A status report was given by Luc. It was noted that good progress since the first f2f was made however there has been a slow down in progress because of redebating of issues and complexity. The group is deviating from the timetable and needs to re-adjust it's ambition and timetable. To address these concerns a new timetable was proposed and resolved. In terms of process, any content causing slippage from the timetable (i.e. issues not being resolved) will will be candidates for removal. The timetable will be extended by three months. The proper W3C processes will needed to be followed.
Ivan gave his perspective. He encouraged the group to simplify focusing on the core semantic web and linked data community. He emphasized that we should focus on making prov-o OWL-RL compatible. He also noted that we should use turtle for examples as that facilitates uptake.
The current status of the prov-aq document was described. Paul gave an overview of six issues he had with the document. The major issues were editiorial in nature. A key outcome was that part of the document is best practice in nature (e.g. how to use sparql to query provenance, or embedd provenance in rdfa) and other parts are a specification (e.g. how to locate provenance). The editors agreed to try and make this distinction clear. A large amount of discussion was had on the definition of provenance services. In particular, there were concerns about not allowing service specific extensions that allow clients to define how much provenance information they want back. Essentially, the service definition should allow for extensibility. Two options were discussed for the definition of a protocol for provenance service either using a WSDL approach or a url pattern approach. The editors agreed to come up with a proposal for this protocol.
Simon presented the current status of the primer. A key reason for not progressing farther is the differences between prov-o and prov-dm once those issues are resolved further work can be done. Longer term there is a goal to tailor a primer to different communities. In gerneral, the group was happy abou the primer's status. A discussion was had about having a common way to graphically illustrate provenance graphs. It was agreed that having a common convention would be good. Finally, the importance of the primer as an entry point to the entiry family was discussed. There was consensus that the group should aim for a synchronous release with the other documents.
The current best practices document describes how to extend the ontology to an application specific domain. Kai agreed to lead the development of a best practice document for using Dublin Core and Prov together. Danial, Graham and Simon agreed to help. It was agreed, not to reach out to people outside the group until the specifications have stabalized more. Ivan suggested that the Semantic Web wiki can be used to maintain examples coming from the group and best practices after the lifetime of the working group.
Two topics were discussed in this session: accounts and identifiers. Accounts - The prime use of accounts was identified as being able to express the provenance of provenance. However, the current notion attempts to support more complex notions of multiple accounts, which adds complexity to the model. To address this complixty, the group agreed that accounts are going to be taken out and replace it with a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions. Identifiers - a key issue has been what identifiers denote in the data model. The group recognized that the key problem is that we were trying to address two use-cases. The term "scruffy" provenance was used to refer to using the prov-dm vocabulary with already exisiting web resources where the subject of a provenance assertion is just a URI. The term "proper" provenance was used to refer to the case where the thing should have a frozen characterisation. Both use cases were seen as being important. To address the use case of scruffy provenance instead the editors of prov-dm proposed to remove the distinction between entities and things in the document, which reflected these two use cases. There was consensus to move forward with the renaiming.
Concerns were raised about the ability to synchronize prov-o with prov-dm. In particular, about how to know what is changed and what is not in the prov-dm. A process was agreed on to facilate synchronization. An ontology that reflects the current WD-3 version would be produced for review. Because of the possibility of the change in accounts, the updated ontology does not need to reflect accounts. Again, it was encouraged that the ontology follow owl-rl.
08:14:33 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/02-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/02-prov-irc ←
08:14:35 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
08:14:37 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be ←
08:14:37 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot ←
08:14:38 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
08:14:38 <trackbot> Date: 02 February 2012
08:14:47 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV
Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
08:14:47 <Zakim> ok, Luc, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM already started ←
08:15:16 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable
08:15:41 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni] ←
08:15:56 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
08:15:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.315.724.aaaa, [VrijeUni]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see +1.315.724.aaaa, [VrijeUni] ←
08:16:17 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
08:16:24 <tlebo> zakim, aaaa is me
Timothy Lebo: zakim, aaaa is me ←
08:16:24 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo; got it ←
08:17:13 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public ←
08:17:36 <Luc> scribe: Simon Miles
(Scribe set to Simon Miles)
08:17:52 <Luc> Topic: Introduction
Summary: A status report was given by Luc. It was noted that good progress since the first f2f was made however there has been a slow down in progress because of redebating of issues and complexity. The group is deviating from the timetable and needs to re-adjust it's ambition and timetable. To address these concerns a new timetable was proposed and resolved. In terms of process, any content causing slippage from the timetable (i.e. issues not being resolved) will will be candidates for removal. The timetable will be extended by three months. The proper W3C processes will needed to be followed.
<pgroth> Summary: A status report was given by Luc. It was noted that good progress since the first f2f was made however there has been a slow down in progress because of redebating of issues and complexity. The group is deviating from the timetable and needs to re-adjust it's ambition and timetable. To address these concerns a new timetable was proposed and resolved. In terms of process, any content causing slippage from the timetable (i.e. issues not being resolved) will will be candidates for removal. The timetable will be extended by three months. The proper W3C processes will needed to be followed.
08:17:52 <smiles> Scribe: smiles
<pgroth> Guest: Ivan (ivan) Herman, W3C
08:18:38 <smiles> Luc: good morning
Luc Moreau: good morning ←
08:19:21 <smiles> Luc: round of introductions
Luc Moreau: round of introductions ←
08:19:41 <smiles> On the phone: Tim
On the phone: Tim ←
08:20:41 <tlebo> at the table: daniel, simon, khalid, ivan,
Timothy Lebo: at the table: daniel, simon, khalid, ivan, ←
08:20:42 <smiles> Ivan: introduces himself
Ivan Herman: introduces himself ←
08:21:43 <smiles> Luc: first, need to approve minutes of last call
Luc Moreau: first, need to approve minutes of last call ←
08:21:45 <pgroth> minutes http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-01-26
Paul Groth: minutes http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-01-26 ←
08:22:49 <pgroth> Proposed: accept minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon
PROPOSED: accept minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon ←
08:22:51 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
08:22:52 <dgarijo> +0 ( I wasn't there)
Daniel Garijo: +0 ( I wasn't there) ←
08:22:54 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
08:22:54 <Paolo> +1
Paolo Missier: +1 ←
08:22:55 <kai> +1
Kai Eckert: +1 ←
08:22:58 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
08:23:09 <smiles> +1
+1 ←
08:23:41 <pgroth> accepted minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon
Paul Groth: accepted minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon ←
08:24:02 <smiles> Luc: welcome
Luc Moreau: welcome ←
08:24:42 <smiles> ... Have some observations from chairs to start
... Have some observations from chairs to start ←
08:24:47 <GK> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro
Graham Klyne: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro ←
08:25:37 <smiles> ... From initial 17 words, we have made really good progress
... From initial 17 words, we have made really good progress ←
08:26:10 <smiles> ... However, deviation from timetable, was hoping to release last call at 9 months
... However, deviation from timetable, was hoping to release last call at 9 months ←
08:26:34 <smiles> ... See redebating of issues and drop in attendance
... See redebating of issues and drop in attendance ←
08:26:58 <smiles> ... We would like to address these
... We would like to address these ←
08:27:26 <smiles> ... Have some feedback, that the model is too complex
... Have some feedback, that the model is too complex ←
<pgroth> subtopic: Comments from Ivan
Summary: Ivan gave his perspective. He encouraged the group to simplify focusing on the core semantic web and linked data community. He emphasized that we should focus on making prov-o OWL-RL compatible. He also noted that we should use turtle for examples as that facilitates uptake.
<pgroth> Summary: Ivan gave his perspective. He encouraged the group to simplify focusing on the core semantic web and linked data community. He emphasized that we should focus on making prov-o OWL-RL compatible. He also noted that we should use turtle for examples as that facilitates uptake.
08:28:45 <smiles> Ivan: concern is for use in semantic web community, realising most active part is linked data community
Ivan Herman: concern is for use in semantic web community, realising most active part is linked data community ←
08:29:17 <smiles> ... Complex OWL ontolgies are only niche areas
... Complex OWL ontolgies are only niche areas ←
08:30:41 <smiles> ... Experience with two past WGs, tried to be good for everyone, end up being ignored even though recognised useful topic
... Experience with two past WGs, tried to be good for everyone, end up being ignored even though recognised useful topic ←
08:31:30 <smiles> ... Also OWL2, technically good but uptake poor, triple stores use an implementable subset
... Also OWL2, technically good but uptake poor, triple stores use an implementable subset ←
08:35:28 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
08:35:29 <dgarijo> Ivan: maybe we have to think in profiles
Ivan Herman: maybe we have to think in profiles [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
08:35:39 <dgarijo> ... something simple that can be extended
Daniel Garijo: ... something simple that can be extended ←
08:36:01 <dgarijo> ... and it is more simple and reusable by the community
Daniel Garijo: ... and it is more simple and reusable by the community ←
08:36:15 <pgroth> ack proth
Paul Groth: ack proth ←
08:36:17 <dgarijo> pgroth: the concepts from DM are adopted from those places.
Paul Groth: the concepts from DM are adopted from those places. [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
08:36:18 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
08:36:32 <dgarijo> ivan: is every concept of DM necessary?
Ivan Herman: is every concept of DM necessary? [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
08:36:55 <dgarijo> luc: there are interoperability issues that are not yet addressed
Luc Moreau: there are interoperability issues that are not yet addressed [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
08:37:17 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
08:37:36 <dgarijo> ivan: I took olaf and jun's voc as an example
Ivan Herman: I took olaf and jun's voc as an example [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
08:37:48 <dgarijo> ... when I look at it I say: I get i
Daniel Garijo: ... when I look at it I say: I get i ←
08:37:54 <dgarijo> t
Daniel Garijo: t ←
08:38:12 <stain> q+
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←
08:38:37 <smiles> Ivan: would prefer to have whole spec in terms of rdf, possibility of linked data profile
Ivan Herman: would prefer to have whole spec in terms of rdf, possibility of linked data profile ←
08:38:59 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
08:39:57 <GK> q+ to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability
Graham Klyne: q+ to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability ←
08:40:15 <stain> Ivan: PROV-O is simple - OWL-RL-like - Keep it like that!
Ivan Herman: PROV-O is simple - OWL-RL-like - Keep it like that! [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
08:40:20 <stain> Ivan: RDFS with a tiny bit of OWL
Ivan Herman: RDFS with a tiny bit of OWL [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
08:40:25 <dgarijo> +q
Daniel Garijo: +q ←
08:40:29 <smiles> ...with regards to prov-o, impression is that ontology is actually simple, which is good, but should be made clear that
...with regards to prov-o, impression is that ontology is actually simple, which is good, but should be made clear that ←
08:41:10 <smiles> ... this is owl-rl
... this is owl-rl ←
08:41:27 <stain> Ivan: Pleease, don't use RDF/XML
Ivan Herman: Pleease, don't use RDF/XML [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
08:41:32 <stain> stain: +1 +1 +1 +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 +1 +1 +1 [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
08:41:34 <tlebo> :-)
Timothy Lebo: :-) ←
08:41:59 <smiles> ... Please do not use rdf/xml, our concern is not owl reasoners and is not readable
... Please do not use rdf/xml, our concern is not owl reasoners and is not readable ←
08:42:43 <smiles> ...use a time ontology in provo, but it is a draft not followed up
...use a time ontology in provo, but it is a draft not followed up ←
08:42:47 <stain> Ivan: Turtle should hopefully be standardized by then
Ivan Herman: Turtle should hopefully be standardized by then [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
08:43:27 <GK> (I'm very sympathetic with don't use RDF, but I'd like to ask Ivan about where the wind is blowing w.e.
Graham Klyne: (I'm very sympathetic with don't use RDF, but I'd like to ask Ivan about where the wind is blowing w.e. ←
08:43:43 <GK> ... w.r.t. a preferred format for RDF interchange.)
Graham Klyne: ... w.r.t. a preferred format for RDF interchange.) ←
08:43:51 <smiles> ... Rdf group had discussion about time, pat hayes looking at time vocabulary, may be a way forward
... Rdf group had discussion about time, pat hayes looking at time vocabulary, may be a way forward ←
08:44:44 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
08:44:51 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
08:44:55 <smiles> Luc: thanks for the input
Luc Moreau: thanks for the input ←
08:44:56 <GK> ack stain
Graham Klyne: ack stain ←
08:45:42 <tlebo> @GK, RDF__/XML__
Timothy Lebo: @GK, RDF__/XML__ ←
08:45:48 <smiles> Ivan: reading provo at moment, have to go to dm, should be self standing owl docuement
Ivan Herman: reading provo at moment, have to go to dm, should be self standing owl docuement ←
08:46:07 <smiles> ... Go to dm for details if needed
... Go to dm for details if needed ←
08:46:19 <Paolo> q?
Paolo Missier: q? ←
08:46:20 <GK> ack GK
Graham Klyne: ack GK ←
08:46:21 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability ←
08:46:21 <smiles> ... Starting point owl document
... Starting point owl document ←
08:46:25 <Paolo> q+
Paolo Missier: q+ ←
08:47:33 <smiles> GK: regarding interoperabiltiy, when creating standards cant solve every interoperability problem, have to start with big ones
Graham Klyne: regarding interoperabiltiy, when creating standards cant solve every interoperability problem, have to start with big ones ←
08:48:18 <Luc> q/
Luc Moreau: q/ ←
08:48:21 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
08:48:32 <tlebo> ivan: "what exactly do you mean by XXXX"?
Ivan Herman: "what exactly do you mean by XXXX"? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
08:48:52 <GK> @tlebo s/XXXX/interoperability/
Graham Klyne: @tlebo s/XXXX/interoperability/ ←
08:49:16 <Luc> ack dg
Luc Moreau: ack dg ←
08:49:19 <stain> tlebo: fast action on you :) (PROV-ISSUE-231)
Timothy Lebo: fast action on you :) (PROV-ISSUE-231) [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
08:49:31 <Luc> ack pao
Luc Moreau: ack pao ←
08:49:50 <stain> in fact OWL-wise it's almost removed already as we've redeclared the few elements we're using.. we just need to change the prefix
Stian Soiland-Reyes: in fact OWL-wise it's almost removed already as we've redeclared the few elements we're using.. we just need to change the prefix ←
08:50:14 <GK> q+ to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address
Graham Klyne: q+ to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address ←
08:50:36 <tlebo> @stian, I'm surprised I didn't submit the "NO RDF/XML" issue first :)
Timothy Lebo: @stian, I'm surprised I didn't submit the "NO RDF/XML" issue first :) ←
08:50:54 <GK> q+ to mention past experience (Internet fax)
Graham Klyne: q+ to mention past experience (Internet fax) ←
08:51:15 <smiles> Paolo: appreciate comments, accept simplification needed, but worried that taking Jun and Olafs document as ideal means not being as ambituous and not addressing wider community
Paolo Missier: appreciate comments, accept simplification needed, but worried that taking Jun and Olafs document as ideal means not being as ambituous and not addressing wider community ←
08:51:30 <Luc> in this WG, there is a lot of prior art which is not just linked data!
Luc Moreau: in this WG, there is a lot of prior art which is not just linked data! ←
08:51:49 <dgarijo> @tlebo: we discussed this. Weren't you and I supposed to add the exmaples in turtle?
Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: we discussed this. Weren't you and I supposed to add the exmaples in turtle? ←
08:52:47 <dgarijo> now we have an additional motivation to convince satya :D
Daniel Garijo: now we have an additional motivation to convince satya :D ←
08:53:19 <smiles> Luc: paul and I feel that work around concepts in DM are blocking other work, so would like to conclude discussions on entities, identifiers etc.
Luc Moreau: paul and I feel that work around concepts in DM are blocking other work, so would like to conclude discussions on entities, identifiers etc. ←
08:53:23 <tlebo> @dgarijo, right, we never got consensus.
Timothy Lebo: @dgarijo, right, we never got consensus. ←
08:53:58 <Paolo> q?
Paolo Missier: q? ←
08:54:00 <smiles> ... Bandwidth to move to other stuff to make WG successful
... Bandwidth to move to other stuff to make WG successful ←
08:54:28 <smiles> ... With regards to timetable, should revise to reflect ambitions we have
... With regards to timetable, should revise to reflect ambitions we have ←
08:55:22 <smiles> ... But also adjust ambitions to timetable, drop concepts from initial charter
... But also adjust ambitions to timetable, drop concepts from initial charter ←
08:56:13 <smiles> ... Example use cases are not relevant to user communities
... Example use cases are not relevant to user communities ←
08:56:50 <smiles> ... E.g. Concept of entity is complex because trying to address all cases
... E.g. Concept of entity is complex because trying to address all cases ←
08:57:08 <smiles> ... Today 3PWD of DM being released
... Today 3PWD of DM being released ←
08:57:39 <smiles> ... Next should solve issues of entities, identifiers, accounts, alternateOf
... Next should solve issues of entities, identifiers, accounts, alternateOf ←
08:58:00 <smiles> ... Paul and I will propose simplification, dropping concepts
... Paul and I will propose simplification, dropping concepts ←
08:59:21 <smiles> ... Timetable as originally envisaged plus 3 months
... Timetable as originally envisaged plus 3 months ←
09:00:15 <smiles> Ivan: admin path has to be followed, if extended need to convince that have good plan to complete work, i.e. be far enough in pipeline
Ivan Herman: admin path has to be followed, if extended need to convince that have good plan to complete work, i.e. be far enough in pipeline ←
09:00:54 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
09:00:57 <Luc> ack gk
Luc Moreau: ack gk ←
09:00:57 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address and to mention past experience (Internet fax)
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address and to mention past experience (Internet fax) ←
09:00:58 <smiles> .. Managament tougher on this than used to be
.. Managament tougher on this than used to be ←
09:01:10 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
09:01:18 <smiles> GK: is model too complex or overspecified?
Graham Klyne: is model too complex or overspecified? ←
09:01:45 <Paolo> q+
Paolo Missier: q+ ←
09:01:55 <smiles> ... Corner cases can show where we can remove things from the spec
... Corner cases can show where we can remove things from the spec ←
09:02:36 <smiles> ... E.g. Identifiers issue may not arise if use rdf from start rather than asn
... E.g. Identifiers issue may not arise if use rdf from start rather than asn ←
09:03:05 <smiles> Luc: dont think this is incompatible with chairs view
Luc Moreau: dont think this is incompatible with chairs view ←
09:03:38 <smiles> GK: if we declare dm done, we may still come back to the issues
Graham Klyne: if we declare dm done, we may still come back to the issues ←
09:04:36 <smiles> Luc: declring dm done is wg saying done, not just editors
Luc Moreau: declring dm done is wg saying done, not just editors ←
09:04:54 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
09:04:58 <pgroth> ace paolo
Paul Groth: ace paolo ←
09:05:01 <pgroth> ack paolo
Paul Groth: ack paolo ←
09:05:06 <stain> but it's not easy for the WG to consider things done or not done when the editors are continually changing the draft without proper involvement of the WG
Stian Soiland-Reyes: but it's not easy for the WG to consider things done or not done when the editors are continually changing the draft without proper involvement of the WG ←
09:05:07 <smiles> pgroth: part of declaring done is anything possible to cut down
Paul Groth: part of declaring done is anything possible to cut down ←
09:05:29 <tlebo> q+ to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o
Timothy Lebo: q+ to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o ←
09:05:48 <stain> declaring it done is like declaring an API done - we can't go there before we've explored properly using it (otherwise we'll get the PROV version of the DOM API :) )
Stian Soiland-Reyes: declaring it done is like declaring an API done - we can't go there before we've explored properly using it (otherwise we'll get the PROV version of the DOM API :) ) ←
09:05:58 <GK> @tlebo ack.
Graham Klyne: @tlebo ack. ←
09:06:13 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
09:06:48 <jcheney> q+ (dependencies, versioning, charter)
James Cheney: q+ (dependencies, versioning, charter) ←
09:06:57 <jcheney> q- (dependencies, versioning, charter)
James Cheney: q- (dependencies, versioning, charter) ←
09:07:22 <jcheney> q+ to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter
James Cheney: q+ to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter ←
09:08:18 <stain> would it be good to move DM to a more UML-like data model?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: would it be good to move DM to a more UML-like data model? ←
09:08:19 <dgarijo> paolo: you don't want to leave out part of the community because you'll miss an oportunity.
Paolo Missier: you don't want to leave out part of the community because you'll miss an oportunity. [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
09:08:34 <dgarijo> tim: I find it difficult because RDF is a second citizen
Timothy Lebo: I find it difficult because RDF is a second citizen [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
09:08:46 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:08:49 <Luc> ack tle
Luc Moreau: ack tle ←
09:08:49 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o
Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o ←
09:08:59 <Luc> ack kh
Luc Moreau: ack kh ←
09:09:32 <stain> +1 to Paolo's suggestion - basically he was suggesting a more iterative process where PROV-O feeds into PROV-DM in a loop rather than the current one-way development
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 to Paolo's suggestion - basically he was suggesting a more iterative process where PROV-O feeds into PROV-DM in a loop rather than the current one-way development ←
09:09:34 <GK> BTW, notwithstanding my comments, I'm not opposed to having ASN, but I think it could be presented more simply, maybe with less specification detail. Just saying.
Graham Klyne: BTW, notwithstanding my comments, I'm not opposed to having ASN, but I think it could be presented more simply, maybe with less specification detail. Just saying. ←
09:09:49 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:09:55 <dgarijo> khalid: instead of trying to simplify DM I'd leave as it is now and identify the concept that are difficult to represent in OWL and simplify them afterwards
Khalid Belhajjame: instead of trying to simplify DM I'd leave as it is now and identify the concept that are difficult to represent in OWL and simplify them afterwards [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
09:09:58 <Luc> ack jc
Luc Moreau: ack jc ←
09:09:58 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter
Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter ←
09:10:06 <smiles> @dgarijo i am back, will continue scribing
@dgarijo i am back, will continue scribing ←
09:10:27 <dgarijo> @smiles: ok!
Daniel Garijo: @smiles: ok! ←
09:10:30 <tlebo> +1 to parallel / two way development. all of the wg should be thinking in ASN and PROV-O. PROV-O can't just fall out of DM.
Timothy Lebo: +1 to parallel / two way development. all of the wg should be thinking in ASN and PROV-O. PROV-O can't just fall out of DM. ←
09:11:08 <smiles> jcheney: since dm developed first, been hard to keep ontology up, but was useful to start without owl details
James Cheney: since dm developed first, been hard to keep ontology up, but was useful to start without owl details ←
09:11:20 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
09:11:54 <tlebo> BTW, there's a very big difference between encoding in RDF and getting hung up in OWL.
