleuser has joined #webont 16:11:29 <libbyscri> guus: also an issue with RDFCore about dark triples 16:11:35 <DanC> # addressing requirements around daml:collection (rdfms-seq-representation) Dan Connolly (Fri, Apr 19 2002) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Apr/0334.html 16:11:42 <libbyscri> DanC: if action was to start discussion, action done, otherwise not 16:11:50 <libbyscri> action: done 16:11:55 <JonB> JonB has joined #webont 16:11:55 <libbyscri> --- 16:12:13 <ircleuser> ircleuser is now known as ChrisW 16:12:14 <libbyscri> action 3: proposal for separation of language features into 2 levels 16:12:33 <DanC> * DanC wonders about a pointer to that thing 16:12:37 <libbyscri> guus: proposal out today, anticipate email discussions, will be on agenda next week 16:12:43 <DanC> test repository http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/ 16:12:57 <libbyscri> action 4? doe? missed that 16:12:58 <Zakim> +??P1 16:13:00 <libbyscri> --- 16:13:13 <libbyscri> action 5: danc to arrange CVS action - action continues 16:13:17 <DanC> Zakim, ??P1 is TimFinin 16:13:19 <Zakim> +TimFinin; got it 16:13:38 <libbyscri> next 2 actions done and on agenda 16:13:45 <libbyscri> --- 16:13:57 <timfinin> timfinin has joined #webont 16:13:59 <libbyscri> action f2f amstaerdam - don, sent to the list 16:14:06 <DanC> 3) Face-to-face meeting record (chair, 5 min) 16:14:07 <DanC> For review: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html 16:14:19 <jhendler> * jhendler JimH reviewed the document - approves 16:14:38 <libbyscri> DanC: jeremey and jos reviewed the meeting records 16:14:44 <libbyscri> ? glanced at it, no problems 16:15:07 <libbyscri> heh 16:15:22 <Zakim> -Marwan.Sabbouh 16:15:23 <libbyscri> [hiatus as some guy gets a wrong number] 16:15:45 <Zakim> +Marwan.Sabbouh 16:15:47 <libbyscri> guus: propose to accept the record, modulo a few changes in role call possibly 16:15:53 <libbyscri> ** record approved 16:15:58 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html $Revision: 1.21 $ of $Date: 2002/04/24 17:48:08 $ 16:16:01 <jhendler> * jhendler YAY! 16:16:12 <libbyscri> 4) issue submission and format 16:16:21 <DanC> Zakim, is Mike here? 16:16:22 <Zakim> DanC, I see MikeBallantyne? in WS_DescWG()11:00AM 16:16:23 <libbyscri> - as simple and transparant as possible 16:16:33 <libbyscri> mike smith whose acrtion it is not on telecon 16:16:49 <libbyscri> DanC: works fine for me 16:16:58 <DanC> it = http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0197.html 16:17:05 <libbyscri> (I can't paste, will someone paste the url of are mike's mesage?) 16:17:13 <libbyscri> thanks 16:17:29 <libbyscri> ? no description of the issue in the test case? 16:17:46 <libbyscri> MikeD - here was a link to the email where issue was discussied 16:17:55 <libbyscri> - the new format will sort this out 16:18:11 <libbyscri> gusu: all happy with the formt? 16:18:24 <libbyscri> ...idea is the process will be more issue driven from now on. 16:18:29 <libbyscri> [nothing] 16:18:38 <DanC> --- 5) Issues 3.2 "Qualified restrictions" (chair, 10 min) 16:18:51 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#3.2-Qualified-Restrictions 16:18:59 <libbyscri> Jeremy Carroll 16:19:33 <libbyscri> Jeremy: started this issue to exercise the process of testcases. thougt uncontroversial. not so 16:20:00 <DanC> I unzipp'd jeremy's test files into http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/qualified-cardinality-constraints/ 16:20:05 <libbyscri> ...now trying to test whether there is consensus in the group about wanting qualified cardinality constraints 16:20:13 <DanC> e.g. http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/qualified-cardinality-constraints/error001.owl 16:20:26 <JonB> q+ 16:20:27 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB on the speaker queue 16:20:29 <libbyscri> ....basically they're not very useful... 16:20:36 <JosD> JosD has joined #webont 16:20:49 <libbyscri> ...should not be closed if substantive disagreemnet at this stage 16:21:06 <DanC> Guus, ask anybody who wants to speak against the proposal to speak up, please. 