14:47:21 RRSAgent has joined #rif 14:47:21 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/13-rif-irc 14:59:44 DaveReynolds has joined #rif 15:04:12 LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif 15:05:08 hi 15:05:24 I'm on the irc and on the phone, but it hasn't registered. 15:06:04 Zakim, this is RIF 15:06:04 ok, Harold; that matches SW_RIF(CORE)11:00AM 15:06:26 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:06:26 On the phone I see [NRCC], ??P3, LeoraMorgenstern 15:06:42 zakim, NRCC is me 15:06:42 +Harold; got it 15:07:34 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0035.html 15:09:02 +Gary 15:09:45 - http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/48 15:09:45 PROPOSED: RIF Core will include member (#) but 15:09:45 syntactically restricted its use in rule bodies. Note that in RIF-RDF 15:09:45 the equivalent property rdf:type would still be permitted in rule heads. 15:09:45 Rationale: PRD rules almost always start with 15:09:45 "if p is a person and p.age > 16 and ... then ..." 15:11:13 Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif 15:12:33 http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/PRD#Member 15:14:58 PROPOSED: RIF Core will include member (#) but syntactically restricted its use in rule bodies. 15:15:20 Comment: Note that in RIF-RDF the equivalent property rdf:type would still be permitted in rule heads. 15:16:34 Comment: If PRD introduces member (#) in the conclusion, this restriction to conditions in Core should be reconsidered. 15:17:21 Rationale: PRD rules almost always start with a member test in the condition. 15:17:42 PROPOSED: RIF Core will include member (#) but syntactically restricted its use in rule conditions. 15:18:09 rationale 2: PR leverages type system from host programming language and that is externally defined and immutable by rules 15:18:13 Comment: Note that in RIF-RDF the equivalent property rdf:type would still be permitted in rule heads. 15:18:19 Comment: If PRD introduces member (#) in the conclusion, this restriction to conditions in Core should be reconsidered. 15:20:18 Approved by Leora, Dave, Gary, Harold 15:22:14 - http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/75 15:22:14 PROPOSED: Core should keep disjunction in rule bodies, 15:22:14 only if this is permitted by the solution to issue-70. 15:24:29 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html 15:33:25 if (month='may' or month = 'jun' or month = 'jul' or month = 'aug') and (dish='clams' or dish='oysters' or dish='mussels') then "skip main course" 15:34:31 +??P2 15:35:53 month(may) etc. stored as facts and then retrieved with month(?x) has the same effect. 15:36:43 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:36:43 On the phone I see Harold, DaveReynolds, LeoraMorgenstern, Gary, ??P2 15:40:29 Finite Domains and Exclusions as First-Class Citizens: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.30.3860 15:41:40 PROPOSED: Core should keep disjunction in rule bodies. 15:41:43 Comment: 15:41:50 harold: Month('may') Month('june') Dish('clams') etc. + if (Month(?month) and Dish(?dish) then "skip main course" is equivalent 15:42:38 The solution to issue-70 is able to cope with disjunction. 15:43:18 The solution to issue-70 will be able to cope with disjunction. (see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html and follow up)> 15:44:35 PROPOSED: Core should keep disjunction in rule bodies. Implementations can be direct or in using a well-know preprocessing step. 15:45:07 PROPOSED: Core should keep disjunction in rule bodies. Implementations can be direct or in use a well-known preprocessing step. 15:45:18 PROPOSED: Core should keep disjunction in rule bodies. Implementations can be direct or use a well-known preprocessing step. 15:46:32 Comment: The solution to issue-70 will be able to cope with disjunction. (See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html and follow up). 15:48:32 PROPOSED: Core should keep ground disjunction in rule bodies. Implementations can be direct or use a well-known preprocessing step. 15:49:25 (Sorry, cannot be decided statically.) 15:51:28 PROPOSED: Core should keep safe disjunction in rule bodies. Implementations can be direct or use a well-known preprocessing step. 15:51:51 Comment: The solution to issue-70, Option 2, will be able to cope with disjunction. (See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html and follow up). 15:53:47 Comment: An example of solution to issue-70 it Option 2, which will be able to cope with disjunction. (See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html and follow up). 15:54:33 Comment: An example of a solution to issue-70 is Option 2, which will be able to cope with disjunction. (See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html and follow up). 15:55:16 Approved as above, plus by Adrian. 15:56:06 Dave: Work on Document itself. End of month should be ready. 15:56:57 ... Happy to take sections, but we should agree on them. 15:57:17 ... EBNF, Ed notes, structural changes. 15:59:45 Dave will work on this until next Monday, perhaps another Core telecon. 16:00:12 RRSAgent, make logs public 16:00:25 RRSAgent, make minutes 16:00:25 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/13-rif-minutes.html Harold 16:00:26 -??P2 16:01:34 -Harold 16:01:35 -DaveReynolds 16:01:35 -LeoraMorgenstern 16:01:39 -Gary 16:01:41 SW_RIF(CORE)11:00AM has ended 16:01:42 Attendees were LeoraMorgenstern, DaveReynolds, Harold, Gary