Timothy Lebo: BTW, there's a very big difference between encoding in RDF and getting hung up in OWL. ←
09:11:56 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:12:16 <smiles> ... Point 2, for entities could now take rdf resources view, as alternateof etc controversial may not be part of stantdard
... Point 2, for entities could now take rdf resources view, as alternateof etc controversial may not be part of stantdard ←
09:12:30 <jcheney> PIL should be applicable to any resource, not just for Semantic Web objects; have a low entry point to facilitate widespread adoption, and makes it easy to do simple things; have a small core model and allow for extensions (ie, profiles, integration of other more expressive/complementary vocabularies/frameworks);
James Cheney: PIL should be applicable to any resource, not just for Semantic Web objects; have a low entry point to facilitate widespread adoption, and makes it easy to do simple things; have a small core model and allow for extensions (ie, profiles, integration of other more expressive/complementary vocabularies/frameworks); ←
09:12:40 <smiles> ... Also, would be good to look at charter above
... Also, would be good to look at charter above ←
09:12:54 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:13:03 <tlebo> @jcheney "Semantic Web objects" are "any resource"
Timothy Lebo: @jcheney "Semantic Web objects" are "any resource" ←
09:13:39 <Luc> ack iv
Luc Moreau: ack iv ←
09:13:42 <jcheney> @tlebo: That was a quote from the charter, not my wording: http://www.w3.org/2011/01/prov-wg-charter#scope
James Cheney: @tlebo: That was a quote from the charter, not my wording: http://www.w3.org/2011/01/prov-wg-charter#scope ←
09:14:11 <tlebo> @jcheney, thx.
Timothy Lebo: @jcheney, thx. ←
09:14:14 <smiles> Ivan: on time, spent hour yesterday in rdf wg, ended up looking for simple proposal, else could contnue for couple of years
Ivan Herman: on time, spent hour yesterday in rdf wg, ended up looking for simple proposal, else could contnue for couple of years ←
09:14:23 <GK> We could follow@jcheney's suggestion - focus on just expressing provenance with an implicit assumption of non-variability and punt the rest (my interpretation). I think that would be a reasonable approach, as the the rest of the details could be filled in later.
Graham Klyne: We could follow@jcheney's suggestion - focus on just expressing provenance with an implicit assumption of non-variability and punt the rest (my interpretation). I think that would be a reasonable approach, as the the rest of the details could be filled in later. ←
09:14:24 <stain> it takes time even for us who have been in the WG since the beginning
Stian Soiland-Reyes: it takes time even for us who have been in the WG since the beginning ←
09:15:06 <smiles> Luc: definite views - linked data view, owl view, more than sw view
Luc Moreau: definite views - linked data view, owl view, more than sw view ←
09:15:31 <smiles> ... If reasonable, pragmatic can meet timetable
... If reasonable, pragmatic can meet timetable ←
09:16:29 <tlebo> (what was that example?)
Timothy Lebo: (what was that example?) ←
09:16:33 <GK> I don't think anyone said prov-o was 2nd class. Rather, I thought the comment was that RDF syntax was 2nd class.
Graham Klyne: I don't think anyone said prov-o was 2nd class. Rather, I thought the comment was that RDF syntax was 2nd class. ←
09:16:35 <smiles> ... Work of PROVO team is not second class, need to work in way which makes ths clear
... Work of PROVO team is not second class, need to work in way which makes ths clear ←
09:17:54 <smiles> ... Meeting timettable may need dropping use cases, also should be based on prior art as standrdisation not research
... Meeting timettable may need dropping use cases, also should be based on prior art as standrdisation not research ←
09:17:55 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
09:17:57 <stain> (as a side-note - we went for OWL Time because we first wanted to say that we don't want to restrict how time is specified (like Plan and Role) - but then needed to have a realistic mapping to XSD DateTime - OWL Time allowed both - and also gave a way to talk about partially ordered events (as discussed, but perhaps not practicsed, in DM)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: (as a side-note - we went for OWL Time because we first wanted to say that we don't want to restrict how time is specified (like Plan and Role) - but then needed to have a realistic mapping to XSD DateTime - OWL Time allowed both - and also gave a way to talk about partially ordered events (as discussed, but perhaps not practicsed, in DM) ←
09:18:20 <GK> I'm not convinced dropping "use cases" is enough. I think we need to lower levels of specification detail in some areas.
Graham Klyne: I'm not convinced dropping "use cases" is enough. I think we need to lower levels of specification detail in some areas. ←
09:18:33 <smiles> ... Chairs will rely more on W3c processes
... Chairs will rely more on W3c processes ←
09:19:08 <smiles> Paul: have been too laid back so far, e.g. Issues open for months
Paul Groth: have been too laid back so far, e.g. Issues open for months ←
09:19:41 <smiles> Ivan: each rdf wg call starts with open issues, why not addressed
Ivan Herman: each rdf wg call starts with open issues, why not addressed ←
09:20:02 <smiles> Luc: we also do that, but do not enforce completion
Luc Moreau: we also do that, but do not enforce completion ←
09:20:29 <smiles> Ivan: once issue closed do not reopen unless there is new evidence
Ivan Herman: once issue closed do not reopen unless there is new evidence ←
09:20:30 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:20:51 <Luc> ack ivan
Luc Moreau: ack ivan ←
09:21:33 <smiles> Luc: never communicated to outsde world how to approach documents, e.g. Primer then provo
Luc Moreau: never communicated to outsde world how to approach documents, e.g. Primer then provo ←
09:21:46 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:22:17 <smiles> GK: what is conclusion?
Graham Klyne: what is conclusion? ←
09:22:58 <smiles> Luc: strategy driven by the timetable, milestones; can refine milestones over next two days
Luc Moreau: strategy driven by the timetable, milestones; can refine milestones over next two days ←
09:23:57 <smiles> GK: if we slip from new timetable, what is strategy to get back on track?
Graham Klyne: if we slip from new timetable, what is strategy to get back on track? ←
09:24:31 <smiles> Luc: where discussion does not reach consensus, remove from spec
Luc Moreau: where discussion does not reach consensus, remove from spec ←
09:24:58 <smiles> Paul: chairs can decide out of scope
Paul Groth: chairs can decide out of scope ←
09:25:19 <smiles> Ivan: easier to drop from charter rather than add
Ivan Herman: easier to drop from charter rather than add ←
09:25:40 <jcheney> q+ to ask about 17 concepts
James Cheney: q+ to ask about 17 concepts ←
09:25:50 <smiles> GK: agree that this is a concerete strategy
Graham Klyne: agree that this is a concerete strategy ←
09:26:54 <stain> The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable
Stian Soiland-Reyes: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable ←
09:27:13 <stain> ^Luc's proposal
Stian Soiland-Reyes: ^Luc's proposal ←
09:27:45 <GK> +1
Graham Klyne: +1 ←
09:27:56 <Stian> PROPOSED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable
PROPOSED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable ←
09:27:59 <kai> +1
Kai Eckert: +1 ←
09:28:00 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
09:28:00 <Stian> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
09:28:01 <smiles> +1
+1 ←
09:28:02 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
09:28:02 <GK> +1
Graham Klyne: +1 ←
09:28:03 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
09:28:07 <Paolo> +1
Paolo Missier: +1 ←
09:28:16 <Stian> s/a //
09:28:34 <Stian> ACCEPTED The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable
Stian Soiland-Reyes: ACCEPTED The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable ←
09:28:44 <Stian> RESOLVED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable
RESOLVED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable ←
09:28:48 <Stian> we'll do both
Stian Soiland-Reyes: we'll do both ←
09:29:05 <smiles> Khalid: +1 (not on irc)
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 (not on irc) ←
09:45:31 <Luc> q?
(No events recorded for 16 minutes)
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:45:36 <Luc> ack jc
Luc Moreau: ack jc ←
09:45:36 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to ask about 17 concepts
Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to ask about 17 concepts ←
09:45:43 <tlebo> hello
Timothy Lebo: hello ←
09:45:46 <pgroth> hi
Paul Groth: hi ←
09:47:05 <GK1> hi
Graham Klyne: hi ←
09:47:10 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:47:17 <Stian> Scribe: Stian
(Scribe set to Stian Soiland-Reyes)
09:47:21 <khalidbelhajjame> Session on Provenance Access and Query
Khalid Belhajjame: Session on Provenance Access and Query ←
<pgroth> Topic: Provenance Access and Query
Summary: The current status of the prov-aq document was described. Paul gave an overview of six issues he had with the document. The major issues were editiorial in nature. A key outcome was that part of the document is best practice in nature (e.g. how to use sparql to query provenance, or embedd provenance in rdfa) and other parts are a specification (e.g. how to locate provenance). The editors agreed to try and make this distinction clear. A large amount of discussion was had on the definition of provenance services. In particular, there were concerns about not allowing service specific extensions that allow clients to define how much provenance information they want back. Essentially, the service definition should allow for extensibility. Two options were discussed for the definition of a protocol for provenance service either using a WSDL approach or a url pattern approach. The editors agreed to come up with a proposal for this protocol.
<pgroth> Summary: The current status of the prov-aq document was described. Paul gave an overview of six issues he had with the document. The major issues were editiorial in nature. A key outcome was that part of the document is best practice in nature (e.g. how to use sparql to query provenance, or embedd provenance in rdfa) and other parts are a specification (e.g. how to locate provenance). The editors agreed to try and make this distinction clear. A large amount of discussion was had on the definition of provenance services. In particular, there were concerns about not allowing service specific extensions that allow clients to define how much provenance information they want back. Essentially, the service definition should allow for extensibility. Two options were discussed for the definition of a protocol for provenance service either using a WSDL approach or a url pattern approach. The editors agreed to come up with a proposal for this protocol.
09:47:32 <Stian> pgroth: some issues to address.. GK, any?
Paul Groth: some issues to address.. GK, any? ←
09:47:45 <Stian> GK1: Mainly notes within the document, or issue list.
Graham Klyne: Mainly notes within the document, or issue list. ←
09:47:59 <Stian> pgroth: Have 6 issues
Paul Groth: Have 6 issues ←
09:48:08 <Stian> pgroth: 1) Have a current service description
Paul Groth: 1) Have a current service description ←
09:48:25 <Stian> ... Uses an IETF Draft spec on how we define the service description
... Uses an IETF Draft spec on how we define the service description ←
09:48:32 <Stian> GK: Template stuff
Graham Klyne: Template stuff ←
09:48:39 <Stian> GK: Close to becoming an IETF standard
Graham Klyne: Close to becoming an IETF standard ←
09:48:50 <Stian> pgroth: minor technical issue.. second was that we have to do multiple lookups
Paul Groth: minor technical issue.. second was that we have to do multiple lookups ←
09:49:01 <Stian> pgroth: you have to dereference the service specification, understand it, and then do the thing
Paul Groth: you have to dereference the service specification, understand it, and then do the thing ←
09:49:22 <Stian> pgroth: Luc suggested on Sparql. They define a WSDL document that defines the way you get SPARQL or not
Paul Groth: Luc suggested on Sparql. They define a WSDL document that defines the way you get SPARQL or not ←
09:49:33 <tlebo> WSDL died by SPARQL 1.1, no?
Timothy Lebo: WSDL died by SPARQL 1.1, no? ←
09:49:45 <Stian> pgroth: one suggestion is to revisit the service specification and concretize it as a WSDL specification
Paul Groth: one suggestion is to revisit the service specification and concretize it as a WSDL specification ←
09:49:56 <Stian> pgroth: and by very specific about the form of the URI should look like when you make a query
Paul Groth: and by very specific about the form of the URI should look like when you make a query ←
09:50:18 <Stian> GK: Have been doing other stuff
Graham Klyne: Have been doing other stuff ←
09:50:32 <pgroth> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/paq/prov-aq.html#provenance-services
Paul Groth: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/paq/prov-aq.html#provenance-services ←
09:50:38 <Stian> pgroth: section 4
Paul Groth: section 4 ←
09:50:52 <Stian> GK: Was not initially convinced of the need for this section!
Graham Klyne: Was not initially convinced of the need for this section! ←
09:51:01 <Stian> GK: Need simplification or elimination
Graham Klyne: Need simplification or elimination ←
09:51:12 <Stian> GK: Are we just doing strategies in this session, or digging in?
Graham Klyne: Are we just doing strategies in this session, or digging in? ←
09:51:22 <Stian> Luc: Identify what we as the WG should work on
Luc Moreau: Identify what we as the WG should work on ←
09:51:28 <Stian> Luc: so we can say that we don't do anything more on this
Luc Moreau: so we can say that we don't do anything more on this ←
09:51:33 <Stian> pgroth: will go through the rest of my issues
Paul Groth: will go through the rest of my issues ←
09:51:42 <Stian> pgroth: issue of definition on provenance service
Paul Groth: issue of definition on provenance service ←
09:52:12 <Stian> pgroth: second issue, in the document we have access - how we go from a Resource to associated Provenance [Information] - section 1
Paul Groth: second issue, in the document we have access - how we go from a Resource to associated Provenance [Information] - section 1 ←
09:52:32 <Stian> ... then we have queries, how they look like, guidance on sparql etc. One of my questions is wether or not they should be seprated into different documents
... then we have queries, how they look like, guidance on sparql etc. One of my questions is wether or not they should be seprated into different documents ←
09:52:58 <Stian> ... something that defines a query service documentation - might be super-simple. Maybe some patterns on how to use sparql. And then a query document, where's how you go from web resource to provenance.
... something that defines a query service documentation - might be super-simple. Maybe some patterns on how to use sparql. And then a query document, where's how you go from web resource to provenance. ←
09:53:38 <Stian> ... Third issue is.. we have, section 3 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#locating-provenance-information
... Third issue is.. we have, section 3 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#locating-provenance-information ←
09:53:38 <Luc> wsld2.0 interface for sparql protocol: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/
Luc Moreau: wsld2.0 interface for sparql protocol: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/ ←
09:53:54 <Stian> ... we have resources represented as... X hasprovenance service and has provenance. Duplicate.
... we have resources represented as... X hasprovenance service and has provenance. Duplicate. ←
09:54:01 <Stian> pgroth: would find that complicating
Paul Groth: would find that complicating ←
09:54:07 <Stian> GK1: was uneasy about that as well.
Graham Klyne: was uneasy about that as well. ←
09:54:14 <Stian> pgroth: Can we get rid of this duality
Paul Groth: Can we get rid of this duality ←
09:54:30 <Stian> pgroth: Fourth issue - PAQ does not say how to locate provenance information within RDFa
Paul Groth: Fourth issue - PAQ does not say how to locate provenance information within RDFa ←
09:54:41 <Stian> GK1: it's implicit in RDF - how to find it in RDF, then how to find it in RDFa?
Graham Klyne: it's implicit in RDF - how to find it in RDF, then how to find it in RDFa? ←
09:54:55 <Stian> pgroth: perhaps a simple example
Paul Groth: perhaps a simple example ←
09:55:02 <Stian> pgroth: should it be in the PAQ?
Paul Groth: should it be in the PAQ? ←
09:55:09 <Stian> pgroth: best practice? Or in PROV-O?
Paul Groth: best practice? Or in PROV-O? ←
09:55:45 <Stian> GK1: You mentioned best practice.. I thought this document was trying to also be best practice. We might review this.
Graham Klyne: You mentioned best practice.. I thought this document was trying to also be best practice. We might review this. ←
09:55:54 <Stian> pgroth: it's clear that there is specification.. for instance link headers
Paul Groth: it's clear that there is specification.. for instance link headers ←
09:56:06 <Stian> GK1: hoping we would go for registration of these with the IETF registry
Graham Klyne: hoping we would go for registration of these with the IETF registry ←
09:56:12 <Stian> pgroth: so this is a specification
Paul Groth: so this is a specification ←
09:56:39 <Stian> (I edited best practice document on the plane to say that an RDF document can be identified as a prov:Account if it simply says <> a prov:Account
(I edited best practice document on the plane to say that an RDF document can be identified as a prov:Account if it simply says <> a prov:Account ←
09:56:42 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
09:56:47 <Stian> (which should work also for RDFa)
(which should work also for RDFa) ←
09:56:56 <Stian> Luc: Original charter had this in
Luc Moreau: Original charter had this in ←
09:57:12 <Stian> Luc: we received feedback that we have too many implementations on the timetable, so downgraded to a note
Luc Moreau: we received feedback that we have too many implementations on the timetable, so downgraded to a note ←
09:57:16 <Stian> ^^ as a recommendation
^^ as a recommendation ←
09:57:24 <Stian> Luc: as a WG we can define what we are tryin to achieve here
Luc Moreau: as a WG we can define what we are tryin to achieve here ←
09:57:33 <Stian> GK1: Have been trying to follow what I get from the group
Graham Klyne: Have been trying to follow what I get from the group ←
09:57:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
09:58:01 <Stian> pgroth: broadly the document does strike the right balance between reusing what's there, and identifying how you reuse it. But it defines clearly how you should do X,Y,Z, which to me is a specification.
Paul Groth: broadly the document does strike the right balance between reusing what's there, and identifying how you reuse it. But it defines clearly how you should do X,Y,Z, which to me is a specification. ←
09:58:07 <Stian> pgroth: it's fine if a specification is built on other work
Paul Groth: it's fine if a specification is built on other work ←
09:58:23 <Stian> GK1: at this stage we didn't have a clear enough view of which areas we would use PROV to achieve interoperability
Graham Klyne: at this stage we didn't have a clear enough view of which areas we would use PROV to achieve interoperability ←
09:58:27 <Stian> pgroth: perhaps that's what we need to talk about
Paul Groth: perhaps that's what we need to talk about ←
09:58:59 <Stian> GK1: which aspects of interoperability is important. You mentioned splitting the document. To me this is not as much access vs query, but here is a baseline for basic interoperability vs here are some other things you can do if the basic mechanisms don't work
Graham Klyne: which aspects of interoperability is important. You mentioned splitting the document. To me this is not as much access vs query, but here is a baseline for basic interoperability vs here are some other things you can do if the basic mechanisms don't work ←
09:59:06 <Stian> pgroth: sounds like a reasonable split
Paul Groth: sounds like a reasonable split ←
09:59:13 <Stian> ... The provenance services..
... The provenance services.. ←
09:59:21 <Stian> GK1: the issue you raised.. this is what?
Graham Klyne: the issue you raised.. this is what? ←
09:59:27 <Stian> pgroth: PAQ does not have RDFa?
Paul Groth: PAQ does not have RDFa? ←
09:59:37 <Stian> pgroth: where does it belong.. we moved on to wether or not PAQ is a spec.
Paul Groth: where does it belong.. we moved on to wether or not PAQ is a spec. ←
09:59:49 <Stian> pgroth: seems consensus is that part of it is spec and others not
Paul Groth: seems consensus is that part of it is spec and others not ←
09:59:59 <Stian> Stian: like "This is informal section" etc?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: like "This is informal section" etc? ←
10:00:02 <Stian> pgroth: or splitting
Paul Groth: or splitting ←
10:00:16 <Stian> pgroth: Currently we're very entity focused
Paul Groth: Currently we're very entity focused ←
10:00:34 <Stian> pgroth: there's lots of other thins in PROV-DM and in the world that we might want to do provenance of
Paul Groth: there's lots of other thins in PROV-DM and in the world that we might want to do provenance of ←
10:00:42 <Stian> Luc: for instance, provenance of an activity!
Luc Moreau: for instance, provenance of an activity! ←
10:00:51 <Stian> GK1: my suggestion was a refactoring of those!
Graham Klyne: my suggestion was a refactoring of those! ←
10:01:22 <Stian> pgroth: first agree if we are talkina bout more than entities, if so, what can we do..
Paul Groth: first agree if we are talkina bout more than entities, if so, what can we do.. ←
10:01:29 <Stian> pgroth: we are entity questions, but is that appropriate?
Paul Groth: we are entity focuseds, but is that appropriate? ←
10:01:33 <Stian> s/question/focused/
10:01:52 <Stian> pgroth: finally: There are some paragraphs where..
Paul Groth: finally: There are some paragraphs where.. ←
10:02:03 <Stian> pgroth: section 2 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#accessing-provenance-information
Paul Groth: section 2 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#accessing-provenance-information ←
10:02:06 <Stian> pgroth: second and last paragraph
Paul Groth: second and last paragraph ←
10:02:35 <Stian> pgroth: rewrite stuff "provided that such change does not contradict any previously retrieved information" - status about provenance - get rid and don't worry about there
Paul Groth: rewrite stuff "provided that such change does not contradict any previously retrieved information" - status about provenance - get rid and don't worry about there ←
10:02:47 <Stian> GK1: they were put in wether a provenance retrieved is changeable or not
Graham Klyne: they were put in wether a provenance retrieved is changeable or not ←
10:03:00 <Stian> GK1: initially it seemed to me that the intention was.. a dynamic resource, and a provenance resource
Graham Klyne: initially it seemed to me that the intention was.. a dynamic resource, and a provenance resource ←
10:03:11 <Stian> GK1: then you would not expect the provenance resource to update as the dynamic resource was
Graham Klyne: then you would not expect the provenance resource to update as the dynamic resource was ←
10:03:27 <Stian> GK1: but as what we talked about this morning changes, this might become redundant
Graham Klyne: but as what we talked about this morning changes, this might become redundant ←
10:03:46 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: the entity discussion made it useful - because now you talk about entity instead of resource
Khalid Belhajjame: the entity discussion made it useful - because now you talk about entity instead of resource ←
10:03:59 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: earlier we could not distinguish them
Khalid Belhajjame: earlier we could not distinguish them ←
10:04:25 <Stian> GK1: but do we need to hang so much on this discussion? It was probably an important discussion - but is this important for the presentation on how to access information about some resource?
Graham Klyne: but do we need to hang so much on this discussion? It was probably an important discussion - but is this important for the presentation on how to access provenance \0rmation about some resource? ←
10:04:31 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:04:33 <Stian> s/info/provenance \0/
10:04:47 <Stian> pgroth: Use the paq as saying 'There's some provenance info about this X over there'
Paul Groth: Use the paq as saying 'There's some provenance info about this X over there' ←
10:05:07 <Stian> pgroth: whatever is there - we don't say anything about it - you decide if it changes etc
Paul Groth: whatever is there - we don't say anything about it - you decide if it changes etc ←
10:05:13 <Stian> pgroth: that's my view - agnostic
Paul Groth: that's my view - agnostic ←
10:05:27 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
10:05:30 <Stian> GK1: works for me and close to where I came from. That's the web - here's some related info, go get it
Graham Klyne: works for me and close to where I came from. That's the web - here's some related info, go get it ←
10:05:54 <Stian> dgarijo: tried to write down some example from yesterday. When I am asserting provenance, I want to say some resource used another resource, do I use an entity or a resource?
Daniel Garijo: tried to write down some example from yesterday. When I am asserting provenance, I want to say some resource used another resource, do I use an entity or a resource? ←
10:06:00 <Stian> pgroth: that's a Data Model discussion!