16:21:10 <libbyscri> ...mikeD responded 16:21:29 <libbyscri> mikeD: wouldnt object to keeping it in, not putting up a big fight...keep it open 16:22:08 <libbyscri> Ian: doesn't know of any/many convincing uyses of it in ontologies. sometimes necessary for formal encodings of other languages 16:22:24 <jhendler> q+ 16:22:24 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB, Jhendler on the speaker queue 16:22:27 <libbyscri> ...makes implementations a bt harder, tho not more complex 16:22:38 <libbyscri> ...but we know how to do it 16:23:07 <libbyscri> Guus proposes to close this issue for now - drop qualified restrictions (scribe missed a bit here) 16:23:25 <DanC> * DanC ack JonB 16:23:26 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue 16:23:54 <libbyscri> JonB dissented in email, wanted adequate discussion - thought should be discussion itf stuff removed from Daml+oil 16:24:02 <libbyscri> ...as per charter 16:24:35 <libbyscri> MikeD and JonB were intereste din what Ian had to say, Ian lukewarm?, can support it 16:24:36 <JosD> JosD has quit 16:24:46 <jhendler> * jhendler if my queue slot comes up - I'll type in and someone can read on phone... 16:24:46 <libbyscri> jonB - so how did it et into Daml+oil? 16:25:10 <libbyscri> ?? says doesn't thinkdaml+oil driven at that stage by use cases 16:25:39 <libbyscri> peter - tho no use cases, there were inetntions and desires 16:25:46 <JonB> q- 16:25:46 <libbyscri> (?? was patH) 16:25:47 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue 16:25:48 <DanC> jimh, what is it? 16:25:50 <jhendler> I believe these are the most complained about issue in D+O -- certainly hardest to explain - I believe it was a artifact of something that didn't end up being important 16:26:09 <DanC> * DanC read that out 16:26:27 <JosD> JosD has joined #webont 16:26:30 <jhendler> We had discussed before as a synactc shortcut -- if still needed someone should explain 16:26:37 <libbyscri> jeremy: we can take it out now, and then review if people complain - see if they can come up with usecases 16:26:45 <jhendler> (end of me) 16:26:50 <libbyscri> jonB?: happy to drop it 16:26:54 <JonB> yes 16:27:16 <libbyscri> guus: agree resolution to this issue? 16:27:33 <libbyscri> jeremy - testcases associated with this issue? 16:27:41 <libbyscri> jos, danc, they're ok by us 16:27:42 <Zakim> +M.Smith 16:28:14 <Enrico> Enrico has joined #webont 16:28:32 <libbyscri> guus: proposed to decide that we resolve to decde this issue: qualified restrcitions are not part orf OWL 16:28:41 <libbyscri> issue: resolved! *** 16:29:11 <DanC> ==== 6) Dark triple requirement (chair, 5 min) 16:29:12 <libbyscri> ---- 16:29:58 <libbyscri> guus: a message from SWCG- needed issues about dark triples from us clearly in one message 16:30:11 <Zakim> +??P22 16:30:16 <libbyscri> ...concise and agreed upon statement 16:30:44 <JonB> q+ 16:30:46 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler, JonB on the speaker queue 16:30:51 <libbyscri> DanC: important to propose a solution too 16:30:59 <jhendler> q- 16:31:00 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB on the speaker queue 16:31:06 <libbyscri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0233.html 16:31:41 <libbyscri> guss - the solution sepatae from issue. the solution was not part of the request of the grop. guus is sure wasnt 16:31:49 <libbyscri> danc sure was part fothe request 16:32:13 <libbyscri> patH: was it expected that the taskforce reach consensus on the recommended solution 16:32:23 <libbyscri> DanC: has to be acceptable to this group 16:32:40 <libbyscri> ...the poiunt a for this group to be happy 16:32:58 <libbyscri> patH - enumerate all the possible solutions, to show there are some 16:33:08 <libbyscri> DanC: essential to pick some that are acceptable 16:33:20 <libbyscri> patH has a new proposal 16:34:00 <libbyscri> guus: go back to webont ...and get a requirement [missed some, sorry] 16:34:13 <libbyscri> DanC: examples supposed to be of how it is solved 16:34:28 <libbyscri> guus: we discussed some solutions at the f2f 16:34:36 <libbyscri> DanC: but some are not acceptable to the group 16:34:45 <jhendler> my understanding is that RDF Core asked us to propose 1, and only 1, solution. 