RIF Telecon 10-June-2008 -- 10 Jun 2008

<ChrisW> StellaMitchell can you scribe today?

yes

<ChrisW> thakns

<ChrisW> Scribe: StellaMitchell

<ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/F2F10_Minutes

<ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept F2F10 minutes

cw: any objections to approving the f2f10 minutes?

<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept F2F10 minutes

<ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jun/att-0021/RIF_Telecon_minutes__3-Jun-08.htm

cw: any objections to approving the minutes from last week's telcon?

<ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept 3-Jun telecon minutes

<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept 3-Jun telecon minutes

cw: any agenda ammendments?

Liason

cw: Adrian, Jos, Mike, any news?

MikeD: nothing from OWL

<AdrianP> nothing

cw: sandro, has the owl group discussed our responses?

sandro: I don't think so

cw: what about the joint document about something like rif:text ?

sandro: nothing has happened on thatg

cw: axel, did you agree to work on this?

axel: I think we were going to get the first working draft out with the current vefrsion of rif: text, and then after that reconcile with owl's treatment

F2F11

<AxelPolleres> remark: Can the England access number also be made public in the agenda (England +44.117.370.6152), are hteir any other accesss number we haven't got?

<sandro> ACTION: Axel to work with Jie Bao (of OWL-WG) to put together draft on rif:text/owl:internationalizedText, due 27 June 2008 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-521 - Work with Jie Bao (of OWL-WG) to put together draft on rif:text/owl:internationalizedText, due 27 June 2008 [on Axel Polleres - due 2008-06-17].

cw: email last week asking if people could make meeting sept 7-8 in either Boston or New York

<Hassan> I will not attend either anyway

cw: does anyone here have a problem with that date?

<josb> access number of Zakim in France: +33.4.89.06.34.99

<AxelPolleres> I definitly can't make that date... other obligations the week 7-11.

garyh: anyone still interested in late august in portland?

<Hassan> USA

<Hassan> yes

<AxelPolleres> possibly

cw: late august doesn't work for me

<AxelPolleres> possibly by phone

Action Review

cw: axel, could you attend part of the meeting by phone if it were on sept 7-8?

<sandro> reminder people can use http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/users/my for their own actions

ACTION-519 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-519 Start work on response to http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_PPS3 closed

<csma> I will

ACTION-518 continued

ACTION-516 continued

ACTION-517 continjued

ACTION-514 dropped

ACTION-515 continued

<AxelPolleres> Can someone point me to a mail or draft page where owl:{|

<AxelPolleres> | style="background-color: #80FF80" rowspan="1" colspan="1" |

<AxelPolleres> Editor's note: Although <tt>rif:iri</tt> is not a datatype, I left conversions from and to <tt>rif:iri</tt>s in the list of cast functions, to cover use cases in the context of RDF where you want to extract a string from an IRI denoting an RDF resource and vice versa.

<AxelPolleres> See also the use case mentioned in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Mar/0011.html

<AxelPolleres> |}

<AxelPolleres> oops.

<AxelPolleres> sorry

ACTION-512 continued

<csma> done

ACTION-511 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-511 Change REMOVE to RETRACT closed

<AxelPolleres> Can someone point me to a mail or draft page where owl:internationalizedText is referenced?

<AxelPolleres> ... or to an email.

ACTION-510 pending discussion

ACTION-508 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-508 Work out policies for pick (refraction, recency, priority, sequential) closed

ACTION-507 continued

ACTION-506 continued

ACTION-505 continued

ACTION-504 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-504 Add XML 1.0 statement to BLD closed

ACTION-503 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-503 Update BNF with base directive for relative IRI handling in PS closed

ACTION-502 continued

ACTION-501 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-501 Put text about "metadata should survive roundtripping out of RIF and back again" in Conformance section of BLD closed

harold: mk and I both made many updates but we weren't coordinating, so used different terminology

ACTION-499 pending discussion

ACTION-497 continued

ACTION-496 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-496 Update all examples for Presentation Syntax and XML syntax for curies and entities. Also add Prefix to presentation syntax. closed

<AdrianP> Yes, action-496 is done

ACTION-495 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-495 Respond to Dan2 (about well-formedness) closed

csma: where in the document is xml syntax for curies and entities defined?

harold: (points to an example 6)

cw: presentation syntax should not have curies in them

<Hassan> Are the contents of the IRI declarations for PS complete and fine?