Paul Groth: that's a Data Model discussion! ←
10:06:17 <Stian> pgroth: in PAQ we just say "There is some related provenance information - use this URL"
Paul Groth: in PAQ we just say "There is some related provenance information - use this URL" ←
10:06:39 <Stian> pgroth: Same for provenance service, here's a serrvice, here's a URL, give me some provenance back
Paul Groth: Same for provenance service, here's a serrvice, here's a URL, give me some provenance back ←
10:06:42 <Stian> pgroth: that's what I think we have!
Paul Groth: that's what I think we have! ←
10:06:51 <Stian> GK1: yes, that and more! That is my minimal model.
Graham Klyne: yes, that and more! That is my minimal model. ←
10:07:05 <Stian> GK1: I would have stopped there - perhaps say there's SPARQL for other stuff.
Graham Klyne: I would have stopped there - perhaps say there's SPARQL for other stuff. ←
10:07:14 <Stian> ivan: That's the only document I didn't have time to look at
Ivan Herman: That's the only document I didn't have time to look at ←
10:07:29 <Stian> ivan: ran out of time
Ivan Herman: ran out of time ←
10:07:31 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:07:46 <Stian> ivan: how does this relate to the approach as to what people do when they try to get metadata on dataset, using the VOID vocabulary?
Ivan Herman: how does this relate to the approach as to what people do when they try to get metadata on dataset, using the VOID vocabulary? ←
10:08:04 <Stian> ivan: VOID describes datasets. SPARQL (?) has another document on how to get information on a dataset
Ivan Herman: VOID describes datasets. SPARQL (?) has another document on how to get information on a dataset ←
10:08:15 <Stian> ivan: perhaps provenance not the same as VOID - not sure how they are related, but somehow they are both metadata
Ivan Herman: perhaps provenance not the same as VOID - not sure how they are related, but somehow they are both metadata ←
10:08:42 <Stian> ivan: there is a Sparql service description..
Ivan Herman: there is a Sparql service description.. ←
10:08:50 <GK1> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-sparql11-service-description-20100126/
Graham Klyne: http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-sparql11-service-description-20100126/ ←
10:09:09 <Stian> ivan: that is only on a sparql service, here we are talking about any resource
Ivan Herman: that is only on a sparql service, here we are talking about any resource ←
10:09:12 <Stian> pgroth: I think that's different
Paul Groth: I think that's different ←
10:09:22 <Stian> ivan: I'm thinking of the mechanism to get there
Ivan Herman: I'm thinking of the mechanism to get there ←
10:09:38 <Stian> GK1: section 2
Graham Klyne: section 2 ←
10:09:42 <Stian> > SPARQL services made available via the SPARQL Protocol should return a service description document at the service URL. This service description should be made available in an RDF serialization, and may be provided embedded in HTML by RDFa, or other RDF representations by using content negotiation.
> SPARQL services made available via the SPARQL Protocol should return a service description document at the service URL. This service description should be made available in an RDF serialization, and may be provided embedded in HTML by RDFa, or other RDF representations by using content negotiation. ←
10:10:06 <Stian> GK1: because we are looking at a resource, and we're trying to find information at a different resource
Graham Klyne: because we are looking at a resource, and we're trying to find information at a different resource ←
10:10:16 <Stian> GK1: you start with an URI of a service, you need to do an indirection to get there
Graham Klyne: you start with an URI of a service, you need to do an indirection to get there ←
10:10:31 <Stian> ivan: There is an additional discussion - too bad Sandro is not here as he's in both groups
Ivan Herman: There is an additional discussion - too bad Sandro is not here as he's in both groups ←
10:10:50 <Stian> ivan: We have a discussion to start a group on linked data patterns
Ivan Herman: We have a discussion to start a group on linked data patterns ←
10:10:53 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:11:01 <Stian> ivan: what came up was how in generaral do I get information about a resource
Ivan Herman: what came up was how in generaral do I get information about a resource ←
10:11:12 <Stian> ivan: that is one of the patterns, a general RESTful pattern for that
Ivan Herman: that is one of the patterns, a general RESTful pattern for that ←
10:11:53 <Stian> ivan: If I ask for a resource, then there is a HTTP header field , Related-To or something (Existing header)
Ivan Herman: If I ask for a resource, then there is a HTTP header field , Related-To or something (Existing header) ←
10:11:57 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:11:59 <Stian> GK1: there is a Link: header which we use
Graham Klyne: there is a Link: header which we use ←
10:12:15 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html ←
10:12:19 <Stian> ivan: perhaps it's the same conclusion.. Link header, yes.
Ivan Herman: perhaps it's the same conclusion.. Link header, yes. ←
10:12:26 <Stian> Stian: yes, so all we use is a new relation, rel=provenance
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes, so all we use is a new relation, rel=provenance ←
10:12:36 <Stian> (and provenance-service)
(and provenance-service) ←
10:12:39 <Stian> ivan: check section 2.2
Ivan Herman: check section 2.2 ←
10:12:46 <tlebo> whcih doc?
Timothy Lebo: whcih doc? ←
10:12:52 <Stian> http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html
http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html ←
10:12:57 <tlebo> thx
Timothy Lebo: thx ←
10:13:03 <Stian> > Define a protocol to interact with Linked Data resources, following a REST approach ...
> Define a protocol to interact with Linked Data resources, following a REST approach ... ←
10:13:10 <Stian> how long?
how long? ←
10:13:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:13:14 <Stian> ivan: might take some time
Ivan Herman: might take some time ←
10:13:32 <Stian> GK1: is there a case for taking this piece of work, and combining. Similar goals.
Graham Klyne: is there a case for taking this piece of work, and combining. Similar goals. ←
10:13:41 <Stian> ivan: there should be a reference to provenance WG here
Ivan Herman: there should be a reference to provenance WG here ←
10:13:47 <pgroth> - Link: provenance-URI; rel="provenance"; anchor="entity-URI"
Paul Groth: - Link: provenance-URI; rel="provenance"; anchor="entity-URI" ←
10:13:51 <Stian> ivan: apologies for orbgetting that
Ivan Herman: apologies for orbgetting that ←
10:14:04 <Stian> pgroth: that's what we do - link header on resources, there's wher eyou get related provenance information
Paul Groth: that's what we do - link header on resources, there's wher eyou get related provenance information ←
10:14:10 <Stian> ivan: yes, that's very much in line
Ivan Herman: yes, that's very much in line ←
10:14:23 <Stian> pgroth: yes, but we have a clear semantic - you are getting back some *provenance* information
Paul Groth: yes, but we have a clear semantic - you are getting back some *provenance* information ←
10:14:33 <Stian> pgroth: you can generalize it to just some metadata and look at the data
Paul Groth: you can generalize it to just some metadata and look at the data ←
10:15:01 <Stian> pgroth: but GK1 pointed out that the priority is.. for us.. are we far enough along? Wait for this group? Or just define this, and later we say how they are compatible
Paul Groth: but GK1 pointed out that the priority is.. for us.. are we far enough along? Wait for this group? Or just define this, and later we say how they are compatible ←
10:15:11 <Stian> pgroth: Suggests that they will be compatible
Paul Groth: Suggests that they will be compatible ←
10:15:13 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:15:30 <Luc> ack sm
Luc Moreau: ack sm ←
10:15:36 <Stian> smiles: Slight concern with the simple provenance URI..
Simon Miles: Slight concern with the simple provenance URI.. ←
10:15:55 <Stian> smiles: if someone is expecting that.. provenance data model allows you to record wast amount of information if you want to
Simon Miles: if someone is expecting that.. provenance data model allows you to record wast amount of information if you want to ←
10:16:14 <Stian> smiles: if I get provenance URI in header, and I Resolve it, and I get a wast amount of information.. how to deal with it?
Simon Miles: if I get provenance URI in header, and I Resolve it, and I get a wast amount of information.. how to deal with it? ←
10:16:22 <Stian> pgroth: sounds like a techie conversation we should have now.
Paul Groth: sounds like a techie conversation we should have now. ←
10:16:26 <Stian> GK1: a kind of scoping conversation
Graham Klyne: a kind of scoping conversation ←
10:16:44 <Stian> Luc: we said from day 1 that provenance is a resource that has an URI
Luc Moreau: we said from day 1 that provenance is a resource that has an URI ←
10:16:54 <Stian> Luc: in entity view, you have a service, you run a querry
Luc Moreau: in entity view, you have a service, you run a querry ←
10:17:11 <Stian> Luc: when Sparql talks about sparql query results, they don't talk about them as resources. But of course you can view them as resources.
Luc Moreau: when Sparql talks about sparql query results, they don't talk about them as resources. But of course you can view them as resources. ←
10:17:16 <Stian> GK1: yes, if you use the GET form they are resources
Graham Klyne: yes, if you use the GET form they are resources ←
10:17:22 <tlebo> lost audio
Timothy Lebo: lost audio ←
10:17:32 <Stian> Luc: but in the document it is not presented as such..
Luc Moreau: but in the document it is not presented as such.. ←
10:17:38 <Stian> Luc: in the sparql service description document
Luc Moreau: in the sparql service description document ←
10:17:55 <tlebo> sparql query results are resource _representations_, not resources themselves.
Timothy Lebo: sparql query results are resource _representations_, not resources themselves. ←
10:17:58 <tlebo> per AWWW
Timothy Lebo: per AWWW ←
10:18:00 <Stian> GK1: yes, the service is a resource, if you dereference it you get a service description - and the rest follows this. This is the web resource (?)
Graham Klyne: yes, the service is a resource, if you dereference it you get a service description - and the rest follows this. This is the web resource (?) ←
10:18:14 <Stian> Luc: we were talking about provenance information as a resource
Luc Moreau: we were talking about provenance information as a resource ←
10:18:24 <Stian> GK1: it's a different resource, provenance information resource
Graham Klyne: it's a different resource, provenance information resource ←
10:18:34 <Stian> GK1: key to the resource centric approach - you have to identify what those resources as
Graham Klyne: key to the resource centric approach - you have to identify what those resources as ←
10:18:49 <Stian> GK1: as Smiles say, there's not a predefined notion of 'provenance' - it's something I have to query
Graham Klyne: as Smiles say, there's not a predefined notion of 'provenance' - it's something I have to query ←
10:18:52 <Stian> ^^Luc
^^Luc ←
10:19:01 <tlebo> still silent on this end.
Timothy Lebo: still silent on this end. ←
10:19:06 <Stian> Luc: what is the provenance, resource, entity = always had the view that I need to run a query
Luc Moreau: what is the provenance, resource, entity = always had the view that I need to run a query ←
10:19:13 <Stian> Luc: I might not want a GB of provenance information
Luc Moreau: I might not want a GB of provenance information ←
10:19:22 <Stian> GK1: a resource-centric approach might not have to be done like that.
Graham Klyne: a resource-centric approach might not have to be done like that. ←
10:19:33 <Stian> GK1: there's a resource view, and a service view - different levels
Graham Klyne: there's a resource view, and a service view - different levels ←
10:19:50 <Stian> GK1: web architecture is based around resources - if we design something for the web, we should try to keep this in mind
Graham Klyne: web architecture is based around resources - if we design something for the web, we should try to keep this in mind ←
10:19:53 <Stian> q+
q+ ←
10:20:05 <Stian> Luc: pitching this as a resource - is not helping the presentation of the material
Luc Moreau: pitching this as a resource - is not helping the presentation of the material ←
10:20:23 <Stian> Luc: if we want as Simon says, to control what we get.. it sounds like a client would need to formulate a kind of query?
Luc Moreau: if we want as Simon says, to control what we get.. it sounds like a client would need to formulate a kind of query? ←
10:20:38 <Stian> Luc: when you have a provenance URI, which is in the header, you don't have that opportunity, the query has been formulated for you
Luc Moreau: when you have a provenance URI, which is in the header, you don't have that opportunity, the query has been formulated for you ←
10:20:49 <Stian> GK1: there's no reason that header is not a sparql header
Graham Klyne: there's no reason that header is not a sparql header ←
10:20:55 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:20:56 <Stian> Luc: but someone would have had to premade that query
Luc Moreau: but someone would have had to premade that query ←
10:20:59 <Zakim> -tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←
10:21:09 <Stian> Khalid: Does not seciton 5 address this?
Khalid Belhajjame: Does not seciton 5 address this? ←
10:21:15 <Stian> smiles_: you might get a GB first..
Simon Miles: you might get a GB first.. ←
10:21:24 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:21:24 <Stian> smiles_: imagine a user who is.. what do you get first
Simon Miles: imagine a user who is.. what do you get first ←
10:21:27 <Zakim> +tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo ←
10:21:38 <Stian> GK1: do we try to define how much information gets back when you dereference?
Graham Klyne: do we try to define how much information gets back when you dereference? ←
10:21:41 <tlebo> (still quiet)
Timothy Lebo: (still quiet) ←
10:21:41 <Stian> smiles_: either is a solution
Simon Miles: either is a solution ←
10:21:52 <pgroth> is anyone else on the phone?
Paul Groth: is anyone else on the phone? ←
10:22:02 <Stian> smiles_: one way is to do a query.. another way is to say there is a definite thing that comes back, that you can operate on
Simon Miles: one way is to do a query.. another way is to say there is a definite thing that comes back, that you can operate on ←
10:22:04 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
10:22:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo ←
10:22:17 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:22:18 <Stian> GK1: in a sense they are both in there, Paul's eariler comment, too many mechanism
Graham Klyne: in a sense they are both in there, Paul's eariler comment, too many mechanism ←
10:23:12 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:23:16 <Luc> ack stia
Luc Moreau: ack stia ←
10:23:39 <Stian> Stian: A provenance resource is not necessarily a whole provenance account (Which truly might be many GBs) - but Linked data allows you to have many resources that you have to follow the links to
Stian Soiland-Reyes: A provenance resource is not necessarily a whole provenance account (Which truly might be many GBs) - but Linked data allows you to have many resources that you have to follow the links to ←
10:24:09 <Stian> pgroth: (...) for the provenance combination - there might be other people that adds the ability to filter in the service information. FOr instance ?maxEntries=200
Paul Groth: (...) for the provenance combination - there might be other people that adds the ability to filter in the service information. FOr instance ?maxEntries=200 ←
10:24:14 <Stian> pgroth: we should not preclude exactly this
Paul Groth: we should not preclude exactly this ←
10:24:18 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
10:24:26 <Stian> pgroth: but we don't have enough background material as to what that looks like
Paul Groth: but we don't have enough background material as to what that looks like ←
10:24:28 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:24:30 <Stian> Zakim: who is making noise?
Zakim IRC Bot: who is making noise? ←
10:24:32 <tlebo> back!
Timothy Lebo: back! ←
10:24:37 <kai> Thats me
Kai Eckert: Thats me ←
10:24:45 <kai> Probably :-)
Kai Eckert: Probably :-) ←
10:24:50 <Stian> pgroth: just write a paragraph that's says.. who couldn't standardize it
Paul Groth: just write a paragraph that's says.. who couldn't standardize it ←
10:24:55 <Stian> kai: no I meant if zakim heard us :)
Kai Eckert: no I meant if zakim heard us :) ←
10:25:02 <Stian> pgroth: if everyone uses a different mechanism to filter
Paul Groth: if everyone uses a different mechanism to filter ←
10:25:05 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:25:14 <Stian> smiles_: agree - we can't know how filtering might take place
Simon Miles: agree - we can't know how filtering might take place ←
10:25:22 <kai> I can't hear anything either.
Kai Eckert: I can't hear anything either. ←
10:25:32 <kai> Think we have to redial.
Kai Eckert: Think we have to redial. ←
10:25:35 <Stian> GK1: Sympathy with this - concern is that it is not the case.. we are defining another API. Rather than following a REST approach
Graham Klyne: Sympathy with this - concern is that it is not the case.. we are defining another API. Rather than following a REST approach ←
10:25:48 <Stian> ...
... ←
10:25:48 <tlebo> resolving URIs or submitting a URI to a service is a matter of perspective. The former paradigm reduces the "agency" of the server on the other end and minimizes the client's control. Calling a service permits the client to have more control by feeding parameters to control what comes back.
Timothy Lebo: resolving URIs or submitting a URI to a service is a matter of perspective. The former paradigm reduces the "agency" of the server on the other end and minimizes the client's control. Calling a service permits the client to have more control by feeding parameters to control what comes back. ←
10:26:25 <Stian> GK1: Roy Fielding is specific that there is a (...) pure restful approach - much better with exchange of information (???)
Graham Klyne: Roy Fielding is specific that there is a (...) pure restful approach - much better with exchange of information (???) ←
10:26:48 <Stian> GK1: internally I feel it is the web way, or do we go through the route of making an API which is perhaps simpler/more specific..
Graham Klyne: internally I feel it is the web way, or do we go through the route of making an API which is perhaps simpler/more specific.. ←
10:27:04 <tlebo> (at least now I know _who_ is talking. Just a bunch of bnodes for what they're saying...)
Timothy Lebo: (at least now I know _who_ is talking. Just a bunch of bnodes for what they're saying...) ←
10:27:22 <Stian> pgroth: in SPARQL protocol, I would just copy what they do. "Here's a WSDL 2.0 file that says input/output of this thing called query - a HTTP binding says how to do it with HTTP GET
Paul Groth: in SPARQL protocol, I would just copy what they do. "Here's a WSDL 2.0 file that says input/output of this thing called query - a HTTP binding says how to do it with HTTP GET ←
10:27:30 <Stian> GK1: which is what I attempted to do with tempaltes
Graham Klyne: which is what I attempted to do with tempaltes ←
10:27:41 <Stian> pgroth: doing this in SPARQL I don't have to look up service description, etc..
Paul Groth: doing this in SPARQL I don't have to look up service description, etc.. ←
10:27:47 <Stian> GK1: this is the REST Tax coming in
Graham Klyne: this is the REST Tax coming in ←
10:27:54 <tlebo> BTW, nobody implemented the WSDL, all implementations used HTTP exclusively.
Timothy Lebo: BTW, nobody implemented the WSDL, all implementations used HTTP exclusively. ←
10:28:06 <Stian> GK1: one of the principles, the client should not know about the form of the URI used. It is the hyperengine as an engine of application state.
Graham Klyne: one of the principles, the client should not know about the form of the URI used. It is the hyperengine as an engine of application state. ←
10:31:43 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
10:34:06 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: what is the agreement?
Luc Moreau: what is the agreement? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ] ←
10:34:07 <Stian> Pgroth: Would argue for..
Paul Groth: Would argue for.. ←
10:34:21 <Stian> pgroth: indirection that is currently in the document - not a good thing - not what people really want
Paul Groth: indirection that is currently in the document - not a good thing - not what people really want ←
10:34:30 <Stian> pgroth: they don't want to dereferene the service description and build a URI
Paul Groth: they don't want to dereferene the service description and build a URI ←
10:34:41 <Stian> pgroth: notion of well known URI vs WSDL - something to discuss
Paul Groth: notion of well known URI vs WSDL - something to discuss ←
10:34:42 <Stian> q+
q+ ←
10:34:43 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: The notion of well known URI vs WSDL is something we should discuss
Paul Groth: The notion of well known URI vs WSDL is something we should discuss [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ] ←
10:34:48 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: I'm back :)
Khalid Belhajjame: I'm back :) ←
10:34:56 <khalidbelhajjame> @Stian ok :-)
Khalid Belhajjame: @Stian ok :-) ←
10:35:00 <Stian> pgroth: sepreate out document, call it an Provenance Service API.. perhaps lightweight
Paul Groth: sepreate out document, call it an Provenance Service API.. perhaps lightweight ←
10:35:04 <Stian> @Khalid thanks
@Khalid thanks ←
10:35:24 <Stian> ivan: when I saw the word 'query' I saw a red flag
Ivan Herman: when I saw the word 'query' I saw a red flag ←
10:35:37 <Stian> ivan: I saw Query in the title.. read the document I realised.. but the title suggest something else
Ivan Herman: I saw Query in the title.. read the document I realised.. but the title suggest something else ←
10:35:44 <Stian> ivan: that you can define a query language for provenance information
Ivan Herman: that you can define a query language for provenance information ←
10:35:53 <Stian> GK: so change the title to Access and SPARQL query?
Graham Klyne: so change the title to Access and SPARQL query? ←
10:35:59 <Stian> ivan: just Provenance Access
Ivan Herman: just Provenance Access ←
10:36:13 <Stian> pgroth: two things - provenance access, current service, and then there is the Locating Proveannce Information
Paul Groth: two things - provenance access, current service, and then there is the Locating Proveannce Information ←
10:36:28 <Stian> pgroth: how to embed thins in HTML etc.. that's location
Paul Groth: how to embed thins in HTML etc.. that's location ←
10:36:39 <Stian> pgroth: this conversation about how to access the information - we don't say anything about query
Paul Groth: this conversation about how to access the information - we don't say anything about query ←
10:36:45 <Stian> GK: can't we make references to sparql?
Graham Klyne: can't we make references to sparql? ←
10:36:58 <Stian> pgroth: that's a way to do it.. and what we said.. but I think that it's more looking at me as a Best PRactice
Paul Groth: that's a way to do it.. and what we said.. but I think that it's more looking at me as a Best PRactice ←
10:38:37 <Luc2> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
10:41:17 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
10:43:40 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
10:43:48 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
10:43:49 <Luc2> Ack stain
Luc Moreau: Ack stain ←
10:43:55 <Stian> pgroth: just writing some SPARQL query..
Paul Groth: just writing some SPARQL query.. ←
10:44:00 <Stian> (??> Insert paste here)
(??> Insert paste here) ←
10:44:02 <Luc2> Ack st
Luc Moreau: Ack st ←
10:44:27 <Stian> Khalid: how to get information about entity.. getting the URI of the sparql query. Not inetersted in URI of entity (??) (?)
Khalid Belhajjame: how to get information about entity.. getting the URI of the sparql query. Not inetersted in URI of entity (??) (?) ←
10:44:39 <Luc2> Ack kha
Luc Moreau: Ack kha ←
10:44:50 <Stian> GK: what you want is what you want.. what you get back is an URI that refers to some provenance
Graham Klyne: what you want is what you want.. what you get back is an URI that refers to some provenance ←
10:44:59 <Stian> GK: but what do you get back when dereferencing it - that's up to the service
Graham Klyne: but what do you get back when dereferencing it - that's up to the service ←
10:45:04 <Paolo> Q?
Paolo Missier: Q? ←
10:45:14 <Stian> GK: the second thing is that we can get back the ... (??)
Graham Klyne: the second thing is that we can get back the ... (??) ←
10:45:24 <Stian> pgroth: provenance information directly - option 1
Paul Groth: provenance information directly - option 1 ←
10:45:30 <Stian> pgroth: big blob - could overwhelm you
Paul Groth: big blob - could overwhelm you ←
10:45:39 <Stian> pgroth: second is, we give you a URI that refers to that provenance information
Paul Groth: second is, we give you a URI that refers to that provenance information ←
10:45:43 <Stian> pgroth: those are the two options
Paul Groth: those are the two options ←
10:45:52 <Stian> GK: the third option - a URI for a SPARQL endpoint?