16:35:00 <libbyscri> jeremy thought he'd heard that multiple files were acceptable.... 16:35:13 <JonB> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0290.html 16:35:21 <libbyscri> guus: thinks the problem is the requirements, and this is what rdfcore want 16:35:32 <libbyscri> jeremy thinks understanding theserequirements much better recently 16:36:11 <libbyscri> patH's email: we do it in OWL and RDFCore doesnt have to worry about it 16:36:34 <jhendler> q+ 16:36:35 <Zakim> * Zakim sees JonB, Jhendler on the speaker queue 16:36:40 <libbyscri> janB: if this proposal is acceptable.... 16:36:48 <JonB> q- 16:36:50 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue 16:37:09 <libbyscri> pps: 'allowable' == within charter - 'acceptable' is whether WG agrees on it 16:37:39 <libbyscri> jeremy - in RDFCore discussion is whether model theory discussion of dark triples be retained for a ?book? 16:37:59 <libbyscri> ...if webont wants them, rdfcore should not rule it out 16:38:14 <libbyscri> pps? still needs to be endorsed by RDFCore 16:38:37 <libbyscri> jeremy - need to say why we want RDFCore to endorse it 16:38:54 <ChrisW> q 16:39:00 <DanC> I'm pretty sure 2002Apr/0290.html is a proposal that Owl be incomplete w.r.t. RDF Core semantics. I don't like that. (I'm pretty sure I can make it into an entailment test) 16:39:10 <ChrisW> zakim, q 16:39:11 <Zakim> I don't understand 'q', ChrisW. Try /msg Zakim help 16:39:27 <JonB> chrisw do q+ 16:39:29 <DanC> it's q+, ChrisW, but I'm not sure Guus can see Zakim's queue 16:39:42 <libbyscri> patH: strcilty, doesnty need to be in the model theory, but then rdf/webont would not quite be in sync, though this could be handled by owl 16:39:52 <libbyscri> ...for most users arcane distinction 16:40:13 <libbyscri> patH: would prefer that RDFCore is left alone 16:40:19 <ChrisW> danc, I understand, but this is all we've got... 16:40:30 <libbyscri> jeremy: would switch sides in rdfcore debate if went this way 16:40:35 <libbyscri> guus: conclusions? 16:40:40 <ChrisW> (oops) 16:41:08 <libbyscri> patH: [sorry, missed some] coordination thing between groups 16:41:28 <libbyscri> ? thinks that danc doesn't like this option 16:41:34 <DanC> ?=JonB 16:41:39 <libbyscri> thanks 16:42:02 <libbyscri> ....thinks important that danc as webont and rdfcore person important he is happy 16:42:24 <libbyscri> jeremy is not happy about endorsing any proposal yet, not clear what WG wants yet. 16:42:42 <jhendler> I don't care what solution - but I want to know how we will (i) reach consensus, (ii) get someone to volunteer to edit - if it doesn't end up in document, we didn't do anything (from outside world perspective) - esp. if we go with "owl-only" solution. Do we have a volunteer? 16:42:55 <libbyscri> ...need specific requirements. don't know what the entailments are 16:43:15 <libbyscri> jeremy posted a msg today with test cases and disfferent approaches 16:43:18 <DanC> JimH, it's awkward for you to try to chair from IRC. Guus is doing OK, I think. 16:43:50 <libbyscri> jeremy do youhave a reference for that? 16:44:00 <jhendler> * jhendler Guus does great, I just can't stay quiet :-> 16:44:18 <libbyscri> JonB: does jonb's inheritable disease e.g. illustrate that issue? 16:44:51 <libbyscri> jeremy: not really. some alllow you to state there is a circular definition but don;t know what it is. 16:45:04 <libbyscri> ?missed a bit of detail here, sorry 16:45:36 <libbyscri> guus: would like to have this discussion n a more proceedural sense 16:46:15 <libbyscri> ...would like a statement from the taskforce people whether they are willing to work on a consolidated solution, by may 6, and after. and a volunteer to edit 16:46:30 <libbyscri> ...ok? volunteer? 