<AdrianP> sorry I ment action 495 is done

harold: I used prefixes

jos: maybe we should mention that entities are optional, and also in example 6 we should expand one of the entities

<sandro> +1 jos, have one of the prefixes not turn into an entity, to show the correspondance is optional

harold: ok, will make that change

ACTION 494 is complete

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 494

ACTION-493 is complete

ACTION-492 continued

ACTION-490 complete

ACTION-489 complete

ACTION-486 complete

ACTION-488 complete

ACTION-487 continued

<ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/61

cw: editor's note (in action-487 should link to above issue)

ACTION-485 complete

ACTION-483 complete

ACTION-482 continued

cw: re: action-482 we discussed that dtb would be a comprehensive list of all data types, and when defining a dialect you would choose from those

ACTION-454 complete

ACTION-475 continued

ACTION-152 continued

cw: a number of resolutions (from f2f10) didn't have actions associated with them, so I want to confirm that they are done
... axel, subtypes?

axel: yes, I made the update in dtb

harold: bld doesn't require any update for this item

cw: my understanding that dtb would be a menu of data types and builtins, and so bld would have to add a paragraph saying which of those from dtb that bld uses

harold: ok, I understand

cw: and so the new section needs an "at risk" comment on rif:text

<sandro> ACTION: Harold to ask Michael to update BLD with the DTB references, including "at risk" for rif:text [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-522 - Ask Michael to update BLD with the DTB references, including \"at risk\" for rif:text [on Harold Boley - due 2008-06-17].

cw: another resultion was that we would add >= <=, etc to dtb

axel: this is done
... these were added for each data type

cw: does the bld just need to list data types and that implies that it supports all builtins for that data types?

sandro: yes, I think so

cw: so adding those predicates wouldn't impact the bld text
... another resolution was to remove symbol space ids in rif

jos: it means symbol space ids must be iris

axel: this is done

<ChrisW> modify Presentation Syntax to include "Const ::= STRING" (allowing "chat" as short for "chat"^^xs:string).

axel: harold, you can just copy updagted const grammar from dtb

<josb> very good!

cw: also, a resolution about syntax for rif:local

axel: yes, these updates are made

cw: we had a resultion do add xsd: double

axel: done

cw: there was a resolution on xml syntax for ordered=yes

harold: done

cw: resolution to point people to dublin core for metadata properties

harold: done

cw: any other discussion on actions?

Public Comments

cw: this is about the response to peter's response
... this is the only outstanding one
... jos, do you want to discuss your response to peter here?

jos: no

<josb> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2008Jun/0004.html

UCR

jos: dan c responded to my response, and said that it addressed his concerns (although he found it counter intuitive)

<AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/UCR#Requirements

<AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/UCR#OWL_data

adrian: last telcon we discussed requirements and stopped at the owl data requirement

cw: should we continue through the rest of the list?

adrian: yes

cw: we were a little stalled on coverage (5.1.6) and there was some discussion on the mailing list

sandro: no one objected to the last text that I proposed

<AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/UCR#Rule_language_coverage

sandro: that section was updated since last week, but it is more verbose than we need

cw: it needs to be reworded using standard language of requirements

<sandro> The RIF dialect targetting a group of similar rule languages must support, at a minimum, interchange of rules using all the features which are common to all the major rule languages in that group.

<AdrianP> ok sound good and compact

<sandro> (as full replacement for 5.1.6)

cw: I'd change "must" to "should"

sandro: all the other requirements use must, except for the implementability requirement

cw: but this (5.1.6) is a fuzzy requirement

<sandro> "must"

<ChrisW> Straw poll: prefer must/should in 5.1.6

<sandro> strawpoll: must vs should on that 5.1.6 text

<csma> 0

<Hassan> 0

<AdrianP> +1 for must

<josb> don't care

<AxelPolleres> should

<csma> +/- must/should

<Harold> +0.8 for must

<mdean> 0

<csma> or could be should/must

<AxelPolleres> +1 for mould

<Hassan> +1 for mould

<AdrianP> the general requirements should describe fundamental properties

<ChrisW> not mould, mold

<ChrisW> RIF must cover OWL knowledge bases as data where compatible with RIF semantics.

<AxelPolleres> These people from the US have this tendency to drop "u"s from English words...

cw: requirement 5.2.7 looks fine

<AdrianP> RIF must cover RDF triples as data where compatible with RIF semantics.

<ChrisW> RIF must cover RDF triples as data where compatible with Phase 1 semantics.

<ChrisW> PROPOSED: reword 5.2.8 to "RIF semantics"

<ChrisW> RESOLVED: reword 5.2.8 to "RIF semantics"

cw: requirement 5.2.9

<sandro> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jun/0006.html

sandro: I commented on this requirement in the above email - I don't know what this requirement means

<sandro> The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined from the contents of the document, without out-of-band data.

<sandro> The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined by the content of the document, without out-of-band data.

<AxelPolleres> makes sense

<Harold> Re 5.2.9: The XML Schema's location will differentiate between dialects.

<sandro> PROPOSED: replace 5.2.9 with re-wording: "The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined by the content of the document, without out-of-band data."

<AxelPolleres> +1

<sandro> +1

<Hassan> +1

<ChrisW> +1

<AdrianP> +1

<sandro> RESOLVED: replace 5.2.9 with re-wording: "The semantics of a RIF document must be uniquely determined by the content of the document, without out-of-band data."

cw: requirement 5.2.10 - fine

cw; requirement 5.2.11 - fine

cw: requirement 5.2.12

sandro: change 'should' to 'must'

<Harold> +1

<sandro> PROPOSED: in 5.2.12 change to "must" support ability to merge rule sets

<sandro> +1

<Hassan> +1

<AdrianP> +1

<ChrisW> +1

<sandro> RESOLVED: in 5.2.12 change to "must" support ability to merge rule sets

<sandro> PROPOSED 5.2.13 change "will" to "must"

<sandro> PROPOSED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must"

<Harold> In BLD rule sets are called groups.

