- From: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:19:32 -0500
- To: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
- CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org, ewallace@clue.msid.cme.nist.gov
I had expressed regrets for the Dec. 12 telecon and possible regrets for the Dec. 5 telecon (which turned into actual regrets unfortunately). Thanks, Leo Evan Wallace wrote: > ===== > > Executive Summary: > > DECISIONS: > > RESOLVED: > - Open and Postpone Justification issue per Dan Connolly's email. > - Accept items 1, 2, and 5 of Peter Patel-Scheider's proposed closure > for Issue 5.8 - datatypes. > - Close Issue 5.13 by advising users in the documents that they can use: > application/xml, application/rdf+xml, application/owl+xml. > - Close Issue 5.23 by resolving to not add hasValue to OWL Lite. > > NEW ACTIONS: > - Mike Smith to add Postponed Justification issue to issue list. > - Jeremy to create text to use in place of PPS item 3 in resolution to > Issue 5.8 on datatypes. > - Dan C to to communicate with XML schema group about URIs for > XML datatypes. > - Jonathon Borden to update media types document and pass to M Dean > for use in editing Reference Document. > - Dan C take media type registration request to IETF. > - Ian to write up an explanation of known characteristics > for decision procedures for OWL Lite and OWL DL. > > ----------------- > > More detail: > > IRC: > http://www.w3.org/2002/12/12-webont-irc > > AGENDA: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0106.html > > 1) ADMIN (15 min) > > 1.1 Role Call > > Dan Connolly, Marwan Sabbouh, Evan Wallace, Peter Patel-Schneider, > Mike Smith, Ian Horrocks, Mike Dean, Tim Finin, Ruediger Klein, Jeremy > Carroll, Jeff Heflin, Masahiro Hori, Jim Hendler, Ziv Hellman, Herman > ter Horst, Deborah McGuinness, Jos De Roo, Pat Hayes, Frank van Harmelen, > Jean-Francois Baget (irc), Nicholas Gibbins > > Late: Jonathan Borden > > Regrets: Guus Schreiber, Lynn Stein, Jonathan Dale, Larry Eshelman, > John Stanton > > 1.2 Approval of Minutes of Dec 5 call > > PROPOSED to accept the following as a true record of the Dec 5 > telecon: > http://www.w3.org/2002/12/05-webont-irc > > Dan prefered Jeremy's notes as sent in message > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0114.html > subject to revision by Jeremy (link to previous meeting, and M Smith > ammendment etc). > > ACCEPTED, see final version in subsequent message: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0172.html > > 1.3 Agenda Amendments > > Dan Connolly's Justifications issue, as described in his email > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0110.html > > 1.4 Telecon Schedule > > Next telecon: December 19 > Scribe: Ian Horrocks, if present > > Question was raised: should we cancel Dec 26 telecon? > No one objected. Dec 26 meeting CANCELLED! > > 2 Jan 03 meeting NOT cancelled. > Dan Connolly notes potential regrets for that meeting. > > 1.5 F2F Meeting Manchester > > Registration page: > http://cgi.w3.org/Register/selectUser.pl?_w3c_meetingName=WebontManchester > > Local arrangements page: > http://wonderweb.semanticweb.org/mcr-f2f.shtml > > Short discussion of plan for f2f: Hendler > > Jim Hendler reviewed plans for a meeting focus on implementation and > interoperability experience with OWL. In addition, detailed working > draft editorial inspections will be undertaken. > > Mike Smith started a discussion on the preferred anchor pattern to use > in preparing WDs for this. Advice was: provide anchors for all > language elements, and use same case for anchor strings as that used in > wd text for human consumption. > > Insertiong of anchors and other preparations of the Working Drafts > should be completed a week before the ftf (2 January 2003). > > 1.6 Report on Web Ontology Working Group Extension > AC Vote period closed. 24 votes cast - 23 approve, 1 abstain > Information passed on to W3M for decision > If/when extension granted, members not yet re-enrolled will be informed > > 1.7 Webont schedule > > FTI: Current schedule: > - LC to start directly after Man ftf (around Jan 15) > - LC period 3-6 weeks > - Man ftf and LC period to be used by WG to gather implementation > experiences > - odds are low that a WebOnt ftf is required in March at Tech Plenary > > Jeremy Carroll: > > Colleagues at HP believe Jeremy was too negative in his concerns > about schedule as expressed in email: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0048.html. > He suggests a longer Last Call period (e.g. six weeks) may be > sufficient to address these concerns. > > Jim Hendler: > > Chairs leaning toward lengthening Last Call period. May go to last > call after Jan Face-to-face. > > Dan Connolly: > > In light of above, do we need a face-to-face in March (in conjunction > with the Technical plenary)? > > Chairs and W3C contact to discuss this further off line. > > 2. ISSUES (60 min) > > Link to issues list: > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html > > 2.1 Pending updates: > > ISSUE 5.14 Versioning Closed Dec. 05 > closing text at: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0075.html > (Versioning needs to go into the reference and maybe Guide documents) > (Issues List also needs to reflect this change -EKW as scribe) > > 2.2 ACTIONS wrt. resolved issues > > ACTION Chris Welty will work on getting "The meaning of > owl:ontology" explained better in Guide, other editors will see > if their documents need changing (not obvious they do). > [Continued] > > ACTION Jeremy to generate test Cases for 5.5. List Syntax or Semantics > [Continued] > > ACTION Jeff Heflin will produce test cases for owl:imports > See also message from Jeremy Carroll: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0228.html > [Done] > > ACTION DanC to provide wording > [Concerns Issue 5.9 - malformed D+O restrictions (closed) > Dan would like to amend the proposal with some clear instructions to the > guide that says "Don't do that". Dan was actioned to write up a few > sentences for the guide.] > [Done - see email > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0127.html] > > ACTION: Deb/Change feature doc in accordance with 5.19 resolution > (using MikeS's text) > [Continued] > > ACTION: MikeDean/update reference appropriately for three > sublanguages > [Continued] > > ACTION: Deb/Change features for three sublanguages > [Continued] > > 3.2 OPEN issues > > New issue: Justification > > RESOLVED by consensus to open and postpone this issue per Dan's email. > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0110.html > NEW ACTION: Mike Smith to add this to issue list > > [We have five open issues left] > > ** Issue 5.8 - datatypes > > Peter's proposal > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0265.html > > Pat Hayes - > Does bullet five prevent referenced literals? > > other discussion. > > Hendler put question on items 1, 2 and 5 of Peters message. > > RESOLVED > objections: none > abstentions: Mike Dean, Jeff Heflin > > Discussion of problems with 3: > > Prior email comments on this from Jeremy: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0278.