16:46:46 <libbyscri> patth: good idea but off email next few weeks 16:47:07 <libbyscri> guus: jeremy, jonb, patH, pps?....more 16:47:24 <libbyscri> jonb could edit it but doesnt feel quite competent 16:47:54 <libbyscri> guus: thinks jonb should do it, and not feeling understand it is a good thing. patH agrees jonb good 16:48:14 <libbyscri> jonB agrees to do it 16:48:41 <libbyscri> ian: we seem to be spending an incredible amount of time on this. not convinced this analysis of options is that useful 16:49:02 <libbyscri> pps: can't particpate by may 6. 16:49:17 <libbyscri> ...can't commit to anything over next 2 weeks 16:49:50 <libbyscri> ? we already have a nearly infitite amount of text - one document would be a start 16:49:59 <libbyscri> ian: this has been tried a number of times 16:50:08 <libbyscri> ? so what's the problemwith the existing ones? 16:50:30 <libbyscri> jeremy - no agreemnt on some of the constraints about the solutions, hence test cases.... 16:51:00 <libbyscri> patH this is the job of the whole working group, not just a test case 16:51:21 <libbyscri> jeremy - at least find ut which testcases the WG feels strongly about 16:51:50 <libbyscri> ? think its obvious that we need somethign like dark triples 16:52:18 <schreiber> (this was mike smith) 16:52:24 <libbyscri> ....we need to say to rdfcore that we need this, so we're goingto do it in any case 16:52:30 <libbyscri> jeremy: not convinced need it 16:52:37 <libbyscri> thanks 16:53:01 <libbyscri> jeremy, danc, both think that don't need dark triples 16:53:33 <libbyscri> mikeS: do patH and pps, agree with what jeremy says? 16:53:45 <libbyscri> pah: not sur understand it, pps, not sure viable 16:54:46 <libbyscri> patH: still in process of trying to understand it...[discussion of message] - not a particular proposal 16:55:03 <libbyscri> ....talking absout messages of today from jeremy 16:55:37 <libbyscri> jeremy: axiomatic....? anyone got the reference? 16:56:18 <libbyscri> chairs concerned that 80% of email abot this issue. ooking for a proposal to stremline this so don't dominate all the conversioans 16:56:42 <DanC> I suggest we make JonB issue owner, release the obligations of the rest of the "task force", and let JonB coordinate the issue until it looks ready for resolution. 16:56:51 <libbyscri> ....possible for jonBto gather upo the discussion and put in a document to start the thread. not adding anything 16:57:07 <libbyscri> JonB: will try not to mess up adding anything 16:57:19 <libbyscri> DanC: would be happy with jonb as issue owner 16:57:33 <libbyscri> guus: timeline is unfeasibale 16:57:58 <libbyscri> DanC: no need for adeadline. either we make it for rdfcore last core ot not 16:58:04 <libbyscri> guus: may 20 - SW cood group 16:58:09 <libbyscri> DanC: useful 16:58:23 <libbyscri> ? out of loop may 10-17 16:58:30 <DanC> ?=JonB 16:58:31 <libbyscri> path: out from 6-10 may 16:58:34 <libbyscri> thanks 16:58:40 <JonB> * JonB away 10-17 may 16:58:55 <libbyscri> * everyone happy with this proceedural proposal 16:59:03 <libbyscri> ------ 16:59:19 <libbyscri> 7) Guide target results - guus 16:59:25 <DanC> * DanC hears buzzing... went away 16:59:47 <libbyscri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0266.html 16:59:48 <DanC> guus's msg http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0266.html 16:59:56 <libbyscri> danc chairing temporarily 17:00:08 <libbyscri> 3 things on it: 17:00:47 <libbyscri> 1: presentation syntaxes. we will work on 2 prsentation syntaxes till recommendation - UML and and XML 17:01:02 <libbyscri> ....UML covers part of it, XML covers all of it 17:01:03 <DanC> I've done some UML-ish stuff with DAML+OIL: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/infoset/ http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/infoset/infoset-diagram.svg 17:01:28 <DanC> * DanC q? 17:01:29 <Zakim> * Zakim sees Jhendler on the speaker queue 17:01:43 <jhendler> q- 17:01:44 <Zakim> * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue 17:01:48 <libbyscri> ? have we determined what the normative syntax is to be? 17:01:56 <libbyscri> DanC: yes, amstaerdam f2f, RDF/XML 17:02:17 <libbyscri> guus: agreement on item 1? 