Graham Klyne: the third option - a URI for a SPARQL endpoint? ←
10:46:08 <Stian> ivan: as a user I have the choice of which SPARQL endpoint to use
Ivan Herman: as a user I have the choice of which SPARQL endpoint to use ←
10:46:26 <tlebo> is there objection to letting a client SPARQL the provenance service for the subset it wants?
Timothy Lebo: is there objection to letting a client SPARQL the provenance service for the subset it wants? ←
10:46:37 <Stian> GK: two deployments.. one is a SPARQL endpoint that fronts a bit of data - the second is a general engine where you can load data and then query it
Graham Klyne: two deployments.. one is a SPARQL endpoint that fronts a bit of data - the second is a general engine where you can load data and then query it ←
10:46:47 <Stian> ivan: then we have a different problem.. if we have a URI against a RDF resource
Ivan Herman: then we have a different problem.. if we have a URI against a RDF resource ←
10:46:58 <Stian> ivan: give me those SPARQL endpoints that can query that resource
Ivan Herman: give me those SPARQL endpoints that can query that resource ←
10:47:05 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
10:47:08 <Stian> ivan: not something this group can standardize
Ivan Herman: not something this group can standardize ←
10:47:16 <Zakim> + +1.781.899.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.781.899.aabb ←
10:47:23 <Stian> pgroth: down to a lightweight service description - if Graham agrees with this
Paul Groth: down to a lightweight service description - if Graham agrees with this ←
10:47:28 <Stian> pgroth: as the PAQ man!
Paul Groth: as the PAQ man! ←
10:47:54 <Stian> pgroth: to decide what that API/protocol should cater for - we currently have two .. descriptions
Paul Groth: to decide what that API/protocol should cater for - we currently have two .. descriptions ←
10:48:02 <Stian> pgroth: one gives provenance info, one that gives (?)
Paul Groth: one gives provenance info, one that gives (?) ←
10:48:05 <Stian> pgroth: resource view of the world
Paul Groth: resource view of the world ←
10:48:14 <Stian> pgroth: dereference
Paul Groth: dereference ←
10:48:25 <Stian> GK: discovery of provenance, provenance service endpoints
Graham Klyne: discovery of provenance, provenance service endpoints ←
10:48:33 <Stian> GK: context is a bit off..
Graham Klyne: context is a bit off.. ←
10:48:37 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
10:48:42 <Stian> GK: simple case is focus on discovery of provenance URIs
Graham Klyne: simple case is focus on discovery of provenance URIs ←
10:48:48 <Stian> GK: would be happy if that is as far as I go
Graham Klyne: would be happy if that is as far as I go ←
10:49:02 <Stian> GK: provenance URI is something you dereference to get the provenance
Graham Klyne: provenance URI is something you dereference to get the provenance ←
10:49:13 <Stian> GK: it's a URI you dereference that gives 'a' provenance resource
Graham Klyne: it's a URI you dereference that gives 'a' provenance resource ←
10:49:39 <Stian> pgroth: what has been asked is - if we go for this - do we allow (not define) extending that so you can make sure the client can say 'Don't vive me everything'
Paul Groth: what has been asked is - if we go for this - do we allow (not define) extending that so you can make sure the client can say 'Don't vive me everything' ←
10:49:57 <Stian> smiles_: in the API call.. if the rquest says "Give me provenance of this" - what is returned is the provenance URI
Simon Miles: in the API call.. if the rquest says "Give me provenance of this" - what is returned is the provenance URI ←
10:50:13 <Stian> ivan: Admin issue - Sandro is on the call - understands Paul but noone else
Ivan Herman: Admin issue - Sandro is on the call - understands Paul but noone else ←
10:50:17 <tlebo> I skyped in via Daniel.
Timothy Lebo: I skyped in via Daniel. ←
10:50:27 <tlebo> much clearer than the telecon phone.
Timothy Lebo: much clearer than the telecon phone. ←
10:51:00 <Stian> can you hear us better now?
can you hear us better now? ←
10:51:17 <Stian> Sandro: Mainly using the IRC track
Sandro Hawke: Mainly using the IRC track ←
10:51:17 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
10:51:27 <Stian> Ivan: pgroth will call in on the other line to see if it works again
Ivan Herman: pgroth will call in on the other line to see if it works again ←
10:51:27 <tlebo> telecon phone is only useful for knowing the speaker, not what they are saying.
Timothy Lebo: telecon phone is only useful for knowing the speaker, not what they are saying. ←
10:54:09 <Stian> Luc: provenance-uri does not work for me.. say I found a resource, a provenance URI
Luc Moreau: provenance-uri does not work for me.. say I found a resource, a provenance URI ←
10:54:13 <Stian> Luc2: find with how we find it
Luc Moreau: find with how we find it ←
10:54:22 <kai> You could directly use Skype, maybe thats better
Kai Eckert: You could directly use Skype, maybe thats better ←
10:54:36 <Stian> Luc2: I download the provenance.. dereference.. then I navigate my grpah and find "Oh, there is an edge, activity mentioned in here"
Luc Moreau: I download the provenance.. dereference.. then I navigate my grpah and find "Oh, there is an edge, activity mentioned in here" ←
10:54:48 <Stian> Luc2: then I have a provenance URI..(?)
Luc Moreau: then I have a provenance URI..(?) ←
10:55:00 <Stian> GK: so you go back to the same step with the new URI
Graham Klyne: so you go back to the same step with the new URI ←
10:55:02 <kai> My ID is cirq-kai, if you want to give it a try
Kai Eckert: My ID is cirq-kai, if you want to give it a try ←
10:55:18 <Stian> ivan: you have an URI, that is a resource, you go and ask for the provenance of that URI
Ivan Herman: you have an URI, that is a resource, you go and ask for the provenance of that URI ←
10:55:28 <Stian> ivan: so in linked data, you find out what's there, and that's how you expose it
Ivan Herman: so in linked data, you find out what's there, and that's how you expose it ←
10:55:54 <Stian> Luc2: talkinga bout prior art.. some prior art that is not (?) (?)
Luc Moreau: talkinga bout prior art.. some prior art that is not (?) (?) ←
10:56:02 <Stian> Luc2: no prior art covered by this usecase
Luc Moreau: no prior art covered by this usecase ←
10:56:24 <Stian> Luc2: a protocol for provenance addresses, resolves this
Luc Moreau: a protocol for provenance addresses, resolves this ←
10:56:28 <Stian> ivan: what does that mean?
Ivan Herman: what does that mean? ←
10:56:37 <Stian> pgroth: what you might want to do is that there is some provenance-service
Paul Groth: what you might want to do is that there is some provenance-service ←
10:56:43 <Stian> pgroth: you pass it an identifier..
Paul Groth: you pass it an identifier.. ←
10:56:50 <Stian> ivan: "Some provenance information" is vague to me
Ivan Herman: "Some provenance information" is vague to me ←
10:57:01 <Stian> pgroth: in these protocols.. if you say some query
Paul Groth: in these protocols.. if you say some query ←
10:57:10 <Stian> pgroth: now I don't think we can define that provenance query language
Paul Groth: now I don't think we can define that provenance query language ←
10:57:11 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
10:57:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [IPcaller], Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [IPcaller], Sandro ←
10:57:27 <Stian> pgroth: however we can define the protocol to say that here's a URL - give me provenance for that
Paul Groth: however we can define the protocol to say that here's a URL - give me provenance for that ←
10:57:34 <Stian> ivan: but Luc does not like that?
Ivan Herman: but Luc does not like that? ←
10:57:48 <Stian> pgroth: but you can extend that with non-standard service-specific query mechanisms if I want to
Paul Groth: but you can extend that with non-standard service-specific query mechanisms if I want to ←
10:57:58 <Stian> pgroth: two ways - linked data approach, dereference data information - get something back
Paul Groth: two ways - linked data approach, dereference data information - get something back ←
10:58:04 <Stian> pgroth: look through.. clear provenance service
Paul Groth: look through.. clear provenance service ←
10:58:30 <Stian> pgroth: give me information about this URI.. browsing through provenance info.. and then I know it's a provenance service, I could try to use the same with the other URI
Paul Groth: give me information about this URI.. browsing through provenance info.. and then I know it's a provenance service, I could try to use the same with the other URI ←
10:58:45 <Stian> ivan: so an extension point in the sysstem, where you cut put any query language, or SPARQL, or anything as additional thing
Ivan Herman: so an extension point in the sysstem, where you cut put any query language, or SPARQL, or anything as additional thing ←
10:58:57 <Stian> Luc2: but people implementing this, visualisation of PROV information
Luc Moreau: but people implementing this, visualisation of PROV information ←
10:59:08 <Stian> Luc2: javascript code, accessing bits of PROV information, visualising
Luc Moreau: javascript code, accessing bits of PROV information, visualising ←
10:59:27 <Stian> Luc2: I want my browser to be able to interact with the provenance provider and retrieve what is needed
Luc Moreau: I want my browser to be able to interact with the provenance provider and retrieve what is needed ←
10:59:46 <Stian> ivan: if the provenance provider also has a SPARQL endpoint, this can be handled, get back a URI, get a SPARQL query.. throw it in
Ivan Herman: if the provenance provider also has a SPARQL endpoint, this can be handled, get back a URI, get a SPARQL query.. throw it in ←
11:00:12 <Stian> Luc2: the provenance service COULD be a sparql endpoint
Luc Moreau: the provenance service COULD be a sparql endpoint ←
11:00:15 <Stian> (How can you tell?)
(How can you tell?) ←
11:00:33 <Stian> GK: given an entity URI.. don't try to provide.. access to ..(?)
Graham Klyne: given an entity URI.. don't try to provide.. access to ..(?) ←
11:00:52 <Stian> Khalid: Given URI or place.. where provenance information might be.. (?)
Khalid Belhajjame: Given URI or place.. where provenance information might be.. (?) ←
11:01:02 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: but not trying to say which SPARQL endpoint...?
Khalid Belhajjame: but not trying to say which SPARQL endpoint...? ←
11:01:20 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: we are not trying to return to the user with SPARQL enpodint that provides access to the entity that the user is (?)
Khalid Belhajjame: we are not trying to return to the user with SPARQL enpodint that provides access to the entity that the user is (?) ←
11:01:31 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: you started discussion with (?) how to access provenance
Khalid Belhajjame: you started discussion with (?) how to access provenance ←
11:01:43 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: the user has an entity, represent and entity, you can find entity in this URI.. (?)
Khalid Belhajjame: the user has an entity, represent and entity, you can find entity in this URI.. (?) ←
11:02:06 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: if you want to query only parts of the provenance.. then you could use SPARQL - but given an entity URI we need a way to find which SPARQL endpoint that gives access to that
Khalid Belhajjame: if you want to query only parts of the provenance.. then you could use SPARQL - but given an entity URI we need a way to find which SPARQL endpoint that gives access to that ←
11:02:08 <tlebo> what is the current concern? that the two options in PAQ are too much, or that it is inadequate?
Timothy Lebo: what is the current concern? that the two options in PAQ are too much, or that it is inadequate? ←
11:02:11 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: but now we say that is outside the scope
Khalid Belhajjame: but now we say that is outside the scope ←
11:02:19 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: but now we return back to this..
Khalid Belhajjame: but now we return back to this.. ←
11:02:22 <Stian> q+
q+ ←
11:02:24 <Stian> q?
q? ←
11:02:36 <sandro> (Alas, I can't hear the discussion, but one solution might be to provide access to the graphs an endpoint knows about, and have those graphs provide Link headers pointing to the endpoint.)
Sandro Hawke: (Alas, I can't hear the discussion, but one solution might be to provide access to the graphs an endpoint knows about, and have those graphs provide Link headers pointing to the endpoint.) ←
11:02:45 <tlebo> Zakim, what time is it there?
Timothy Lebo: Zakim, what time is it there? ←
11:02:45 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, tlebo.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, tlebo. ←
11:02:50 <Stian> pgroth: we lost 30 minutes before this started
Paul Groth: we lost 30 minutes before this started ←
11:02:57 <sandro> (that way only clients who know SPARQL needs to know SPARQL.)
Sandro Hawke: (that way only clients who know SPARQL needs to know SPARQL.) ←
11:02:58 <jcheney> it's 12:00 here
James Cheney: it's 12:00 here ←
11:03:00 <dgarijo> it is 12:00
Daniel Garijo: it is 12:00 ←
11:03:01 <Stian> pgroth: need a resolution on what we need to look at - bu tnot just look at it
Paul Groth: need a resolution on what we need to look at - bu tnot just look at it ←
11:03:18 <Stian> pgroth: a sheet is shown
Paul Groth: a sheet is shown ←
11:03:19 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
11:03:32 <kai> @Sandro: Can you use Skype? Call me or someone else on Skype, thats better.
Kai Eckert: @Sandro: Can you use Skype? Call me or someone else on Skype, thats better. ←
11:03:40 <Stian> GK: 1) Discover provenance URI from the resource provider. Link: <link> etc
Graham Klyne: 1) Discover provenance URI from the resource provider. Link: <link> etc ←
11:03:50 <tlebo> ^^ from HTTP header
Timothy Lebo: ^^ from HTTP header ←
11:04:00 <Stian> ... 2) Locatiing provenance information via a 3rd party service -- Provenance service
... 2) Locatiing provenance information via a 3rd party service -- Provenance service ←
11:04:13 <Stian> GK: difference is that 1) is that the resource provider knows about, 2) is independent service
Graham Klyne: difference is that 1) is that the resource provider knows about, 2) is independent service ←
11:04:33 <Stian> GK: 3) Using SPARQL to query provenance - more Best Practice side - not anything about discovering SPARQL endpoint
Graham Klyne: 3) Using SPARQL to query provenance - more Best Practice side - not anything about discovering SPARQL endpoint ←
11:04:40 <Stian> pgroth: so we should drop 3 or move 3 out
Paul Groth: so we should drop 3 or move 3 out ←
11:04:44 <Stian> ivan: it's just informative
Ivan Herman: it's just informative ←
11:05:01 <Stian> pgroth: think we should focus on 1 and 2 - explicit
Paul Groth: think we should focus on 1 and 2 - explicit ←
11:05:09 <Stian> pgroth: MAke it.. this is a protocol
Paul Groth: MAke it.. this is a protocol ←
11:05:16 <Stian> pgroth: it is not defined as such
Paul Groth: it is not defined as such ←
11:05:32 <Stian> pgroth: WSDL option, pattern option etc.. just decide on one and talk about it
Paul Groth: WSDL option, pattern option etc.. just decide on one and talk about it ←
11:05:43 <Stian> GK: also decide what scope is. Here in 2) scope is a bit wide
Graham Klyne: also decide what scope is. Here in 2) scope is a bit wide ←
11:05:54 <Stian> pgroth: should just say 'Here is a provenance service - here's something for an entity'
Paul Groth: should just say 'Here is a provenance service - here's something for an entity' ←
11:06:09 <Stian> pgroth: only constrait is that we make it open for extensibility - would solve Smiles' problem
Paul Groth: only constrait is that we make it open for extensibility - would solve Smiles' problem ←
11:06:24 <Stian> pgroth: up to other people to define how to extend it - could be extended with filters etc
Paul Groth: up to other people to define how to extend it - could be extended with filters etc ←
11:06:27 <Stian> smiles: *(??)
Simon Miles: *(??) ←
11:06:38 <Stian> smiles: In the HTPT header from provider you can say that a provenance service is here
Simon Miles: In the HTPT header from provider you can say that a provenance service is here ←
11:06:47 <Stian> pgroth: that's in scope - saying how to locate provenance service provider - that's 2)
Paul Groth: that's in scope - saying how to locate provenance service provider - that's 2) ←
11:06:53 <Stian> pgroth: provenance-service headers
Paul Groth: provenance-service headers ←
11:07:09 <Stian> smiles: the provider can talk about 3rd party services?
Simon Miles: the provider can talk about 3rd party services? ←
11:07:17 <Stian> luc: If he so wishes..
Luc Moreau: If he so wishes.. ←
11:07:20 <Stian> q-
q- ←
11:07:22 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
11:07:40 <Stian> Luc: So 3) SPARQL queries is just best practice
Luc Moreau: So 3) SPARQL queries is just best practice ←
11:07:46 <Stian> GK: yes, just says how to use what exists
Graham Klyne: yes, just says how to use what exists ←
11:08:23 <Stian> Luc: And then saying that we are.. two different topics a) Defining a protocol - form and shape of protocol needs to be specified. b) Is about locating.. much what we have, with headers etc.. f
Luc Moreau: And then saying that we are.. two different topics a) Defining a protocol - form and shape of protocol needs to be specified. b) Is about locating.. much what we have, with headers etc.. f ←
11:08:29 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
11:08:32 <Stian> GK: For resource providers to give location of provenance
Graham Klyne: For resource providers to give location of provenance ←
11:08:39 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
11:08:41 <Stian> pgroth: biggest is defining this proctocol
Paul Groth: biggest is defining this proctocol ←
11:09:01 <Stian> GK: biggest thing is coming to consensus about.. pure REST, part REST.. perhaps this is not the irght time for this discussion
Graham Klyne: biggest thing is coming to consensus about.. pure REST, part REST.. perhaps this is not the irght time for this discussion ←
11:09:04 <Stian> Luc: Lunch discission?
Luc Moreau: Lunch discission? ←
11:09:21 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
11:10:23 <Stian> - TODO: SUmmarise the decission above
- TODO: SUmmarise the decission above ←
11:10:29 <Stian> We're trying to call in again now
We're trying to call in again now ←
11:10:44 <tlebo> my telecon phone went silent again.
Timothy Lebo: my telecon phone went silent again. ←
11:10:50 <Stian> PAQ discussion finished
PAQ discussion finished ←
11:11:11 <sandro> (perfect timing -- PAQ was probably where I had the most expertise. Ah well.)
Sandro Hawke: (perfect timing -- PAQ was probably where I had the most expertise. Ah well.) ←
11:11:13 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
11:11:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo ←
11:11:26 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni.a] ←
11:11:27 <Stian> --- I'll now paste in some chat log from earlier
--- I'll now paste in some chat log from earlier ←
11:11:30 <Stian> 2012-02-02 PROV F2F notes
2012-02-02 PROV F2F notes ←
11:11:30 <Stian> ---
--- ←
11:11:30 <Stian> In practice, the application does not interpret the WSDL - but the user does.
In practice, the application does not interpret the WSDL - but the user does. ←
11:11:30 <Stian> pgroth: The REST API.. Banging on Yahoo's REST API.. look at URI templates, replace this with a parameter,
Paul Groth: The REST API.. Banging on Yahoo's REST API.. look at URI templates, replace this with a parameter, ←
11:11:33 <Stian> GK: This is not a REST API according to Roy Fielding
Graham Klyne: This is not a REST API according to Roy Fielding ←
11:11:36 <Stian> pgroth: But this is what the world does
Paul Groth: But this is what the world does ←
11:11:38 <Stian> Luc: What is the pragmatic solution?
Luc Moreau: What is the pragmatic solution? ←
11:11:41 <Stian> Ivan: WSDL is independently form this coice.. you could also (ugh) build a SOAP interface to the same service.
Ivan Herman: WSDL is independently form this coice.. you could also (ugh) build a SOAP interface to the same service. ←
11:11:44 <Stian> GK: If we fix the form of the URI we are forcing a certain API.
Graham Klyne: If we fix the form of the URI we are forcing a certain API. ←
11:11:46 <Stian> Ivan: This is an option.. you use the URI of the resource, the return header, there is a reference to X... OR you use the REST API.. or you WSDL allows this - use the mechanism of well known URIs.
Ivan Herman: This is an option.. you use the URI of the resource, the return header, there is a reference to X... OR you use the REST API.. or you WSDL allows this - use the mechanism of well known URIs. ←
11:11:50 <Stian> Ivan: There is an RFC that says "This is the way you can construct a well known URI. This group can propose that"
Ivan Herman: There is an RFC that says "This is the way you can construct a well known URI. This group can propose that" ←
11:11:53 <Stian> Pgroth: Between the WSDL solution and well known URIs.. not good for our case. In the politics, people who have set up provenance services, they have all kinds of .. "ugly" URIs.
Paul Groth: Between the WSDL solution and well known URIs.. not good for our case. In the politics, people who have set up provenance services, they have all kinds of .. "ugly" URIs. ←
11:11:53 <tlebo> +1 @GK - uri templates are bad REST practice.
Timothy Lebo: +1 @GK - uri templates are bad REST practice. ←
11:11:56 <Stian> Ivan: that means that.. not advodating here - that means mechanism itself of putting a provenance on a sort of URI that is related to the other URI - if this is true, then the mechanism widely used - is not interoperability - we can propose somethin that uses same approach, but standardize it. We can register the well-known-URI pattern with the IETF.
Ivan Herman: that means that.. not advodating here - that means mechanism itself of putting a provenance on a sort of URI that is related to the other URI - if this is true, then the mechanism widely used - is not interoperability - we can propose somethin that uses same approach, but standardize it. We can register the well-known-URI pattern with the IETF. ←
11:12:01 <Stian> GK: My proposal allows you to encode this practice..
Graham Klyne: My proposal allows you to encode this practice.. ←
11:12:04 <Stian> Ivan: Keep the old one, keep a redirection.. still a case.
Ivan Herman: Keep the old one, keep a redirection.. still a case. ←
11:12:06 <Stian> GK: A tension that is putting wind behind the URI Template stuff.
Graham Klyne: A tension that is putting wind behind the URI Template stuff. ←
11:12:09 <Stian> Luc: How can we move forward?
Luc Moreau: How can we move forward? ←
11:12:11 <Stian> Pgroth: Would argue for..
Paul Groth: Would argue for.. ←
11:12:12 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
11:12:14 <Stian> Luc: SQL query would be different, but could still be a provenance service
Luc Moreau: SQL query would be different, but could still be a provenance service ←
11:12:16 <Stian> GK: If we define a protocol we need to scope it.. These are the thins we do.. There are options. If we try to say, this is what we recommend. Then we n
Graham Klyne: If we define a protocol we need to scope it.. These are the thins we do.. There are options. If we try to say, this is what we recommend. Then we n ←
11:12:19 <Stian> Ivan: The scope of this WG should only be 'How to get to the provenance information' Full stop!
Ivan Herman: The scope of this WG should only be 'How to get to the provenance information' Full stop! ←
11:12:20 <GK> @tlebo: I understood templates to be *good* REST practice
Graham Klyne: @tlebo: I understood templates to be *good* REST practice ←
11:12:22 <Stian> GK: That's what I initially wanted
Graham Klyne: That's what I initially wanted ←
11:12:25 <Stian> Ivan: Anything beyond that is not scope of WG. SPARQL or what not. How to get it!