<AdrianP> +1

<sandro> PROPOSED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must" & remove parenthetical comment

<Harold> groups can be identified with our new (* ... *) syntax.

<sandro> +1

<AdrianP> +1

<Hassan> +1

<Harold> +1

<ChrisW> +1

<sandro> RESOLVED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must" & remove parenthetical comment

<sandro> RESOLVED: 5.2.13 change "will" to "must" & remove parenthetical comment: RIF must support the identification of rule sets.

cw: 5.3.1

sandro: we don't clarify what we mean by "objective"

<sandro> "Objectives" to "Anticipated Future Requirements"

<sandro> ?

<sandro> PROPOSED: drop 5.3 Objectives

harold: can we say more about the 2 use cases that motivated it?

<Hassan> +1 on dropping this - "future requirement" means nothing as far as we are concerned

csma: frame or atom could point directly to a part of an xml document based on an xml schema or DTD

<Harold> DTB could have an XML-'open' data type: it would only need to be well-formed, not valid wrt our XSD -- such 'any' types are supported by XSD.

csma: using xml schema as data models in rif documents we can use that capability to use an xml document as data

cw: does anyone object to dropping this reqjuirement?

adrian, csma: I would like to keep this requirement

sandro: why are we choosing to call out this one of many possible future requirements?

<Harold> "5.3.1 XML data" is there because of many XML-based appls, incl. Web Services.

csma: I think it's in a separate section because sandro said it's a phase 2 requirement

sandro: one requirement for last call is that you met all your requirements

cw: change 'must' to 'should'?
... do you have reasonable expectation that this req would be met by prd?

csma: yes

<Harold> Yes, PRD could have such an XML-'open' data type.

<AdrianP> The implementation of this requirement in the schema is very easy

cw: so, I think it can be a regular requirment with 'must' changed to 'should'

<sandro> PROPOSED: Maybe 5.3.1 be 5.2.14 and make it a SHOULD instead of MUST.

<sandro> PROPOSED: Move 5.3.1 be 5.2.14 and make it a SHOULD instead of MUST. (support XML as data)

<sandro> +0

<csma> +0.5

<ChrisW> +1

<AdrianP> +1

<josb> 0

<Hassan> +0

<GaryHallmark> +1

<sandro> RESOLVED: Move 5.3.1 be 5.2.14 and make it a SHOULD instead of MUST. (support XML as data)

<Harold> +1

<csma> ACTION: adrianP to update UCR to reflect the above resolutions [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - adrianP

<sandro> ACTION: Adrian to update UCR to reflect resolutions in today's meeting (2008-06-10) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Adrian

<trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. agiurca, apaschke)

<sandro> ACTION: apaschke to update UCR to reflect resolutions in today's meeting (2008-06-10) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-523 - Update UCR to reflect resolutions in today's meeting (2008-06-10) [on Adrian Paschke - due 2008-06-17].

cw: adrian, anything else to discuss on ucr?

Acknowledgements

cw: all the documents need an acknowlegement section

<GaryHallmark> Christian, I see XML data as a tree of frames with constraints on its structure which could be achieved in theory by embedding XML (Schema) axioms into RIF

cw: it is customary to list by name all members of working group by name, but this group is large with many inactive members

<josb> +1

<mdean> +1

cw: so we can use other methods to come up with the name list

<sandro> "The regular attendees at Working Group meetings at the time of publication were:"

<AxelPolleres> THere are means to kick out non-active members. I think we should put the non-active people in "bad standing"

<AxelPolleres> i.e. contact their AC Reps.

<Stella_Mitchell> harold: some people made contributions early on and then didn't attend calls

<Stella_Mitchell> sandro: there can be several ways to select names and to acknowledge people

<Stella_Mitchell> harold: ok

<sandro> Sandro: the "acknowledgements" section should have this Regular Attendees bit, PLUS thanks for all the reviews, PLUS any other thanks the editors feel appropriate to give.

<csma> ACTION: sandro to start the wiki page for the active members of the WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-524 - Start the wiki page for the active members of the WG [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-06-17].

<Stella_Mitchell> cw: any other business?

<sandro> ACTION: Sandro create wiki page for inclusion in pubs, listing active members of WG at current time. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-rif-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-525 - Create wiki page for inclusion in pubs, listing active members of WG at current time. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-06-17].

<josb> +1

<csma> +1

<sandro> trackbot, ACTION-524 done

<trackbot> Sorry, sandro, I don't understand 'trackbot, ACTION-524 done'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

<sandro> ACTION-524 done

<sandro> ACTION-524: done

<trackbot> ACTION-524 Start the wiki page for the active members of the WG notes added

- DRAFT -

RIF Telecon 10-June-2008

10 Jun 2008

Attendees

Contents

Liason

F2F11

Action Review

Public Comments

UCR

Acknowledgements

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output