17:02:44 <libbyscri> ? clarification on uml syntax? 17:02:50 <DanC> A UML Presentation Syntax for OWL Lite 17:02:50 <DanC> Author: Guus Schreiber 17:02:50 <DanC> Created:: April 3, 2002 17:02:50 <DanC> Last update: April 19, 2002 17:02:53 <DanC> http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/docs/owl-uml/owl-uml.html 17:03:10 <libbyscri> guus: describes UML - useful for frame-based 17:03:35 <libbyscri> patH: uml incorporates assumptions about the nature of the set heirarchty, incorporating those as well? 17:04:02 <libbyscri> ....often very strict assumptions in uml about data and metadta...do we want to incorporate this? 17:04:24 <libbyscri> guus: no. uml as is taught in books, uml distilled etc, doesnt contain this stuff 17:05:08 <libbyscri> DanC: e.g. height and weight attribtes, uml assiumes that's all there is, so if you want to add another, uml types will look at you funny 17:05:25 <libbyscri> guus: no, depends on the cardinality fo the attribute 17:05:43 <libbyscri> ...yes, will look funny 17:05:56 <libbyscri> DanC: we'll have to make a spcecial note about this 17:06:19 <libbyscri> guus: a grphical editor to generate xml, then likely that it won't be complete 17:07:00 <libbyscri> guus: second issue - language primer or walkthough 17:07:27 <libbyscri> ...the guide shoudl particpate in this because typically one of the main documents to explain the language 17:07:37 <libbyscri> ...very realistic examples important 17:07:46 <libbyscri> [yey!] 17:08:09 <libbyscri> ...both realistic and a reamontological example, and so convince people useful thing to do 17:08:29 <libbyscri> ...not toy examples, preferably from usecases we have, and with necessary depth 17:08:42 <libbyscri> DanC: its a goal, might be difficult 17:08:47 <ChrisW> We should be very careful about examples - they tend to become canonical 17:09:17 <libbyscri> ...coud be part of guide as far as I'm concerned. danc and lynn stein did the walkthrough originally 17:09:23 <Zakim> -LeoO? 17:10:09 <libbyscri> LynnS - would like to help edit, bput probably not the right person to code up real examples. but maybepwoplw couild explain this 17:10:16 <DanC> yes, Chris, I used to shy away from examples for that reason; I now think it's better to go for it, lest the spec (i.e. W3C materials) become irrelevant, and folks just learn from the examples in the books. 17:10:43 <libbyscri> libby agrees with guus 17:10:45 <JosD> JosD has quit 17:10:50 <libbyscri> guus thinks one of most important docs 17:10:51 <las> * las couldn't hear (libby?) the previous speaker....walkthrough wasn't useful, but didn't hear why. 17:11:03 <DanC> * DanC hear buzz 17:11:07 <ChrisW> I don't mean avoid them, I mean be careful. They are more important to "get right" than the NL text. 17:11:14 <DanC> yup 17:11:27 <libbyscri> las, the examples seemed rather toy examples when I got down to trying to use daml 17:11:41 <las> * las agrees about the walkthrough being too simple; it was exactly what could be done then, but not at all what we need now. 17:12:00 <libbyscri> sorry, don't mean tot be rude. I do have some examples I could give you 17:12:11 <libbyscri> scribe can't hear at all 17:12:39 <Zakim> -JeremyCarrol? 17:12:43 <jhendler> * jhendler agrres with las (and Libby) my students use walkthrough to get started, but didn't have enough for complex cases and instances 17:13:02 <jhendler> * jhendler but did great with "basic" DAML 17:13:12 <libbyscri> [hiatus with a loud noise, posible a mobile near to phone] 17:13:27 <las> libby, I agree about the old walkthrough (not insulted at all -- that's what we were in a position to do then), but think someone else has to code up the real examples. My contribution could be to take code and explain it, but it won't be to build a big app. 17:13:33 <libbyscri> on to 3) - how to do it doc 17:13:52 <libbyscri> las, sure 17:14:13 <libbyscri> various modelling issues 17:14:26 <libbyscri> defined classes would be useful to discuss. 