Ivan Herman: Anything beyond that is not scope of WG. SPARQL or what not. How to get it! ←
11:12:27 <Stian> GK: How to get it from several starting points.
Graham Klyne: How to get it from several starting points. ←
11:12:30 <Stian> GK: You might have URI for your source.. how do you get provenance from the provider of that resource. that's where Link: etc came in.
Graham Klyne: You might have URI for your source.. how do you get provenance from the provider of that resource. that's where Link: etc came in. ←
11:12:31 <tlebo> @pgroth, describe your URI template filling in some "service description" and I'd be fine with it.
Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, describe your URI template filling in some "service description" and I'd be fine with it. ←
11:12:33 <Stian> GK: then other requirements, third-party provenance. Other people provide thrust-assessments about your data.
Graham Klyne: then other requirements, third-party provenance. Other people provide thrust-assessments about your data. ←
11:12:33 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
11:12:36 <Stian> Ivan: HTTP header is not restricted to the same URI?
Ivan Herman: HTTP header is not restricted to the same URI? ←
11:12:36 <GK> They allow the client to follow information provided by the server.
Graham Klyne: They allow the client to follow information provided by the server. ←
11:12:38 <Stian> GK: But you need to know where to start. Provenance service came in here..
Graham Klyne: But you need to know where to start. Provenance service came in here.. ←
11:12:41 <Stian> Pgroth: Where do you get provenance from.. In many cases, if you look around what people who have done provenance, most if it stuck in some Provenance Service. Another way to do so is like in Dublin Core - just have a little graph/document that describe some provenance.
Paul Groth: Where do you get provenance from.. In many cases, if you look around what people who have done provenance, most if it stuck in some Provenance Service. Another way to do so is like in Dublin Core - just have a little graph/document that describe some provenance. ←
11:12:45 <Stian> Pgroth: Put it in a service - then you need to say "Hey, service, I am interested in provenance about X"
Paul Groth: Put it in a service - then you need to say "Hey, service, I am interested in provenance about X" ←
11:12:48 <Stian> Pgroth: And most services provide you a way to query to not get the provenance of the world. But there is not a single well-defined way to do so.
Paul Groth: And most services provide you a way to query to not get the provenance of the world. But there is not a single well-defined way to do so. ←
11:12:51 <Stian> Pgroth: We should just say here's where you get some provenance. If it is in a document, related resource, you can go straight to it.
Paul Groth: We should just say here's where you get some provenance. If it is in a document, related resource, you can go straight to it. ←
11:12:54 <Stian> pgroth: just being pedantic.
Paul Groth: just being pedantic. ←
11:12:56 <Stian> SmileS: what's relation between the API and a SPARQL query. If I get the resource.. what does that mean?
Simon Miles: what's relation between the API and a SPARQL query. If I get the resource.. what does that mean? ←
11:13:00 <Stian> Pgroth: One thing we might say is, we need a query language.. we have a draft query language.. we come up with some patterns on how to use SPARQL to query, but that's only an informative thing.
Paul Groth: One thing we might say is, we need a query language.. we have a draft query language.. we come up with some patterns on how to use SPARQL to query, but that's only an informative thing. ←
11:13:01 <GK> Sure, you ned to know where to start, but that'simp;licit in REST.
Graham Klyne: Sure, you ned to know where to start, but that'simp;licit in REST. ←
11:13:04 <Stian> SmileS: So does it need sparql in the API?
Simon Miles: So does it need sparql in the API? ←
11:13:06 <Stian> Ivan: No, not int he API. The Service either gives me a whole graph - and I can do what I like with the graph. Outside scope. Or I get an URI to the provenance information.
Ivan Herman: No, not int he API. The Service either gives me a whole graph - and I can do what I like with the graph. Outside scope. Or I get an URI to the provenance information. ←
11:13:09 <Stian> Ivan: I can use that URI in a SPARQL service. In any case the query is done on the .... might be a different SPARQL engine.
Ivan Herman: I can use that URI in a SPARQL service. In any case the query is done on the .... might be a different SPARQL engine. ←
11:13:12 <Stian> Pgroth: Does not ..(?)
Paul Groth: Does not ..(?) ←
11:13:15 <Stian> SmileS: so what you get back from the API is..
Simon Miles: so what you get back from the API is.. ←
11:13:17 <Stian> Pgroth: Provenance information
Paul Groth: Provenance information ←
11:13:20 <Stian> Smiles: Representation or URI?
Simon Miles: Representation or URI? ←
11:13:21 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
11:13:22 <Stian> Pgroth/Luc: We need to decide on that.
Pgroth/Luc: We need to decide on that. ←
11:13:25 <Stian> ------------- END OF PASTE
------------- END OF PASTE ←
11:13:27 <Stian> (those are from various points above that needs to ve moved around)
(those are from various points above that needs to ve moved around) ←
11:13:30 <Stian> Luc: Two questions
Luc Moreau: Two questions ←
11:13:32 <Stian> Luc: For the primer - what are the next steps, what do we need to continue
Luc Moreau: For the primer - what are the next steps, what do we need to continue ←
11:13:35 <Stian> TOPIC: Primer
Summary: Simon presented the current status of the primer. A key reason for not progressing farther is the differences between prov-o and prov-dm once those issues are resolved further work can be done. Longer term there is a goal to tailor a primer to different communities. In gerneral, the group was happy abou the primer's status. A discussion was had about having a common way to graphically illustrate provenance graphs. It was agreed that having a common convention would be good. Finally, the importance of the primer as an entry point to the entiry family was discussed. There was consensus that the group should aim for a synchronous release with the other documents.
<pgroth> Summary: Simon presented the current status of the primer. A key reason for not progressing farther is the differences between prov-o and prov-dm once those issues are resolved further work can be done. Longer term there is a goal to tailor a primer to different communities. In gerneral, the group was happy abou the primer's status. A discussion was had about having a common way to graphically illustrate provenance graphs. It was agreed that having a common convention would be good. Finally, the importance of the primer as an entry point to the entiry family was discussed. There was consensus that the group should aim for a synchronous release with the other documents.
11:13:37 <Stian> smiles: two thins that we thought would need to be done
Simon Miles: two thins that we thought would need to be done ←
11:13:40 <Stian> smiles: fill in missing parts - DM things we want to introduce in primer
Simon Miles: fill in missing parts - DM things we want to introduce in primer ←
11:13:42 <Stian> smiles: some impression this morning that we keep things breef - use Turtle in examples
Simon Miles: some impression this morning that we keep things breef - use Turtle in examples ←
11:13:45 <Stian> smiles: if we're happy with that we stick with that
Simon Miles: if we're happy with that we stick with that ←
11:13:48 <Stian> smiles: the reason we have not progressed.. PROV-DM and PROV-O differences - those need to be matched up
Simon Miles: the reason we have not progressed.. PROV-DM and PROV-O differences - those need to be matched up ←
11:13:51 <Stian> smiles: had to raise issues on PROV-O for those
Simon Miles: had to raise issues on PROV-O for those ←
11:13:53 <Stian> smiles: derivation, notes.. assocation with.. alternateof, specialisationof, account
Simon Miles: derivation, notes.. assocation with.. alternateof, specialisationof, account ←
11:13:57 <Stian> smiles: some of these controversial
Simon Miles: some of these controversial ←
11:14:02 <Stian> smiles: longer term - primer should make sure communities that are to read the documents would all be compatible with it
Simon Miles: longer term - primer should make sure communities that are to read the documents would all be compatible with it ←
11:14:14 <Stian> smiles: how to start with the document - now i takes some lines of starting up.. entities attributes
Simon Miles: how to start with the document - now i takes some lines of starting up.. entities attributes ←
11:14:25 <Stian> smiles: but if people are just citing things.. is it easy for them to pick up and use?
Simon Miles: but if people are just citing things.. is it easy for them to pick up and use? ←
11:14:33 <Stian> smiles: workflow people, how do we address those?
Simon Miles: workflow people, how do we address those? ←
11:14:37 <Stian> smiles: pathways through documents
Simon Miles: pathways through documents ←
11:14:48 <Stian> ivan: q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
11:14:52 <Stian> q+ ivan
q+ ivan ←
11:15:04 <Stian> q?
q? ←
11:15:06 <Stian> q- ivan
q- ivan ←
11:15:14 <Stian> ivan: this is the first doc I Read, and i understood it
Ivan Herman: this is the first doc I Read, and i understood it ←
11:15:20 <Stian> ivan: my comments are minor - like
Ivan Herman: my comments are minor - like ←
11:15:32 <Stian> ... bothered my why you use namespace ex1
... bothered my why you use namespace ex1 ←
11:15:37 <Stian> ... in my mind I dropped 1
... in my mind I dropped 1 ←
11:15:44 <Stian> smiles: the reason was that there might be more than one example
Simon Miles: the reason was that there might be more than one example ←
11:15:52 <Stian> smiles: one example to show everything.. and to not confuse it
Simon Miles: one example to show everything.. and to not confuse it ←
11:16:04 <Stian> ivan: thins you define as entity.. is not anywhere else, like article
Ivan Herman: thins you define as entity.. is not anywhere else, like article ←
11:16:19 <Stian> ivan: when I made my own drawings.. for me, when I have an activty, it's an active thing
Ivan Herman: when I made my own drawings.. for me, when I have an activty, it's an active thing ←
11:16:25 <Stian> ivan: for me the natural thing of that is to use a word
Ivan Herman: for me the natural thing of that is to use a word ←
11:16:33 <Stian> ivan: you use aggregated - and i use aggregate
Ivan Herman: you use aggregated - and i use aggregate ←
11:16:44 <Stian> smiles: in concern using provenance.. you can describe arbitrary processes
Simon Miles: in concern using provenance.. you can describe arbitrary processes ←
11:16:46 <Paolo> Q+
Paolo Missier: Q+ ←
11:16:52 <Stian> smiles: what provenance is used for is the *past* - so past tense
Simon Miles: what provenance is used for is the *past* - so past tense ←
11:16:59 <Stian> ivan: it's a personal thing..
Ivan Herman: it's a personal thing.. ←
11:17:06 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
11:17:11 <Stian> ivan: that's how I hit these huge predicate names in PROV-O
Ivan Herman: that's how I hit these huge predicate names in PROV-O ←
11:17:16 <Stian> ivan: prov:wasGeneratedBy
Ivan Herman: prov:wasGeneratedBy ←
11:17:27 <Stian> ivan: on a diagram it does not look good
Ivan Herman: on a diagram it does not look good ←
11:17:40 <Stian> ivan: found section on revision and derivation very shallow
Ivan Herman: found section on revision and derivation very shallow ←
11:17:46 <Stian> ivan: could follow everything before that
Ivan Herman: could follow everything before that ←
11:17:54 <Stian> ivan: wasEventuallyDerivedFrom
Ivan Herman: wasEventuallyDerivedFrom ←
11:18:04 <Stian> smiles: it's still being developed by the other task forces
Simon Miles: it's still being developed by the other task forces ←
11:18:05 <Stian> smiles: agree
Simon Miles: agree ←
11:18:13 <Stian> ivan: abstract notation.. skipped that
Ivan Herman: abstract notation.. skipped that ←
11:18:21 <Stian> ivan: different discussion
Ivan Herman: different discussion ←
11:18:40 <Stian> ivan: easily, in terms of figures.. an RDF Graph with part of that in the primer would be helpful
Ivan Herman: easily, in terms of figures.. an RDF Graph with part of that in the primer would be helpful ←
11:18:48 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:18:50 <Stian> ivan: the diagram that you put up in the beginning section 2
Ivan Herman: the diagram that you put up in the beginning section 2 ←
11:18:54 <Stian> ivan: is a copy of th eone in DM
Ivan Herman: is a copy of th eone in DM ←
11:19:06 <Stian> ivan: bu tnot sure if you use the terms in the diagram in the rest of the example..
Ivan Herman: bu tnot sure if you use the terms in the diagram in the rest of the example.. ←
11:19:13 <Stian> Luc: synchronization issue
Luc Moreau: synchronization issue ←
11:19:24 <Stian> ivan: does not need a full diagram of ontology in primer
Ivan Herman: does not need a full diagram of ontology in primer ←
11:19:27 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:19:37 <Stian> smiles: is the overall what you expected from a primer?
Simon Miles: is the overall what you expected from a primer? ←
11:19:44 <Stian> ivan: yes, this was my entry point
Ivan Herman: yes, this was my entry point ←
11:19:48 <Stian> ivan: I can use these diagrams
Ivan Herman: I can use these diagrams ←
11:19:53 <Stian> ivan: works very well
Ivan Herman: works very well ←
11:20:04 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
11:20:11 <Luc> ack paol
Luc Moreau: ack paol ←
11:20:18 <Stian> Paolo: Question was if diagram or graphical notation explains some things
Paolo Missier: Question was if diagram or graphical notation explains some things ←
11:20:21 <Stian> Paolo: what notation to use
Paolo Missier: what notation to use ←
11:20:30 <Stian> ivan: I would do RDF graph - examples are in turtle
Ivan Herman: I would do RDF graph - examples are in turtle ←
11:20:48 <Stian> Paolo: my original point - if I give this to half my colleagues - they would be happy to see this as technology/notation independeny
Paolo Missier: my original point - if I give this to half my colleagues - they would be happy to see this as technology/notation independeny ←
11:20:54 <Stian> Paolo: RDF all over the primer might scare..
Paolo Missier: RDF all over the primer might scare.. ←
11:21:12 <Stian> Paolo: important tha tthis is the first dive in.. then not alienate people who are not interested in RDF
Paolo Missier: important tha tthis is the first dive in.. then not alienate people who are not interested in RDF ←
11:21:17 <Stian> ivan: ok, so part of overall discussion
Ivan Herman: ok, so part of overall discussion ←
11:21:28 <Stian> ivan: other possibility is to do what OWL primer does.. with the buttons
Ivan Herman: other possibility is to do what OWL primer does.. with the buttons ←
11:21:49 <Stian> ivan: if I look at OWL primers I always click Turtle syntax - but friends of mine probably clicks Manchester syntax
Ivan Herman: if I look at OWL primers I always click Turtle syntax - but friends of mine probably clicks Manchester syntax ←
11:21:53 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:22:00 <Stian> pgroth: agree on this
Paul Groth: agree on this ←
11:22:18 <Stian> pgroth: if other syntaxes like XML-native, JSON come up.. they can fit in
Paul Groth: if other syntaxes like XML-native, JSON come up.. they can fit in ←
11:22:29 <Stian> ivan: ok, then even RDF/XML if you really want to
Ivan Herman: ok, then even RDF/XML if you really want to ←
11:22:50 <Stian> pgroth: a graphical notation in OPM
Paul Groth: a graphical notation in OPM ←
11:22:56 <Stian> (?)
(?) ←
11:23:09 <Stian> Luc: not notation, illustration
Luc Moreau: not notation, illustration ←
11:23:17 <Stian> pgroth: illustrate graphically provenance
Paul Groth: illustrate graphically provenance ←
11:23:19 <GK> Is this discussion of using ASN a first consensus point to test our earlier discussion. Is this group trying to be technology-independent, or are we defining a specification for the Semantic Web?
Graham Klyne: Is this discussion of using ASN a first consensus point to test our earlier discussion. Is this group trying to be technology-independent, or are we defining a specification for the Semantic Web? ←
11:23:43 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:23:44 <Stian> pgroth: (..) or are we trying to just put data as RDF and produce figures?
Paul Groth: (..) or are we trying to just put data as RDF and produce figures? ←
11:24:14 <Stian> ivan: could look at diagram at file:///home/stain/src/provenance-wg/prov/primer/Primer.html#intuitive-overview-of-prov-dm and think of it as RDF
Ivan Herman: could look at diagram at file:///home/stain/src/provenance-wg/prov/primer/Primer.html#intuitive-overview-of-prov-dm and think of it as RDF ←
11:24:28 <Luc> ack pgr
Luc Moreau: ack pgr ←
11:24:29 <Stian> ivan: there is not standard RDF Graph notation.. but if I add some kind of typing
Ivan Herman: there is not standard RDF Graph notation.. but if I add some kind of typing ←
11:24:36 <Stian> ivan: and from the shape I see it's an activity, agent, etc
Ivan Herman: and from the shape I see it's an activity, agent, etc ←
11:24:42 <Stian> ivan: then I have some kind of notation that is understandable by others
Ivan Herman: then I have some kind of notation that is understandable by others ←
11:24:54 <Stian> ivan: type information info RDF graph - explicitly, obscures everything
Ivan Herman: type information info RDF graph - explicitly, obscures everything ←
11:25:01 <Stian> smiles: Does it have to be fixed to th eRDF graph
Simon Miles: Does it have to be fixed to th eRDF graph ←
11:25:20 <Stian> smiles: like in PROV-O some thins are more complicated then thay need to be in a diagram - wher eyou ahve n-ary relationships
Simon Miles: like in PROV-O some thins are more complicated then thay need to be in a diagram - wher eyou ahve n-ary relationships ←
11:25:46 <Stian> ivan: perhaps same technique of syntax switching can also be used for graphics
Ivan Herman: perhaps same technique of syntax switching can also be used for graphics ←
11:25:53 <Stian> Stian: but it's hard enough already to update the diagrams
Stian Soiland-Reyes: but it's hard enough already to update the diagrams ←
11:26:02 <Stian> Paolo: was just meant like a classic ER diagram
Paolo Missier: was just meant like a classic ER diagram ←
11:26:14 <Stian> Paolo: I would support the idea of a suggested graphical illustration
Paolo Missier: I would support the idea of a suggested graphical illustration ←
11:26:17 <Stian> Paolo: first thing people do..
Paolo Missier: first thing people do.. ←
11:26:24 <Stian> Paolo: pictures on slides, etc
Paolo Missier: pictures on slides, etc ←
11:26:29 <Stian> Paolo: suggest at least
Paolo Missier: suggest at least ←
11:26:39 <Stian> Luc: Graphical illustration.. we do not mean that kind of picture
Luc Moreau: Graphical illustration.. we do not mean that kind of picture ←
11:26:50 <Stian> Luc: We mean an instance of a graph
Luc Moreau: We mean an instance of a graph ←
11:26:54 <Stian> Luc: PROV-DM has something like that
Luc Moreau: PROV-DM has something like that ←
11:27:23 <Stian> ivan: but then it can be correct.. I can look at the picture.. if it's a circle, then it's not just a resource, but with some type information
Ivan Herman: but then it can be correct.. I can look at the picture.. if it's a circle, then it's not just a resource, but with some type information ←
11:27:27 <Stian> ivan: that would be perfect
Ivan Herman: that would be perfect ←
11:27:42 <Stian> Luc: some edges in this illustrations are not properties
Luc Moreau: some edges in this illustrations are not properties ←
11:28:01 <Stian> Luc: like wasGeneratedBy or Used might be an instance
Luc Moreau: like wasGeneratedBy or Used might be an instance ←
11:28:03 <tlebo> @luc, they are predicates
Timothy Lebo: @luc, they are predicates ←
11:28:07 <Stian> Paolo: it can have additional elements
Paolo Missier: it can have additional elements ←
11:28:13 <tlebo> their qualified forms are classes.
Timothy Lebo: their qualified forms are classes. ←
11:28:19 <Stian> Luc: it was used..
Luc Moreau: it was used.. ←
11:29:34 <Stian> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html#graphical-illustration
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html#graphical-illustration ←
11:29:50 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:29:50 <Stian> pgroth: so an illustration of the graph should be easily represented as RDF
Paul Groth: so an illustration of the graph should be easily represented as RDF ←
11:29:58 <Stian> Paolo: 10 people doing same graph in different ways
Paolo Missier: 10 people doing same graph in different ways ←
11:30:03 <Stian> Luc: we should as a WG be consistent
Luc Moreau: we should as a WG be consistent ←
11:30:09 <Stian> ivan: so not take my slides public..?
Ivan Herman: so not take my slides public..? ←
11:30:19 <Stian> Luc: Oh, that's fine, but not in the PROV document
Luc Moreau: Oh, that's fine, but not in the PROV document ←
11:30:28 <Stian> ivan: these slides people will copy!
Ivan Herman: these slides people will copy! ←
11:30:40 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:30:49 <Stian> ivan: my picture is just ovals in colours - would not work in generral!
Ivan Herman: my picture is just ovals in colours - would not work in generral! ←
11:31:00 <Stian> @ivan can we have a sneak-view of this..? :)
@ivan can we have a sneak-view of this..? :) ←
11:31:08 <Stian> Paolo: illustration of different perspectives
Paolo Missier: illustration of different perspectives ←
11:31:17 <Stian> smiles: if we can stick at one example, that is a good thing, makes it simpler
Simon Miles: if we can stick at one example, that is a good thing, makes it simpler ←
11:31:30 <Stian> smiles: why we though we need more than one example, is that it might be contrived to fit every concept into the same example
Simon Miles: why we though we need more than one example, is that it might be contrived to fit every concept into the same example ←
11:31:33 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:31:38 <dgarijo> +q
Daniel Garijo: +q ←
11:31:46 <Stian> Paolo: might flow into Best Practices document with several examples
Paolo Missier: might flow into Best Practices document with several examples ←
11:32:05 <Stian> dgarijo: I see that you use the QualifiedInvolvement in the example, but not talk about it in the primer
Daniel Garijo: I see that you use the QualifiedInvolvement in the example, but not talk about it in the primer ←
11:32:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:32:09 <Stian> smiles: See what you mean
Simon Miles: See what you mean ←
11:32:10 <Luc> ack d
Luc Moreau: ack d ←
11:32:17 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
11:32:18 <Stian> smiles: as PROV-O has changed duing development
Simon Miles: as PROV-O has changed duing development ←
11:32:22 <GK> q+ to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points
Graham Klyne: q+ to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points ←
11:32:29 <Stian> dgarijo: can be confusing with class vs. property
Daniel Garijo: can be confusing with class vs. property ←
11:32:29 <Luc> ack kh
Luc Moreau: ack kh ←
11:32:39 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: Notion of role in the primer? (???)(
Khalid Belhajjame: Notion of role in the primer? (???)( ←
11:33:11 <Stian> Stian: yes, roles have become downplayed for general attributes later
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes, roles have become downplayed for general attributes later ←
11:33:19 <Stian> (We had EntityInRole rather than QualifiedInvolvement)
(We had EntityInRole rather than QualifiedInvolvement) ←
11:33:46 <Stian> smiles: roles were more explicit before, now evolved with various qualifications
Simon Miles: roles were more explicit before, now evolved with various qualifications ←
11:33:58 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: perhaps it's best to keep it, explain roles which are more important (?)