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0115.html > > Jeremy summarized these comments, identifying a few XML Schema > built-in non-list types which present problems for OWL (and RDF for > that matter). [Had trouble hearing which, although I assume they were > those discussed in email. -EKW as scribe] > > Discussion ensued, such as: > Dan: QNAMEs do not behave as RDF datatypes. > > Jeremy: We should specify XML schema datatypes that we will > support, but note that there are ones that we won't support. > > Dan: It is worthwhile to include a note explaining why this was > not the complete XML list. > > NEW ACTION Jeremy: > Write up suggested text to address item 3. > > see html attached to a subsequent email from Jeremy: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/att-0174/01-fo.HTML > > Item 4: > > Chair's decision on part 4 of this proposal (out of scope) > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0104.html > > Discussion: > Peter would hate not to use a solution that solves 99% of > this problem. > > Dan points out that what we need to do is to include the XML Schema > group in our solution group. This potentially creates a schedule > risk in order to "do the right thing." > > Jeremy has an action from last week to draft a message for wg > consideration as a message to tag about item 4. > > NEW ACTION Dan - to communicate with XML schema group about URIs for > XML datatypes. > > ** Issue 5.13 - Internet media type for OWL > > ACTION: chairs, to ask Jonathan Borden re: wording to close 5.13 - DONE > > Proposal to close (As per last week's request for changes): > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0057.html > > Discussion: > Jonathan changed entailment parameter to a URI per suggestion > > Dan skeptical that a test could be defined to demonstrate use > of this parameter. > > Mike Dean: doesn't know how to tag his current data with this > parameter. > > Jonathon: How do you tell what entailments are licensed for an OWL > document without this. > > general: some discussion about inferring from vocabulary. > > Frank van Harmelan : It's not just the vocabulary that suggests intention, > it is also the way the vocabulary is put together. > > Hendler: We some way to declare intent for our usage of OWL. > > Dan convinced that it is worth having mime types for OWL Lite and > OWL DL (OWL Full is default entailment). > > PHayes: use semantic extension vocabulary. > > Dan's proposal: 4 mime types (same as 30 Oct mail?) > xml > rdf+xml > owl-lite > owl-dl > ???owl-full??? > > Dan explanation of http protocol --client states preference. > > Mike Dean best practice: anything that uses OWL namespace should use > owl mime type. > > Jim Hendler - proposal > advise users in the documents that they can use: > application/xml, application/rdf+xml, application/owl+xml > > Straw poll - Pat Hayes objected > Pat hayes then suggests changing app/owl+xml to app/owl+rdf+xml > > Reference document or Guide would be the target for this advice. > > Called question as proposed by JH above, not with Pat's change. > RESOLVED > objections: none > abstentions: Dan Connolly, Frank van Harmelen, Jeremy Carroll, Pat > Hayes, Jos De Roo > > NEW ACTION: > Jonathon Borden to update document and pass to M Dean for use > in editing Reference Document. > > NEW ACTION: > Dan C take media type registration request to IETF > > ** Issue 15.23: add hasValue to Owl Lite > > [sound and completeness discussion] > > A great deal of email discussion took place prior to this meeting on > the subject of how the inclusion of hasValue in OWL Lite would affect > the implementation of OWL Lite reasoners. Two of the strongest voices > on each side of this debate: Ian Horrocks and Jim Hendler continued > this discussion by phone. This revealed some details with regard to > prior implementations that may have not been fully understood. > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0160.html > Describes this. This sets the background for the discussion on this > at the telecon. > > Ian asserts that - There are known decision procedures for OWL Lite > that are sound, complete and terminating. Implementations exist for > this. Addition of hasValue would break this property. > > Note that because OWL DL includes both hasValue and oneOf, decision > procedures for OWL DL reasoning are not _currently known_ to have these > properties. > > NEW ACTION Ian Horrocks to write an explanation of this situation > > Given this information about known repercussions of including hasValue > in OWL language subsets, the chair took a straw pole concerning > leaving hasValue out of OWL Lite. No one responded that they could > not live with such an action. > > The question was put: > Close Issue 5.23 by resolving to not add hasValue to OWL Lite. > RESOLVED. > objections: none > abstentions: Dan Connolly, Jos De Roo, Jonathan Borden, Jeremy Carroll, > Deb McGuinness, Mike Dean, Pat Hayes, Jeff Heflin, Jim Hendler? > > Discussion about the OWL DL feature set and implementation of OWL DL > reasoners was not entertained during the telecon, but was welcomed at > a future time (in subsequent email or when scheduled for subsequent > telecons). -- _____________________________________________ Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation mailto:lobrst@mitre.org Intelligent Information Management/Exploitation Voice: 703-883-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S W640 Fax: 703-883-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2002 10:19:52 UTC