17:14:45 <libbyscri> guss: doesn't have to be a long document, but should make it easier for people to use the langauge 17:15:01 <libbyscri> ..." if I had more time it would have been shorter" 17:15:04 <JonB> * JonB agrees strongly about usefulness of discussing defined vs. primitive classes 17:15:11 <libbyscri> ...anything missing from this list? 17:15:44 <libbyscri> danc wuld like to exaplin to users the issue of things an dtheir names - concept-terms 17:15:46 <DanC> in how-to-do-it: yes, good list. pls add things vs. their names. 17:16:38 <libbyscri> guus: there was a complaint that not using this terminology, good point 17:16:52 <DanC> thins vs. their names: i.e. explain why not do: author "Fred". do: author [ name "Fred"]. 17:17:38 <libbyscri> guus: nede to start workign on it quickly for it to be feasible, een if we have to chnge the document along the line 17:17:54 <libbyscri> danc/path think that uml issue would be good for preople to start looking at. 17:18:03 <libbyscri> path - ok if 2-3 weeks 17:18:15 <libbyscri> DanC: need more people 17:18:26 <libbyscri> evan? volunteers 17:18:36 <ChrisW> me 17:18:53 <libbyscri> DanC: volunteers for riting pats of the document? 17:19:13 <libbyscri> chrisW volunteers for UML thing (sorry) 17:19:17 <JonB> * JonB wrote a non-XML syntax 17:19:31 <libbyscri> ..as did pps 17:19:47 <libbyscri> scribe has lost count of volunteers, is confused 17:20:17 <libbyscri> patH, chrisW, ?evan?? 17:20:25 <DanC> Zakim, who's here? 17:20:26 <Zakim> I see Guus, JosD?, PeterPS, Evan.Wallace, John.Stanton, AndyS_etc? (muted), ??P62, NickG, DanC, LibbyM, MDean, PatH?, ??P16, Enrico, ZivH, LynnS, Jonathan.Borden, TimFinin, 17:20:28 <Zakim> ... Marwan.Sabbouh, M.Smith, ??P22 17:20:29 <Zakim> PeterPS has IanH 17:20:33 <libbyscri> ** people like Guus's suggestions 17:20:58 <libbyscri> looking for a scribe voluneteer. danc proposes to cancel unless a volunteer 17:20:59 <jhendler> * jhendler must go now - glad to hear we have volunteers. Good call - yay Guus and "see" you all next week 17:21:05 <libbyscri> seeya 17:21:14 <DanC> TimF volunteers to scribe 17:21:16 <libbyscri> tim finin volunteers scribe next week 17:21:22 <jhendler> jhendler has left #webont 17:21:23 <Zakim> -Marwan.Sabbouh 17:21:23 <Zakim> -M.Smith 17:21:24 <Zakim> -Evan.Wallace 17:21:25 <Zakim> -??P62 17:21:25 <libbyscri> adjourned 17:21:27 <ChrisW> ciao tutti 17:21:27 <Zakim> -TimFinin 17:21:27 <Zakim> -Enrico 17:21:27 <Zakim> -PatH? 17:21:29 <Zakim> -AndyS_etc? 17:21:29 <libbyscri> bye! 17:21:31 <Zakim> -??P16 17:21:32 <Zakim> -NickG 17:21:34 <Zakim> -PeterPS 17:21:36 <Zakim> -John.Stanton 17:21:38 <Zakim> -ZivH 17:21:40 <Zakim> -LynnS 17:21:42 <timfinin> timfinin has left #webont 17:21:43 <Zakim> -DanC 17:21:45 <Zakim> -MDean 17:21:48 <Zakim> -Jonathan.Borden 17:21:49 <Zakim> -LibbyM 17:21:51 <Zakim> -Guus 17:21:57 <Zakim> -??P22 17:21:59 <DanC> so libby, you'll make sure there are clearly recorded ACTIONS on those folks that volunteered to review the UML bit, yes? 17:22:05 <Zakim> -JosD? 17:22:05 <ChrisW> ChrisW has left #webont 17:22:07 <Zakim> SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has ended 17:22:20 <libbyscri> sure, except that I wasn't sure if tehre were 2 or 3 17:22:31 <libbyscri> people that is 17:22:47 <libbyscri> maybe you mean now... 17:23:18 <afs> afs has left #webont 17:23:38 <JonB> JonB has left #webont 17:23:47 <schreiber> chris welty and evan wallace volunteered 17:24:13 <schreiber> thanks, libby, for scribing 17:24:54 <schreiber> schreiber has quit 17:25:39 <libbyscri> ACTION patH, ChrisW, ?someone, possibly Evan? to examine issues with using UML as a presentation syntax for OWL. the idea that UML incorporates assumptions about the number and types of attributes defined 17:25:57 <libbyscri> no probs, I'll send cleaned up minutes around 17:26:42 <libbyscri> regrets - stefan decker 17:27:58 <las> * las regrets for next week....don't know where that info goes... 17:39:43 <libbyscri> regrets ora
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 14:26:58 UTC