Khalid Belhajjame: perhaps it's best to keep it, explain roles which are more important (?) ←
11:34:07 <Stian> smiles: add something about roles being just one way to qualify
Simon Miles: add something about roles being just one way to qualify ←
11:34:22 <Luc> ack gk
Luc Moreau: ack gk ←
11:34:22 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points ←
11:34:30 <Stian> GK: about single example.. was impressed with how the examples were introduced
Graham Klyne: about single example.. was impressed with how the examples were introduced ←
11:34:32 <tlebo> @stian, which shifted from describing the (EntityInRole) more characterized Entity to describing the (QualifiedInvolvement) triple between the Activity and the Entity.
Timothy Lebo: @stian, which shifted from describing the (EntityInRole) more characterized Entity to describing the (QualifiedInvolvement) triple between the Activity and the Entity. ←
11:34:36 <Stian> GK: if we force it to single example we might loose this!
Graham Klyne: if we force it to single example we might loose this! ←
11:34:46 <Stian> GK: so push this to make sure we keep the simple ocus in incremental development
Graham Klyne: so push this to make sure we keep the simple ocus in incremental development ←
11:34:53 <Stian> ---Lunch has arrived
---Lunch has arrived ←
11:34:58 <Stian> with 3 freeriders
with 3 freeriders ←
11:35:03 <Stian> (?)
(?) ←
11:35:18 <Stian> smiles: point is that focus on common relations.. properties.. wassummaryof etc
Simon Miles: point is that focus on common relations.. properties.. wassummaryof etc ←
11:35:26 <Stian> smiles: thinking of document from librarian perspective
Simon Miles: thinking of document from librarian perspective ←
11:35:42 <Stian> smiles: record of activities.. make you start to read, see if this is relevant to me
Simon Miles: record of activities.. make you start to read, see if this is relevant to me ←
11:35:48 <Stian> smiles: so both kind of communities are encouraged
Simon Miles: so both kind of communities are encouraged ←
11:35:49 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
11:36:32 <Stian> smiles: last release in January.. suggests that in 6 times for something that addresses different communities.. on the way changes with intermediate releases to keep up to date
Simon Miles: last release in January.. suggests that in 6 times for something that addresses different communities.. on the way changes with intermediate releases to keep up to date ←
11:36:39 <Stian> ivan: so primer is a Note?
Ivan Herman: so primer is a Note? ←
11:36:43 <Stian> Stian: yes, informative
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes, informative ←
11:37:10 <Stian> Luc: if we simplify DM.. then alignment iwth primer is important - it's the first entry point - we should pitch it like that
Luc Moreau: if we simplify DM.. then alignment iwth primer is important - it's the first entry point - we should pitch it like that ←
11:37:27 <Stian> Luc: so it must be align with our changes -b ut can be incomplete and say not cover collections
Luc Moreau: so it must be align with our changes -b ut can be incomplete and say not cover collections ←
11:37:45 <Stian> Luc: but if core thins change, then we must update primer
Luc Moreau: but if core thins change, then we must update primer ←
11:37:55 <Stian> smiles: so instead of primer folks lagging behind..
Simon Miles: so instead of primer folks lagging behind.. ←
11:38:02 <Stian> smiles: treat it as a change request (?)
Simon Miles: treat it as a change request (?) ←
11:38:14 <Stian> Luc: align with milestones of DM and O
Luc Moreau: align with milestones of DM and O ←
11:38:20 <Stian> Luc: even if not 100% synced
Luc Moreau: even if not 100% synced ←
11:38:36 <Stian> smiles: if PROV-O is finished 1 week before deadline, we need to know what is updated or not
Simon Miles: if PROV-O is finished 1 week before deadline, we need to know what is updated or not ←
11:39:15 <Stian> Stian: so it's good with cross-taskforce mixing here, like myself is in PROV-O and Primer - Paolo is in DM and Primer
Stian Soiland-Reyes: so it's good with cross-taskforce mixing here, like myself is in PROV-O and Primer - Paolo is in DM and Primer ←
11:39:30 <tlebo> 35 minutes for lunch?
Timothy Lebo: 35 minutes for lunch? ←
11:39:34 <tlebo> thx
Timothy Lebo: thx ←
11:39:43 <Stian> MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 GMT (~35 mins)
MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 CEST (~35 mins) ←
11:39:49 <Stian> s/GMT/CEST
11:39:53 <Stian> MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 CET (~35 mins)
MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 CET (~35 mins) ←
11:41:02 <Zakim> -[VrijeUni.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[VrijeUni.a] ←
12:18:58 <Stian> TOPIC: Best practic document(s)
(No events recorded for 37 minutes)
Summary: The current best practices document describes how to extend the ontology to an application specific domain. Kai agreed to lead the development of a best practice document for using Dublin Core and Prov together. Danial, Graham and Simon agreed to help. It was agreed, not to reach out to people outside the group until the specifications have stabalized more. Ivan suggested that the Semantic Web wiki can be used to maintain examples coming from the group and best practices after the lifetime of the working group.
<pgroth> Summary: The current best practices document describes how to extend the ontology to an application specific domain. Kai agreed to lead the development of a best practice document for using Dublin Core and Prov together. Danial, Graham and Simon agreed to help. It was agreed, not to reach out to people outside the group until the specifications have stabalized more. Ivan suggested that the Semantic Web wiki can be used to maintain examples coming from the group and best practices after the lifetime of the working group.
12:19:12 <pgroth> we will try to talk again
Paul Groth: we will try to talk again ←
12:19:22 <pgroth> try to phone in again
Paul Groth: try to phone in again ←
12:19:26 <Zakim> -tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←
12:19:28 <Paolo> TOPIC best practice
Paolo Missier: TOPIC best practice ←
12:19:35 <Stian> Scribe: Paolo
(Scribe set to Paolo Missier)
12:19:40 <Paolo> Luc; what should be there?
Luc; what should be there? ←
12:19:54 <Paolo> should SPARQL queries be best practice?
should SPARQL queries be best practice? ←
12:20:02 <Paolo> Stian: started writing a section on serialization
Stian Soiland-Reyes: started writing a section on serialization ←
12:20:03 <Zakim> +tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo ←
12:21:02 <Paolo> Luc: but is this part of PROV-O instead?
Luc Moreau: but is this part of PROV-O instead? ←
12:21:12 <Paolo> dgarijo: all examples from PROV-O have been placed in the BP
Daniel Garijo: all examples from PROV-O have been placed in the BP ←
12:21:39 <dgarijo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html
Daniel Garijo: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html ←
12:21:57 <Paolo> Luc: should be connected to interoperability problem
Luc Moreau: should be connected to interoperability problem ←
12:22:27 <Paolo> Stian: BP is a good place for some limited hints at interop
Stian Soiland-Reyes: BP is a good place for some limited hints at interop ←
12:23:03 <Paolo> Paul: BP should clarify for example the kind of reasoning that one is expected to be able to understand
Paul Groth: BP should clarify for example the kind of reasoning that one is expected to be able to understand ←
12:24:07 <Paolo> Paul: interop is not a proper BP issue
Paul Groth: interop is not a proper BP issue ←
12:24:49 <Paolo> Paul: examples of BP: working with DC, working with OpenID, working with Creative Commons
Paul Groth: examples of BP: working with DC, working with OpenID, working with Creative Commons ←
12:26:03 <Paolo> Kai: DC is directly related in describing the provenance of things
Kai Eckert: DC is directly related in describing the provenance of things ←
12:26:37 <Paolo> Paul: it's about clarifying the relationship b/w DC terms and PROV terms
Paul Groth: it's about clarifying the relationship b/w DC terms and PROV terms ←
12:27:57 <Paolo> Paul: create mappings to that translators can be automatically built
Paul Groth: create mappings to that translators can be automatically built ←
12:28:18 <Paolo> Kai: fine, and volunteers to take responsibility to work on these mappings
Kai Eckert: fine, and volunteers to take responsibility to work on these mappings ←
12:28:28 <Paolo> Daniel joins in!
Daniel joins in! ←
12:28:34 <Paolo> and Simon joins, too!!
and Simon joins, too!! ←
12:28:46 <Paolo> and Graham!!!
and Graham!!! ←
12:29:18 <Paolo> Kai: can we have some initial examples to bootstrap the process
Kai Eckert: can we have some initial examples to bootstrap the process ←
12:29:24 <pgroth> Action: kai to bootstrap dc best practice
ACTION: kai to bootstrap dc best practice ←
12:29:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-53 - Bootstrap dc best practice [on Kai Eckert - due 2012-02-09].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-53 - Bootstrap dc best practice [on Kai Eckert - due 2012-02-09]. ←
12:29:28 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
12:29:52 <Paolo> Khalid, Daniel: example mappings to SKOS exist and can be used as examples
Khalid, Daniel: example mappings to SKOS exist and can be used as examples ←
12:30:08 <Paolo> Luc: what are the scope and objectives of this activity?
Luc Moreau: what are the scope and objectives of this activity? ←
12:30:29 <Paolo> GK: start with illustrative mappings initially
Graham Klyne: start with illustrative mappings initially ←
12:30:41 <Paolo> smiles: simpler DC -> PROV
Simon Miles: simpler DC -> PROV ←
12:32:06 <Paolo> Ivan: practically, some of these mappings should belong in the PROV-O ontology
Ivan Herman: practically, some of these mappings should belong in the PROV-O ontology ←
12:32:45 <Paolo> (that is, if the mappings are simple and just involve subClassOf etc.)
(that is, if the mappings are simple and just involve subClassOf etc.) ←
12:33:41 <Paolo> Ivan: whenever these mappings are clear and OWL-expressible, they should be put in PROV-O
Ivan Herman: whenever these mappings are clear and OWL-expressible, they should be put in PROV-O ←
12:36:33 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni.a] ←
12:36:48 <pgroth> meeting room is back on zakim
Paul Groth: meeting room is back on zakim ←
12:37:23 <Paolo> Luc: need expectation management -- be realistic wrt timeline
Luc Moreau: need expectation management -- be realistic wrt timeline ←
12:38:04 <Paolo> Luc; having mappings is a nice proposition but it may be beyond what we can achieve realistically. Start small initially, then reassess
Luc; having mappings is a nice proposition but it may be beyond what we can achieve realistically. Start small initially, then reassess ←
12:38:40 <Paolo> Paul: need someone to drive the creative commons effort
Paul Groth: need someone to drive the creative commons effort ←
12:38:57 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
12:39:23 <Stian> I've added a template section 2 for Kai et al in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I've added a template section 2 for Kai et al in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html ←
12:39:44 <Paolo> Kai: from the Connection TF POV, connections should be established with CC people. Awaiting the results of this meeting before we can engage them so we have a concrete baseline for collaboration
Kai Eckert: from the Connection TF POV, connections should be established with CC people. Awaiting the results of this meeting before we can engage them so we have a concrete baseline for collaboration ←
12:40:36 <Paolo> Paul: idea still valid but to be postponed until last WD, before last call
Paul Groth: idea still valid but to be postponed until last WD, before last call ←
12:40:44 <Paolo> Luc: to be revisited after WD5 is out
Luc Moreau: to be revisited after WD5 is out ←
12:42:01 <Paolo> Kai: only engage people when we know we have a real chance
Kai Eckert: only engage people when we know we have a real chance ←
12:42:18 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
12:42:29 <Luc2> Ack I
Luc Moreau: Ack I ←
12:42:52 <dgarijo> Paolo: what do you mean by retorical structures?
Paolo Missier: what do you mean by retorical structures? [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
12:43:11 <Paolo> Paul: engaging HCLS group on "rethorical structures" (SWAN etc.). keen on identify provenance issues
Paul Groth: engaging HCLS group on "rethorical structures" (SWAN etc.). keen on identify provenance issues ←
12:43:40 <Paolo> Paul: wil talk to them before end of Feb., using the primer
Paul Groth: wil talk to them before end of Feb., using the primer ←
12:43:44 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
12:48:15 <Paolo> Khalid: is there a place in the doc suite when you can go deeper into some topics that have been determined to be not mature enough for PROV?
Khalid Belhajjame: is there a place in the doc suite when you can go deeper into some topics that have been determined to be not mature enough for PROV? ←
12:48:35 <Paolo> Luc: not precluded but no requirement in the charter to do that
Luc Moreau: not precluded but no requirement in the charter to do that ←
12:49:17 <Paolo> Luc: any need to have a collections-howto in the BP?
Luc Moreau: any need to have a collections-howto in the BP? ←
12:49:25 <Paolo> Stian, Paolo: yes
Stian, Paolo: yes ←
12:50:26 <Paolo> Stian, Paolo to contribute such examples
Stian, Paolo to contribute such examples ←
12:50:57 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
12:52:45 <Paolo> initially to go into the BP doc
initially to go into the BP doc ←
12:53:04 <Paolo> Luc: is BP a single doc?
Luc Moreau: is BP a single doc? ←
12:53:38 <Paolo> or should it be modular
or should it be modular ←
12:53:58 <Paolo> ivan: a note has no constraints on form
Ivan Herman: a note has no constraints on form ←
12:55:00 <Paolo> no formal publication, it can be a web page but careful as it has to be maintained past the end of the project
no formal publication, it can be a web page but careful as it has to be maintained past the end of the project ←
12:55:28 <Paolo> Ivan: the SW wiki can be used to maintain live examples over time
Ivan Herman: the SW wiki can be used to maintain live examples over time ←
12:56:10 <Paolo> Paul: good to have some "stamp" on the examples so that's a good technical solution
Paul Groth: good to have some "stamp" on the examples so that's a good technical solution ←
12:56:23 <Paolo> Ivan: so use the WG wiki to develop, then migrate to SW wiki
Ivan Herman: so use the WG wiki to develop, then migrate to SW wiki ←
12:59:19 <Paolo> Luc: the current "best practices" doc is currently an extension of prov-o, it should be made to stand on its own
Luc Moreau: the current "best practices" doc is currently an extension of prov-o, it should be made to stand on its own ←
13:00:00 <Stian> so we will dismantle http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html and use mainly wiki pages (sparql example, collections) and separate notes (Dublin Core, ontology extensions)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: so we will dismantle http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html and use mainly wiki pages (sparql example, collections) and separate notes (Dublin Core, ontology extensions) ←
13:00:08 <tlebo> hello
Timothy Lebo: hello ←
13:00:39 <tlebo> I'm on Zakim
Timothy Lebo: I'm on Zakim ←
13:00:48 <Stian> Zakim: who is on?
13:00:51 <Stian> Zakim, who is on?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, who is on? ←
13:00:51 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, Stian.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, Stian. ←
13:01:03 <Stian> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
13:01:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [VrijeUni.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [VrijeUni.a] ←
13:01:27 <Paolo> Topic: PROV-DM
Summary: Two topics were discussed in this session: accounts and identifiers. Accounts - The prime use of accounts was identified as being able to express the provenance of provenance. However, the current notion attempts to support more complex notions of multiple accounts, which adds complexity to the model. To address this complixty, the group agreed that accounts are going to be taken out and replace it with a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions. Identifiers - a key issue has been what identifiers denote in the data model. The group recognized that the key problem is that we were trying to address two use-cases. The term "scruffy" provenance was used to refer to using the prov-dm vocabulary with already exisiting web resources where the subject of a provenance assertion is just a URI. The term "proper" provenance was used to refer to the case where the thing should have a frozen characterisation. Both use cases were seen as being important. To address the use case of scruffy provenance instead the editors of prov-dm proposed to remove the distinction between entities and things in the document, which reflected these two use cases. There was consensus to move forward with the renaiming.
<pgroth> Summary: Two topics were discussed in this session: accounts and identifiers. Accounts - The prime use of accounts was identified as being able to express the provenance of provenance. However, the current notion attempts to support more complex notions of multiple accounts, which adds complexity to the model. To address this complixty, the group agreed that accounts are going to be taken out and replace it with a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions. Identifiers - a key issue has been what identifiers denote in the data model. The group recognized that the key problem is that we were trying to address two use-cases. The term "scruffy" provenance was used to refer to using the prov-dm vocabulary with already exisiting web resources where the subject of a provenance assertion is just a URI. The term "proper" provenance was used to refer to the case where the thing should have a frozen characterisation. Both use cases were seen as being important. To address the use case of scruffy provenance instead the editors of prov-dm proposed to remove the distinction between entities and things in the document, which reflected these two use cases. There was consensus to move forward with the renaiming.
13:01:46 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
13:02:04 <Paolo> Paul chairs
Paul chairs ←
13:02:28 <Paolo> Paul issues on identifiers should be addressed in a pragmatic way
Paul issues on identifiers should be addressed in a pragmatic way ←
13:02:55 <Paolo> Paul: need to avoid corner cases
Paul Groth: need to avoid corner cases ←
13:03:07 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:04:00 <Paolo> Luc: issue: {entity, thing, attributes, identifiers}. not specific to PROV-DM, see Paul's blog example
Luc Moreau: issue: {entity, thing, attributes, identifiers}. not specific to PROV-DM, see Paul's blog example ←
13:04:20 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/
Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/ ←
13:04:49 <Paolo> Luc: first issue to address here; account.
Luc Moreau: first issue to address here; account. ←
13:05:47 <Paolo> Luc: prime use for accounts is provenance of provenance
Luc Moreau: prime use for accounts is provenance of provenance ←
13:07:13 <Paolo> Luc: initially accounts were meant to express provenance of provenance (PoP). When written in prov-dm, the concept became broader
Luc Moreau: initially accounts were meant to express provenance of provenance (PoP). When written in prov-dm, the concept became broader ←
13:07:53 <Paolo> Luc: provenance of accounts not ready for std because of outstanding issues,
Luc Moreau: provenance of accounts not ready for std because of outstanding issues, ←
13:08:04 <Paolo> however PoP req. can be addressed
however PoP req. can be addressed ←
13:08:09 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:08:19 <Stian> do we need provenance of provenance accounts, or provenance of individual provenance records?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: do we need provenance of provenance accounts, or provenance of individual provenance records? ←
13:08:41 <GK1> My view: if the sole requirement is provenance of provenance, then I don't think account is needed. I thought the requirement was to capture and compare differing accounts of the same process, and enable some level of reasoning over this different accounts.
Graham Klyne: My view: if the sole requirement is provenance of provenance, then I don't think account is needed. I thought the requirement was to capture and compare differing accounts of the same process, and enable some level of reasoning over this different accounts. ←
13:08:43 <Stian> the second one is the hard one - first is the easy (GK) one
Stian Soiland-Reyes: the second one is the hard one - first is the easy (GK) one ←
13:08:43 <Paolo> @Stian the latter
@Stian the latter ←
13:08:47 <khalidbelhajjame> +q (Is the ability of expressing provenance of provenance the only thing that motivated the notion of Account ?)
Khalid Belhajjame: +q (Is the ability of expressing provenance of provenance the only thing that motivated the notion of Account ?) ←
13:09:42 <Stian> I thought account was essential to different views and different granularities of what has happened
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I thought account was essential to different views and different granularities of what has happened ←
13:10:32 <tlebo> +1 @stian
Timothy Lebo: +1 @stian ←
13:10:44 <GK1> (Provenance of individual provenance records: this sounds a bit like the old discussion of RDF reification vs named graphs)
Graham Klyne: (Provenance of individual provenance records: this sounds a bit like the old discussion of RDF reification vs named graphs) ←
13:10:48 <Paolo> Luc: propose to discard account records and just assume there is a mechanism for naming a "bundle of assertions". The specification of such mechanism is out of scope for us
Luc Moreau: propose to discard account records and just assume there is a mechanism for naming a "bundle of assertions". The specification of such mechanism is out of scope for us ←
13:10:52 <Stian> and different entity characterisations
Stian Soiland-Reyes: and different entity characterisations ←
13:10:56 <GK1> @stian me too
Graham Klyne: @stian me too ←
13:11:01 <dgarijo> @Stian: +1
Daniel Garijo: @Stian: +1 ←
13:11:33 <tlebo> naming "bundle of assertions" sounds reasonable (and seems to agree with the 4 +1s here)
Timothy Lebo: naming "bundle of assertions" sounds reasonable (and seems to agree with the 4 +1s here) ←
13:11:51 <Paolo> Luc: with this, we won't be able to express many things related to accounts, these will not be addressed
Luc Moreau: with this, we won't be able to express many things related to accounts, these will not be addressed ←
13:12:00 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
13:12:02 <Paolo> Luc: the very name "account" could be dropped
Luc Moreau: the very name "account" could be dropped ←
13:12:30 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:12:31 <kai> q+
Kai Eckert: q+ ←
13:12:40 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
13:12:41 <Stian> q+
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←
13:12:42 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
13:12:43 <pgroth> ack smiles
Paul Groth: ack smiles ←
13:13:26 <Paolo> smiles: supportive of proposal. But useful cases include granularity of provenance, should something be put in the best practice doc, or elsewhere?
Simon Miles: supportive of proposal. But useful cases include granularity of provenance, should something be put in the best practice doc, or elsewhere? ←
13:13:29 <GK1> q+ to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply
Graham Klyne: q+ to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply ←
13:14:22 <Stian> I think tlebo has done a rdf reification meta-provenance example
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I think tlebo has done a rdf reification meta-provenance example ←
13:14:29 <Stian> but that's quite RDF-specific of course
Stian Soiland-Reyes: but that's quite RDF-specific of course ←
13:14:40 <tlebo> (which example?)
Timothy Lebo: (which example?) ←
13:14:42 <Stian> no?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: no? ←
13:14:53 <Stian> you do so many cool things I thought you had ;)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: you do so many cool things I thought you had ;) ←
13:15:06 <kai> Actually I did that ;-)
Kai Eckert: Actually I did that ;-) ←
13:15:12 <tlebo> I haven't written an example in my life.
Timothy Lebo: I haven't written an example in my life. ←
13:15:31 <tlebo> @kai, link?
Timothy Lebo: @kai, link? ←
13:15:41 <tlebo> what do we want to do?
Timothy Lebo: what do we want to do? ←
13:15:44 <Paolo> Luc: "finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement.
Luc Moreau: "finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement. ←
13:16:12 <Paolo> Paul: there is prior art from OPM but not enough to standardize it.
Paul Groth: there is prior art from OPM but not enough to standardize it. ←
13:16:18 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:16:22 <pgroth> ack kai
Paul Groth: ack kai ←
13:16:27 <tlebo> what is "it" that we want to do?
Timothy Lebo: what is "it" that we want to do? ←
13:16:29 <Paolo> smiles: just be careful we don't prevent this from being addressed/added later
Simon Miles: just be careful we don't prevent this from being addressed/added later ←
13:16:46 <GK1> ?? ""finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement." is this a recursive requirement for accounts?
Graham Klyne: ?? ""finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement." is this a recursive requirement for accounts? ←
13:16:54 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:17:24 <Paolo> Kai: agree we don't need accounts. in DC there is a "description set" that contains statements
Kai Eckert: agree we don't need accounts. in DC there is a "description set" that contains statements ←
13:17:33 <Stian> @tlebo is this not an example? http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/7f0d26e48556/ontology/examples/ontology-extensions/commerce/commerce.ttl disagrees
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @tlebo is this not an example? http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/7f0d26e48556/ontology/examples/ontology-extensions/commerce/commerce.ttl disagrees ←
13:17:39 <Stian> (not reification though)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: (not reification though) ←
13:18:07 <Paolo> but there is still a need to name a bundle of records. it may or may not be an "account"
but there is still a need to name a bundle of records. it may or may not be an "account" ←
13:18:42 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
13:19:09 <Paolo> Kai: there is a risk of creating something that cannot be implemented using the current RDF
Kai Eckert: there is a risk of creating something that cannot be implemented using the current RDF ←
13:19:12 <Stian> can accounts/bundles/ex overlap? Kai mentions an account 'for provenance of X' - then it might overlap (but not completely) with 'provenance of Y'
Stian Soiland-Reyes: can accounts/bundles/ex overlap? Kai mentions an account 'for provenance of X' - then it might overlap (but not completely) with 'provenance of Y' ←
13:19:22 <GK1> @paolo sure. This is actually what we (Wf4Ever) are doing for annotations in ROs. It's just being able to distinguish resources.
Graham Klyne: @paolo sure. This is actually what we (Wf4Ever) are doing for annotations in ROs. It's just being able to distinguish resources. ←
13:19:50 <Paolo> Luc: not clear that we need named graphs
Luc Moreau: not clear that we need named graphs ←
13:20:03 <pgroth> ack Stian
Paul Groth: ack Stian ←
13:20:09 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame
Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame ←
13:20:12 <Paolo> @GK: sorry that was the continuation of Kai's note... not my own!
@GK: sorry that was the continuation of Kai's note... not my own! ←
13:20:15 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
13:21:10 <kai> Using reification for metametadata: http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/index.php/pubs/article/view/973
Kai Eckert: Using reification for metametadata: http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/index.php/pubs/article/view/973 ←
13:21:15 <Paolo> Khalid: is PoP really the only requirement? should it include "is this set of assertions consistent as a whole?"
Khalid Belhajjame: is PoP really the only requirement? should it include "is this set of assertions consistent as a whole?" ←
13:21:33 <tlebo> (I just missed the last few minutes)
Timothy Lebo: (I just missed the last few minutes) ←
13:21:42 <tlebo> no more NGs?
Timothy Lebo: no more NGs? ←
13:21:57 <Paolo> Luc: but that can still be done, having identified a bundle. does not require an account record in the model
Luc Moreau: but that can still be done, having identified a bundle. does not require an account record in the model ←
13:22:12 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
13:22:12 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply ←
13:23:03 <Paolo> GK: if we only need PoP then there is no need for accounts. other req is granularity/different perspective. For time reasons, we can defer the latter
Graham Klyne: if we only need PoP then there is no need for accounts. other req is granularity/different perspective. For time reasons, we can defer the latter ←
13:23:21 <Paolo> GK: but if possible, it's a useful requirement to include
Graham Klyne: but if possible, it's a useful requirement to include ←
13:23:42 <tlebo> +1 "no need for accounts", as long as we keep "provenance" as a resource that is a "bundle of statements".
Timothy Lebo: +1 "no need for accounts", as long as we keep "provenance" as a resource that is a "bundle of statements". ←
13:25:07 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:25:32 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
13:25:32 <Paolo> Kai: the resource that represents a bundle of provenance assertions, can that be assigned a class, and wouldn't it be an "account"?
Kai Eckert: the resource that represents a bundle of provenance assertions, can that be assigned a class, and wouldn't it be an "account"? ←
13:26:31 <GK1> q+ to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ...
Graham Klyne: q+ to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ... ←
13:26:33 <Paolo> Ivan: warning -- named graph discussion in the RDF group is still ongoing, but it's not advisable to build any dependency to it in PROV
Ivan Herman: warning -- named graph discussion in the RDF group is still ongoing, but it's not advisable to build any dependency to it in PROV ←
13:27:26 <tlebo> q+ to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL 1.1 spec.
Timothy Lebo: q+ to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL 1.1 spec. ←
13:28:34 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
13:28:34 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ...
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ... ←
13:29:08 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
13:29:17 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
13:29:49 <Paolo> Tim: concurs that there is no such dependency
Timothy Lebo: concurs that there is no such dependency ←
13:29:51 <pgroth> ack tlebo
Paul Groth: ack tlebo ←
13:29:51 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL
Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL ←
13:29:54 <Zakim> ... 1.1 spec.
Zakim IRC Bot: ... 1.1 spec. ←
13:29:57 <GK1> (cf. ORE)
Graham Klyne: (cf. ORE) ←
13:30:47 <Paolo> smiles: agree that bundling does not require a provenance-specific concept
Simon Miles: agree that bundling does not require a provenance-specific concept ←
13:30:56 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:31:00 <pgroth> ack smiles
Paul Groth: ack smiles ←
13:31:50 <Paolo> Paul: PoP is clearly required, it's important to give a signal that it has been addressed
Paul Groth: PoP is clearly required, it's important to give a signal that it has been addressed ←
13:32:06 <GK1> @pgroth +1 - yes, indeed, let ppl know it's possible without new mechanism
Graham Klyne: @pgroth +1 - yes, indeed, let ppl know it's possible without new mechanism ←
13:33:05 <Paolo> Paul: "a bundle of provenance" would be good enough
Paul Groth: "a bundle of provenance" would be good enough ←
13:33:22 <GK1> For "bundle of provenance" we could talk about "a provenance resource"?
Graham Klyne: For "bundle of provenance" we could talk about "a provenance resource"? ←
13:33:31 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:35:47 <GK1> q+ to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any
Graham Klyne: q+ to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any ←
13:35:49 <tlebo> q+ to ask if "nesting" bundles stays
Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask if "nesting" bundles stays ←
13:35:56 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:36:20 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
13:36:32 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
13:36:32 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any ←
13:36:46 <tlebo> +1 keeping name "account"
Timothy Lebo: +1 keeping name "account" ←
13:36:51 <pgroth> ack tlebo
Paul Groth: ack tlebo ←
13:36:51 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to ask if "nesting" bundles stays
Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to ask if "nesting" bundles stays ←
13:36:53 <Paolo> GK: do we need to name these bundles?
Graham Klyne: do we need to name these bundles? ←
13:37:02 <pgroth> repeat
Paul Groth: repeat ←
13:37:25 <Paolo> Tim: does nesting of bundles stay?
Timothy Lebo: does nesting of bundles stay? ←
13:37:40 <GK1> q+ to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting. Not prohibited, not defined.
Graham Klyne: q+ to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting. Not prohibited, not defined. ←
13:37:53 <tlebo> no
Timothy Lebo: no ←
13:37:55 <khalidbelhajjame> I think bundle is a better name than acocunt if we are only after expressing the provenance of a possibly random collection of provenance assertions
Khalid Belhajjame: I think bundle is a better name than acocunt if we are only after expressing the provenance of a possibly random collection of provenance assertions ←
13:37:57 <Paolo> Luc: no
Luc Moreau: no ←
13:37:59 <tlebo> happy it's gone :-)
Timothy Lebo: happy it's gone :-) ←
13:38:12 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
13:38:12 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting. Not prohibited, not defined.
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting. Not prohibited, not defined. ←
13:38:23 <Paolo> GK: we are agnostic wrt nesting
Graham Klyne: we are agnostic wrt nesting ←
13:38:42 <tlebo> (btw, one could "nest" themselves using void:subset)
Timothy Lebo: (btw, one could "nest" themselves using void:subset) ←
13:39:49 <tlebo> (btw, one could achieve "nesting" in their own modeling by using void:subset)
Timothy Lebo: (btw, one could achieve "nesting" in their own modeling by using void:subset) ←
13:39:51 <Paolo> Luc: why do we name it?
Luc Moreau: why do we name it? ←
13:40:00 <Paolo> Kai: because people expect it
Kai Eckert: because people expect it ←
13:40:09 <GK1> I lean to the idea that naming it makes it easier to discuss.
Graham Klyne: I lean to the idea that naming it makes it easier to discuss. ←
13:40:42 <Paolo> Kai: just define a new class that is unrelated to the rest of provenance. ProvenanceStatementSet?
Kai Eckert: just define a new class that is unrelated to the rest of provenance. ProvenanceStatementSet? ←
13:41:10 <GK1> q+ to say naming and defining a class are different issues...
Graham Klyne: q+ to say naming and defining a class are different issues... ←
13:41:40 <tlebo> why not just all it Provenance ?
Timothy Lebo: why not just call it Provenance ? ←
13:41:46 <tlebo> s/all/call/
13:42:20 <Paolo> Stian: isn't this a topic for PROV-AQ?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: isn't this a topic for PROV-AQ? ←
13:43:33 <Paolo> Luc: the "hasProvenance" property is not in -O or -DM, currently only in -AQ
Luc Moreau: the "hasProvenance" property is not in -O or -DM, currently only in -AQ ←
13:43:45 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
13:43:45 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
13:43:47 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say naming and defining a class are different issues...
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say naming and defining a class are different issues... ←
13:43:57 <tlebo> - aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject and inverse of foaf:topic .
Timothy Lebo: - aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject and inverse of foaf:topic . ←
13:44:02 <Paolo> GK: name and class are different issues
Graham Klyne: name and class are different issues ←
13:44:21 <Stian> sounds like it is an 'outer' type for perhaps 'any' kind of provenance resource.. aq:hasProvenance [ a aq:Provenance ] - a prov:Account (if we need it) can be a subclass of aq:Provenance
Stian Soiland-Reyes: sounds like it is an 'outer' type for perhaps 'any' kind of provenance resource.. aq:hasProvenance [ a aq:Provenance ] - a prov:Account (if we need it) can be a subclass of aq:Provenance ←
13:44:31 <Stian> which is PROV provenance or even PROV-O provenance
Stian Soiland-Reyes: which is PROV provenance or even PROV-O provenance ←
13:44:31 <Paolo> GK; in favour of former but against the latter
GK; in favour of former but against the latter ←
13:44:45 <tlebo> @stian, I like.
Timothy Lebo: @stian, I like. ←
13:44:57 <pgroth> ack smiles
Paul Groth: ack smiles ←
13:44:59 <Paolo> GK: risk of over-specification
Graham Klyne: risk of over-specification ←
13:45:28 <tlebo> q+ to ask of aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject
Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask of aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject ←
13:45:54 <dgarijo> http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-provenance
Daniel Garijo: http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-provenance ←
13:46:08 <Stian> yaay
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yaay ←
13:46:12 <Stian> our work is futile!
Stian Soiland-Reyes: our work is futile! ←
13:46:20 <dgarijo> :D
Daniel Garijo: :D ←
13:46:23 <tlebo> (modulo the directionality...)
Timothy Lebo: (modulo the directionality...) ←
13:46:30 <Stian> oh look, theres dcterms:created and dcterms:created as well
Stian Soiland-Reyes: oh look, theres dcterms:created and dcterms:created as well ←
13:46:48 <pgroth> @tlebo is your question on this topic?
Paul Groth: @tlebo is your question on this topic? ←
13:47:07 <tlebo> @pgroth, I guess the topic drifted.
Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, I guess the topic drifted. ←
13:47:11 <GK1> http://purl.org/dc/terms/ProvenanceStatement
Graham Klyne: http://purl.org/dc/terms/ProvenanceStatement ←
13:47:11 <GK1> Label - Provenance Statement
Graham Klyne: Label - Provenance Statement ←
13:47:11 <GK1> Definition - A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of a resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation.
Graham Klyne: Definition - A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of a resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. ←
13:47:12 <pgroth> ok
Paul Groth: ok ←
13:47:23 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
13:47:57 <Paolo> Luc: issue of introducing a class can be postponed
Luc Moreau: issue of introducing a class can be postponed ←
13:48:49 <Stian> an attempt to do meta-provenance with RDF reification: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig
Stian Soiland-Reyes: an attempt to do meta-provenance with RDF reification: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig ←
13:49:01 <Stian> notably I did not find a way to link an rdfg:Graph with an rdf:Statement - which sounds quite essential
Stian Soiland-Reyes: notably I did not find a way to link an rdfg:Graph with an rdf:Statement - which sounds quite essential ←
13:49:01 <pgroth> Guidance to editors: revisit the document dropping the notion of account records and make it consistent
Paul Groth: Guidance to editors: revisit the document dropping the notion of account records and make it consistent ←
13:49:12 <Stian> args
Stian Soiland-Reyes: args ←
13:49:19 <tlebo> @Stian rdf:Bag!
Timothy Lebo: @Stian rdf:Bag! ←
13:49:46 <GK1> q+ to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible.
Graham Klyne: q+ to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible. ←
13:49:52 <Paolo> Luc: on "relationships across accounts" -- entity e1 described in account1 wasGeneratedBy entity e2 in account 2
Luc Moreau: on "relationships across accounts" -- entity e1 described in account1 wasGeneratedBy entity e2 in account 2 ←
13:50:25 <tlebo> if you want to relate two resources, assert a triple between them :-)
Timothy Lebo: if you want to relate two resources, assert a triple between them :-) ←
13:50:26 <Paolo> Luc: would still like to be able to say this but not enough prior art, so suggest to accept that it's out of sope
Luc Moreau: would still like to be able to say this but not enough prior art, so suggest to accept that it's out of scope ←
13:50:30 <Paolo> s/sope/scope
13:50:32 <pgroth> guidance to editors: not trying to express relations across accounts
Paul Groth: guidance to editors: not trying to express relations across accounts ←
13:50:53 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:51:08 <smiles_> I think it was ProvenanceStatement class from DC I was thinking of
Simon Miles: I think it was ProvenanceStatement class from DC I was thinking of ←
13:51:16 <tlebo> +1 cross-accounts is out of scope (I'll just handle it with RDF)
Timothy Lebo: +1 cross-accounts is out of scope (I'll just handle it with RDF) ←
13:51:27 <khalidbelhajjame> +q (So entities may exists without being associated within an account)
Khalid Belhajjame: +q (So entities may exists without being associated within an account) ←
13:51:46 <Stian> that's q+, khalidbelhajjame :)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: that's q+, khalidbelhajjame :) ←
13:51:51 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame
Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame ←
13:51:54 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
13:51:54 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible.
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible. ←
13:51:55 <kai> @smiles: Yes, but that's just the range of dct:provenance, not something like the bundle that we had in mind.
Kai Eckert: @smiles: Yes, but that's just the range of dct:provenance, not something like the bundle that we had in mind. ←
13:53:02 <GK1> q+ to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again
Graham Klyne: q+ to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again ←
13:53:21 <tlebo> [ dcterms:description "I have a blue shirt on. I hit Joe yesterday. He has a bruise today."; rdf:type prov:Provenance ] .
Timothy Lebo: [ dcterms:description "I have a blue shirt on. I hit Joe yesterday. He has a bruise today."; rdf:type prov:Provenance ] . ←
13:53:48 <ivan> ack GK1
Ivan Herman: ack GK1 ←
13:54:04 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
13:54:04 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again ←
13:54:53 <Paolo> Luc: second issue
Luc Moreau: second issue ←
13:55:05 <smiles_> @kai OK, but Im not sure I see the difference, really. arent they just 'data describing the provenance'? Probably not an important matter, anyway, except maybe for the mapping to DC
Simon Miles: @kai OK, but Im not sure I see the difference, really. arent they just 'data describing the provenance'? Probably not an important matter, anyway, except maybe for the mapping to DC ←
13:55:46 <Paolo> Luc (sorry) about identifiers
Luc (sorry) about identifiers ←
13:56:29 <Stian> flip chart: :post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul
Stian Soiland-Reyes: flip chart: :post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul ←
13:56:30 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
13:56:30 <tlebo> am I flipchartless?
Timothy Lebo: am I flipchartless? ←
13:56:35 <smiles_> post wasAttributedTo Paul
Simon Miles: post wasAttributedTo Paul ←
13:56:36 <kai> @smiles: probably just some text, if people are using it. But could become interesting if it could be used to point to PROV data. Will have a look at it in context of the mapping.
Kai Eckert: @smiles: probably just some text, if people are using it. But could become interesting if it could be used to point to PROV data. Will have a look at it in context of the mapping. ←
13:56:38 <Stian> I turtlized it
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I turtlized it ←
13:56:47 <Paolo> @Stian flipchart real time scribing!
@Stian flipchart real time scribing! ←
13:56:57 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/
Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/ ←
13:57:21 <tlebo> @ivan dont' forget the @prefix defs.
Timothy Lebo: @ivan dont' forget the @prefix defs. ←
13:57:53 <dgarijo> @prefix ex: <http://www.example.org/> @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> ex:post prov:wasAttributedTo ex:Paul. ex:Paul a foaf:Person.
Daniel Garijo: @prefix ex: <http://www.example.org/> @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> ex:post prov:wasAttributedTo ex:Paul. ex:Paul a foaf:Person. ←
13:58:08 <tlebo> Zakim, turn off these smiley faces.
Timothy Lebo: Zakim, turn off these smiley faces. ←
13:58:08 <Zakim> I don't understand 'turn off these smiley faces', tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'turn off these smiley faces', tlebo ←
13:58:11 <Paolo> Paul: central problem is: describing provenance is solvable if we are allowed to mint new IDs whenever we want
Paul Groth: central problem is: describing provenance is solvable if we are allowed to mint new IDs whenever we want ←
13:58:47 <Paolo> Paul: but we have an obligation to use existing IDs for existing resources
Paul Groth: but we have an obligation to use existing IDs for existing resources ←
13:58:50 <tlebo> but we have specializationOf!
Timothy Lebo: but we have specializationOf! ←
13:59:02 <Paolo> Paul which makes it complicated
Paul which makes it complicated ←
13:59:03 <GK1> Where's this requirement?
Graham Klyne: Where's this requirement? ←
13:59:03 <tlebo> and alternateOf
Timothy Lebo: and alternateOf ←
13:59:32 <Paolo> @Tim I suspect those are in the endangered list...
@Tim I suspect those are in the endangered list... ←
14:00:08 <Paolo> Luc: reusing a URI not enough anyways, because we want to identify specific perspectives on the resources
Luc Moreau: reusing a URI not enough anyways, because we want to identify specific perspectives on the resources ←
14:00:16 <smiles_> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
14:00:23 <tlebo> +1 Luc
Timothy Lebo: +1 Luc ←
14:00:43 <Paolo> Luc: concept of {entity, thing, attributes} not well defined
Luc Moreau: concept of {entity, thing, attributes} not well defined ←
14:00:45 <tlebo> identifyied specific perspectives can be associated to their less specific things with speicalizationOf
Timothy Lebo: identifyied specific perspectives can be associated to their less specific things with speicalizationOf ←
14:01:30 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
14:01:32 <GK1> q+ to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK. But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic resources angle.
Graham Klyne: q+ to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK. But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic resources angle. ←
14:01:40 <Paolo> smiles: should the example ":post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul" be augmented to highlight mutable resources, ie., the blog was later edited
Simon Miles: should the example ":post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul" be augmented to highlight mutable resources, ie., the blog was later edited ←
14:02:02 <pgroth> ack smiles_
Paul Groth: ack smiles_ ←
14:02:37 <Paolo> Ivan: time was spent yesterday in the RDF group on mutability of URI-identified resources
Ivan Herman: time was spent yesterday in the RDF group on mutability of URI-identified resources ←
14:02:50 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
14:02:55 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK. But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK. But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic ←
14:03:00 <Zakim> ... resources angle.
Zakim IRC Bot: ... resources angle. ←
14:03:31 <tlebo> a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov:specializationOf a third.
Timothy Lebo: a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov:specializationOf a third. ←
14:03:39 <tlebo> a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov: specializationOf a third.
Timothy Lebo: a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov: specializationOf a third. ←
14:03:42 <Stian> :account1 can say something else about :post than :account2 - and :account2 might be the same provenance resource retrieved 2 days later
Stian Soiland-Reyes: :account1 can say something else about :post than :account2 - and :account2 might be the same provenance resource retrieved 2 days later ←
14:04:03 <Stian> the problems have then moved to identifying those accounts ..
Stian Soiland-Reyes: the problems have then moved to identifying those accounts .. ←
14:04:08 <Paolo> GK: we can duck the entity mutablity issue, by ways of best practices i.e., adding timestamps to provenance statements
Graham Klyne: we can duck the entity mutablity issue, by ways of best practices i.e., adding timestamps to provenance statements ←
14:04:20 <Paolo> Ivan: these issues are not provenance-specific
Ivan Herman: these issues are not provenance-specific ←
14:04:27 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
14:04:33 <Stian> memento URIs, tag URIs as well
Stian Soiland-Reyes: memento URIs, tag URIs as well ←
14:04:36 <Paolo> q?
q? ←
14:04:56 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame
Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame ←
14:04:57 <GK1> Ivan: re dynamic resources and provenance "the group knows there are issues, but these are not provenance specific"
Ivan Herman: re dynamic resources and provenance "the group knows there are issues, but these are not provenance specific" [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ] ←
14:05:18 <Stian> luc can't identify the problem with identifying entities
Stian Soiland-Reyes: luc can't identify the problem with identifying entities ←
14:05:19 <Paolo> @tim not sure prov:specializationOf is the right way to track mutability of resources
@tim not sure prov:specializationOf is the right way to track mutability of resources ←
14:05:43 <Stian> I think it's a straight forward way
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I think it's a straight forward way ←
14:05:57 <GK1> q?
Graham Klyne: q? ←
14:06:02 <GK1> q+
Graham Klyne: q+ ←
14:06:55 <tlebo> @paolo, I think specializationOf is the only way to make sense of Entity.
Timothy Lebo: @paolo, I think specializationOf is the only way to make sense of Entity. ←
14:07:00 <Stian> In <account35>: <account35#post> a prov:Entity, prov:Agent, foaf:Person; prov:specializationOf <http://example.com/Paul.foaf>
Stian Soiland-Reyes: In <account35>: <account35#Paul> a prov:Entity, prov:Agent, foaf:Person; prov:specializationOf <http://example.com/Paul.foaf> ←
14:07:03 <Stian> tlebo: +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:07:13 <Stian> s/#post/#Paul/
14:07:43 <Stian> we don't need timestamps etc - that is metaprovenance that can be expressed in the provenance of the entity <account35>
Stian Soiland-Reyes: we don't need timestamps etc - that is metaprovenance that can be expressed in the provenance of the entity <account35> ←
14:08:30 <GK1> q+ to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later how to deal with dynamic resources
Graham Klyne: q+ to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later how to deal with dynamic resources ←
14:08:39 <smiles_> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
14:09:13 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
14:09:13 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later ←
14:09:17 <Zakim> ... how to deal with dynamic resources
Zakim IRC Bot: ... how to deal with dynamic resources ←
14:09:52 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
14:09:57 <Paolo> GK OPMV got around the problem by assuming resources are static
GK OPMV got around the problem by assuming resources are static ←
14:10:01 <tlebo> @pgroth, blog posters don't care which level of specializationOf that they are talking about - which is fine until someone starts assuming that the Entity that they were referring to is at an incorrect level of characterization.
Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, blog posters don't care which level of specializationOf that they are talking about - which is fine until someone starts assuming that the Entity that they were referring to is at an incorrect level of characterization. ←
14:10:57 <tlebo> we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.
Timothy Lebo: we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set. ←
14:11:01 <kai> q+ to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice.
Kai Eckert: q+ to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice. ←
14:11:28 <Stian> tlebo: +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:11:44 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/
Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/ ←
14:11:51 <Stian> kai: that's a logical conclusion from what we agreed in the morning!
Kai Eckert: that's a logical conclusion from what we agreed in the morning! [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:11:54 <tlebo> first rule of Cool URIs.... You don't talk about Cool URIs.
Timothy Lebo: first rule of Cool URIs.... You don't talk about Cool URIs. ←
14:12:50 <Stian> one that has changed: <http://megaupload.com/>
Stian Soiland-Reyes: one that has changed: <http://megaupload.com/> ←
14:13:28 <tlebo> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111215/> prov: specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> .
Timothy Lebo: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111215/> prov: specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> . ←
14:13:51 <GK1> http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html
Graham Klyne: http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html ←
14:14:42 <Stian> and <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> prov:alternativeOf <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html> (they have a common specialization which we haven't given a URI)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: and <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> prov:alternativeOf <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html> (they have a common specialization which we haven't given a URI) ←
14:15:16 <GK1> @stian but we *could* mint a URI
Graham Klyne: @stian but we *could* mint a URI ←
14:15:20 <Stian> Luc writing:
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Luc writing: ←
14:15:25 <Stian> entity(post)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: entity(post) ←
14:15:33 <tlebo> @stian, my transcription hero.
Timothy Lebo: @stian, my transcription hero. ←
14:16:12 <Stian> entity(post, [ author="..", title="...", ??="..", time="..."] )
Stian Soiland-Reyes: entity(post, [ author="..", title="...", ??="..", time="..."] ) ←
14:17:01 <Stian> he's pointing at 'post' in the last line - and the whole line
Stian Soiland-Reyes: he's pointing at 'post' in the last line - and the whole line ←
14:17:43 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
14:18:03 <Paolo> Luc: conclusion is that we are actually identifying the resource, not the entity
Luc Moreau: conclusion is that we are actually identifying the resource, not the entity ←
14:18:07 <tlebo> luc wants owl:keys (compound keys) to identify two named things - which is very different from URI identifying
Timothy Lebo: luc wants owl:keys (compound keys) to identify two named things - which is very different from URI identifying ←
14:19:08 <pgroth> ack smiles
Paul Groth: ack smiles ←
14:19:10 <Stian> tlebo to get on the queue
Stian Soiland-Reyes: tlebo to get on the queue ←
14:19:51 <Paolo> smiles: agree with Tim and GK -- no particular problems. in the example, Post is a resource
Simon Miles: agree with Tim and GK -- no particular problems. in the example, Post is a resource ←
14:20:36 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
14:20:37 <Paolo> smiles: resources have implicit characterization -- minimally it's just identified by a URI, and that alone makes it an entity
Simon Miles: resources have implicit characterization -- minimally it's just identified by a URI, and that alone makes it an entity ←
14:20:40 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame
Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame ←
14:21:07 <Stian> smiles_: "...., a resource is an entity"
Simon Miles: "...., a resource is an entity" [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:21:09 <Stian> @smiles +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @smiles +1 ←
14:21:47 <tlebo> we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.
Timothy Lebo: we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set. ←
14:21:56 <Stian> <http://megaupload.org/> prov:wasAttributedTo <http://example.com/theGuyWhoWasArrested> .
Stian Soiland-Reyes: <http://megaupload.org/> prov:wasAttributedTo <http://example.com/theGuyWhoWasArrested> . ←
14:22:08 <Stian> but that's not true anymore - it's now attributed to the department of justice
Stian Soiland-Reyes: but that's not true anymore - it's now attributed to the department of justice ←
14:22:22 <Stian> however that's up to each account when/what they are talking about
Stian Soiland-Reyes: however that's up to each account when/what they are talking about ←
14:23:11 <Paolo> @Stian timestamp, just add timestamps to the entity assertion
@Stian timestamp, just add timestamps to the entity assertion ←
14:23:28 <tlebo> specializationOf, then I'll die happy.
Timothy Lebo: specializationOf, then I'll die happy. ←
14:23:31 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
14:23:48 <Paolo> @stian isn't that what you do when you reference a web site by URL in a paper? "accessed on..."
@stian isn't that what you do when you reference a web site by URL in a paper? "accessed on..." ←
14:24:12 <Paolo> q+
q+ ←
14:24:17 <Stian> Paolo: yes, just some metaprovenance.. it could contain as much or little as possible.. such as "The web page when downloaded on my Samsung Nexus phone using Firefox"
Paolo Missier: yes, just some metaprovenance.. it could contain as much or little as possible.. such as "The web page when downloaded on my Samsung Nexus phone using Firefox" [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:24:29 <Stian> on saturday 15:02 from Uzbekistan
Stian Soiland-Reyes: on saturday 15:02 from Uzbekistan ←
14:24:54 <tlebo> @paolo, I think the "accessed on" is a great example for how one is creating an Entity that is a specializationOf some more abstract Entity.
Timothy Lebo: @paolo, I think the "accessed on" is a great example for how one is creating an Entity that is a specializationOf some more abstract Entity. ←
14:25:00 <Stian> but then within that account you can't have two different entities with the same URI
Stian Soiland-Reyes: but then within that account you can't have two different entities with the same URI ←
14:25:15 <Paolo> @Stian now you're telling us too much... is Uzbekistan a friend country
@Stian now you're telling us too much... is Uzbekistan a friend country ←
14:25:15 <GK1> q?
Graham Klyne: q? ←
14:25:20 <Stian> tlebo: and probably something that should be core to the web-bit of PROV.. like wasAttributedTo
Timothy Lebo: and probably something that should be core to the web-bit of PROV.. like wasAttributedTo [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:25:36 <Stian> the PAV ontology have a few things like that
Stian Soiland-Reyes: the PAV ontology have a few things like that ←
14:26:02 <Paolo> Kai: to propose to drop "entity"
Kai Eckert: to propose to drop "entity" ←
14:26:37 <GK1> q+ to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource
Graham Klyne: q+ to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource ←
14:27:42 <tlebo> -1. Entity introduces the important notion of "frozen characteristics", which is not provided by the current semweb.
Timothy Lebo: -1. Entity introduces the important notion of "frozen characteristics", which is not provided by the current semweb. ←
14:28:04 <Stian> I've always thought of prov:Entity as an rdf:Resource which is rdf:subject of some rdf:Statements - not the group of statements/attributes
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I've always thought of prov:Entity as an rdf:Resource which is rdf:subject of some rdf:Statements - not the group of statements/attributes ←
14:28:13 <Stian> tlebo: mmm
Timothy Lebo: mmm [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:28:14 <Paolo> q?
q? ←
14:28:38 <tlebo> q- I can't keep up with the in-voice pace.
Timothy Lebo: q- I can't keep up with the in-voice pace. ←
14:29:32 <Luc> Q+
Luc Moreau: Q+ ←
14:29:33 <tlebo> q+ we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.
Timothy Lebo: q+ we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set. ←
14:29:38 <Luc> Q+
Luc Moreau: Q+ ←
14:29:49 <pgroth> ack kai
Paul Groth: ack kai ←
14:29:49 <Zakim> kai, you wanted to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice.
Zakim IRC Bot: kai, you wanted to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice. ←
14:29:56 <Stian> tlebo: yes, as Ivan points out, it's a general RDF problem - but (I believe) we need it now
Timothy Lebo: yes, as Ivan points out, it's a general RDF problem - but (I believe) we need it now [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:30:16 <smiles> I might say: An entity is a resource or a specific characterisation of a resource
Simon Miles: I might say: An entity is a resource or a specific characterisation of a resource ←
14:30:41 <smiles> @tlebo +1
Simon Miles: @tlebo +1 ←
14:31:00 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
14:31:02 <tlebo> @ivan, I think so.
Timothy Lebo: @ivan, I think so. ←
14:31:07 <pgroth> ack Paolo
Paul Groth: ack Paolo ←
14:31:23 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
14:31:47 <Stian> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig should be able to cover that (as long as the link between the prov:Account and rdf:Statement is a bit more obvious)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig should be able to cover that (as long as the link between the prov:Account and rdf:Statement is a bit more obvious) ←
14:31:59 <Stian> to identify entity records
Stian Soiland-Reyes: to identify entity records ←
14:32:43 <Stian> (that one mints <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig#assertion1> and #assertion2 )
Stian Soiland-Reyes: (that one mints <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig#assertion1> and #assertion2 ) ←
14:34:49 <GK1> ack gk
Graham Klyne: ack gk ←
14:34:49 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource ←
14:35:02 <tlebo> : tweet_1 prov:wasAttributedTo :mad_Tim . :mad_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> . : facebook_post_2 prov:wasAttributedTo :happy_Tim . :happy_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> .
Timothy Lebo: : tweet_1 prov:wasAttributedTo :mad_Tim . :mad_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> . : facebook_post_2 prov:wasAttributedTo :happy_Tim . :happy_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> . ←
14:35:25 <Paolo> q+
q+ ←
14:36:19 <dgarijo> If you use the same identifier in the bundle, then you can't say that a post was derived from a previous version, because it would have the same uRI
Daniel Garijo: If you use the same identifier in the bundle, then you can't say that a post was derived from a previous version, because it would have the same uRI ←
14:36:39 <Stian> exactly
Stian Soiland-Reyes: exactly ←
14:37:05 <Stian> if you want to use two different characterisation *in the same account*, then they need two URIs and are two entities
Stian Soiland-Reyes: if you want to use two different characterisation *in the same account*, then they need two URIs and are two entities ←
14:37:27 <Stian> you can then relate these using specializationOf etc.. but if you don't do it, then you don't need to worry about it
Stian Soiland-Reyes: you can then relate these using specializationOf etc.. but if you don't do it, then you don't need to worry about it ←
14:37:40 <dgarijo> but on the other side, it is unrelaistic to pretend that people are going to create a new entity for each version of the blog.
Daniel Garijo: but on the other side, it is unrelaistic to pretend that people are going to create a new entity for each version of the blog. ←
14:37:56 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
14:38:05 <tlebo> @dgarijo, they don't need to. They're just asserting it at a higher level of specificity.
Timothy Lebo: @dgarijo, they don't need to. They're just asserting it at a higher level of specificity. ←
14:38:22 <Stian> @luc +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @luc +1 ←
14:38:34 <Stian> @luc this is the exact why we need account/bundle/xx
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @luc this is the exact why we need account/bundle/xx ←
14:38:59 <Paolo> q+ to ask Tim to push his specializationOf proposal
q+ to ask Tim to push his specializationOf proposal ←
14:40:37 <Paolo> jcheney careful about what is the first thing readers see when they approach PROV
jcheney careful about what is the first thing readers see when they approach PROV ←
14:41:05 <Paolo> jcheney then, how do you help people generate "cool provenance"
jcheney then, how do you help people generate "cool provenance" ←
14:41:06 <GK1> "Cool provenance" doesn't (what?)
Graham Klyne: "Cool provenance" doesn't (what?) ←
14:42:16 <tlebo> I'm wondering if Entities are effectively closing the open world assumption.
Timothy Lebo: I'm wondering if Entities are effectively closing the open world assumption. ←
14:42:26 <Paolo> Ivan: most readers will be happy with the primer examples -- no time deps
Ivan Herman: most readers will be happy with the primer examples -- no time deps ←
14:42:30 <tlebo> If that's the case, it's easy to explain :-)
Timothy Lebo: If that's the case, it's easy to explain :-) ←
14:42:48 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
14:42:55 <Stian> tlebo: (!)
Timothy Lebo: (!) [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:42:56 <Paolo> Ivan: then if time dependencies are a concern, then we say how they are dealt with in a principled way
Ivan Herman: then if time dependencies are a concern, then we say how they are dealt with in a principled way ←
14:42:58 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame
Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame ←
14:43:11 <tlebo> @stian what?
Timothy Lebo: @stian what? ←
14:43:50 <Paolo> Khalid: it's a "how to get people to use the model correctly" concern
Khalid Belhajjame: it's a "how to get people to use the model correctly" concern ←
14:44:04 <Luc> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
14:45:28 <Paolo> smiles: essentially support the specializationOf idea when additional context is needed
Simon Miles: essentially support the specializationOf idea when additional context is needed ←
14:45:30 <smiles> ack smiles
Simon Miles: ack smiles ←
14:45:47 <tlebo> +1 Simon's "and don't say how the specializtionOf is characterized"
Timothy Lebo: +1 Simon's "and don't say how the specializtionOf is characterized" ←
14:45:55 <GK1> I think the question is: when necessary, do we contextualize the thing described or the description? I'm deeply uneasy with the latter approach.
Graham Klyne: I think the question is: when necessary, do we contextualize the thing described or the description? I'm deeply uneasy with the latter approach. ←
14:46:22 <Stian> agreed
Stian Soiland-Reyes: agreed ←
14:47:20 <Stian> that is specializationOf
Stian Soiland-Reyes: that is specializationOf ←
14:47:35 <Stian> almost
Stian Soiland-Reyes: almost ←
14:47:36 <Stian> :)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: :) ←
14:48:18 <Paolo> @GK it's the former (the resource)
@GK it's the former (the resource) ←
14:49:03 <Stian> [a prov:State ] prov:frozen [ a prov:Thing ]
Stian Soiland-Reyes: [a prov:State ] prov:frozen [ a prov:Thing ] ←
14:49:09 <Stian> question is if prov:State == prov:Thing here
Stian Soiland-Reyes: question is if prov:State == prov:Thing here ←
14:49:19 <Stian> the old turtles-all-the-way-question
Stian Soiland-Reyes: the old turtles-all-the-way-question ←
14:49:41 <tlebo> aha! Back to F2F1's EntityState :-)
Timothy Lebo: aha! Back to F2F1's EntityState :-) ←
14:49:44 <Stian> yaay
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yaay ←
14:49:58 <GK1> @paolo - that's what we do now, but i think Ivan was proposing the other.
Graham Klyne: @paolo - that's what we do now, but i think Ivan was proposing the other. ←
14:50:06 <Stian> I'm putting up my old EntityState fan posters
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I'm putting up my old EntityState fan posters ←
14:53:31 <tlebo> naive web users _are_ making characterizations, it's just that they're not naming them.
Timothy Lebo: naive web users _are_ making characterizations, it's just that they're not naming them. ←
14:54:57 <tlebo> so Entity is becoming a Graph?
Timothy Lebo: so Entity is becoming a Graph? ←
14:56:54 <Stian> GK: "every resource is a characterisation"
Graham Klyne: "every resource is a characterisation" [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
14:57:02 <pgroth> entity is a resource
Paul Groth: entity is a resource ←
14:57:25 <tlebo> so, two ways to "freeze" a characterization: 1) mint a new URI under the abstract (and add specializationOf) 2) plop the description of the abstract into a graph and name it.
Timothy Lebo: so, two ways to "freeze" a characterization: 1) mint a new URI under the abstract (and add specializationOf) 2) plop the description of the abstract into a graph and name it. ←
14:58:27 <Paolo> @Tim I get (1) but not (2) :-)
@Tim I get (1) but not (2) :-) ←
14:58:57 <tlebo> @paolo, (2) is more like an account
Timothy Lebo: @paolo, (2) is more like an account ←
14:59:59 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:00:37 <tlebo> characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" } and characterization_2 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman" } (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier)
Timothy Lebo: characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" } and characterization_2 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman" } (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier) ←
15:01:47 <Paolo> Batman?!? :-)
Batman?!? :-) ←
15:02:20 <tlebo> 1) characterization_1 foaf:name "Paolo"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier> . and characterization_2 foaf:name "Batman"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier>
Timothy Lebo: 1) characterization_1 foaf:name "Paolo"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier> . and characterization_2 foaf:name "Batman"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier> ←
15:02:45 <Paolo> @Tim so characterization_1 specializationOf http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier etc.?
@Tim so characterization_1 specializationOf http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier etc.? ←
15:03:06 <tlebo> (within 1, or 2?)
Timothy Lebo: (within 1, or 2?) ←
15:03:07 <Stian> uuuh
Stian Soiland-Reyes: uuuh ←
15:03:11 <Paolo> yes ok we crossed over
yes ok we crossed over ←
15:03:45 <tlebo> repeat 2) : characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" } and : characterization_2 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman" } (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier)
Timothy Lebo: repeat 2) : characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" } and : characterization_2 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman" } (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier) ←
15:04:34 <Stian> Luc is enclosing entity(post) on flipover
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Luc is enclosing entity(post) on flipover ←
15:04:37 <Paolo> (1) is the more natural one for me
(1) is the more natural one for me ←
15:05:20 <tlebo> (2) loses the "anchor" of : paolo-missier being the characterized (and more abstract) thing.
Timothy Lebo: (2) loses the "anchor" of : paolo-missier being the characterized (and more abstract) thing. ←
15:06:35 <tlebo> list use cases?
Timothy Lebo: list use cases? ←
15:07:01 <tlebo> use case 1 is the linked data scruffies?
Timothy Lebo: use case 1 is the linked data scruffies? ←
15:07:11 <tlebo> use case 2 is the "provenance field" ?
Timothy Lebo: use case 2 is the "provenance field" ? ←
15:07:17 <Stian> yes
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes ←
15:07:37 <Stian> where in #2 you say deliberately "I'm thinking about 'entity-frozen-version'-thingie "
Stian Soiland-Reyes: where in #2 you say deliberately "I'm thinking about 'entity-frozen-version'-thingie " ←
15:07:40 <jcheney> q?
James Cheney: q? ←
15:07:42 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
15:08:01 <Stian> a kind of prov:FrozenEntity
Stian Soiland-Reyes: a kind of prov:FrozenEntity ←
15:08:06 <tlebo> and use cases 1 and 2 are NOT intended to mesh well correctly, right? (please!?)
Timothy Lebo: and use cases 1 and 2 are NOT intended to mesh well correctly, right? (please!?) ←
15:08:32 <Stian> tlebo: must be so - #1 is scruffy, and so can't mesh well
Timothy Lebo: must be so - #1 is scruffy, and so can't mesh well [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
15:08:37 <Stian> #1 does not mesh with #1' either
Stian Soiland-Reyes: #1 does not mesh with #1' either ←
15:08:41 <Zakim> +??P39
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P39 ←
15:08:43 <tlebo> those scruffies!
Timothy Lebo: those scruffies! ←
15:09:03 <Stian> but.. are we then not inventing contextualised bnodes which happen to have URIs?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: but.. are we then not inventing contextualised bnodes which happen to have URIs? ←
15:09:12 <Stian> which look very official but are not to be interpreted as such
Stian Soiland-Reyes: which look very official but are not to be interpreted as such ←
15:09:14 <Paolo> q-
q- ←
15:09:16 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
15:10:08 <tlebo> I like where this is going, it pulls the "proper provenance folks" back into their field, leaving the common denominator to be the intersection of them and linked data.
Timothy Lebo: I like where this is going, it pulls the "proper provenance folks" back into their field, leaving the common denominator to be the intersection of them and linked data. ←
15:10:15 <dgarijo> then would we go back to the entity/entity state?
Daniel Garijo: then would we go back to the entity/entity state? ←
15:10:25 <Stian> no it's still an entity, just a more clearly defined one
Stian Soiland-Reyes: no it's still an entity, just a more clearly defined one ←
15:10:30 <GK1> Hmmm.... could be anm academic paper here, maybe: a theory of "lifting rules" for provenance (cf. Guha thesis).
Graham Klyne: Hmmm.... could be anm academic paper here, maybe: a theory of "lifting rules" for provenance (cf. Guha thesis). ←
15:10:37 <tlebo> "proper provenance" would be an extension
Timothy Lebo: "proper provenance" would be an extension ←
15:10:58 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
15:11:06 <Stian> graceful provenance degradation
Stian Soiland-Reyes: graceful provenance degradation ←
15:11:42 <GK1> I think that if we follow Paul's proposal, entities go away (for now)
Graham Klyne: I think that if we follow Paul's proposal, entities go away (for now) ←
15:11:49 <Stian> mm
Stian Soiland-Reyes: mm ←
15:12:03 <Stian> instead of entities we just have owl:Thing (any resource)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: instead of entities we just have owl:Thing (any resource) ←
15:12:07 <tlebo> Entity should be in the "proper provenance" extension of the prov rec. It should be subclass of rdfs:Resource .
Timothy Lebo: Entity should be in the "proper provenance" extension of the prov rec. It should be subclass of rdfs:Resource . ←
15:12:23 <Stian> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
15:12:34 <tlebo> we're making interoperability happen!
Timothy Lebo: we're making interoperability happen! ←
15:13:45 <Paolo> @tim can you clarify "proper provenance" in a sentence -- I'm still getting there...
@tim can you clarify "proper provenance" in a sentence -- I'm still getting there... ←
15:14:36 <GK1> @paolo suggest "proper provenance" is validly mergable provenance. (First cut)
Graham Klyne: @paolo suggest "proper provenance" is validly mergable provenance. (First cut) ←
15:15:56 <Paolo> @GK validly what?! :-)
@GK validly what?! :-) ←
15:15:58 <tlebo> "proper provenance" is the model that "provenance researchers" use to clearly distinguish the aspects that they find important (Luc in Boston and Luc Luc), while the rest of the world, aka "scruffies" would use (what remains in) the model to say some unclear things that they still find useful.
Timothy Lebo: "proper provenance" is the model that "provenance researchers" use to clearly distinguish the aspects that they find important (Luc in Boston and Luc Luc), while the rest of the world, aka "scruffies" would use (what remains in) the model to say some unclear things that they still find useful. ←
15:16:05 <GK1> q+ to run withj Paul's position
Graham Klyne: q+ to run withj Paul's position ←
15:16:25 <smiles> ack smiles
Simon Miles: ack smiles ←
15:16:42 <GK1> @paolo: logically valid
Graham Klyne: @paolo: logically valid ←
15:17:14 <Paolo> 2Tim ok got it. But Paul just zapped specializationOf which seems the right way to relate a "state" resource to its "original" resource
2Tim ok got it. But Paul just zapped specializationOf which seems the right way to relate a "state" resource to its "original" resource ←
15:17:24 <Zakim> -[VrijeUni.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[VrijeUni.a] ←
15:17:38 <Zakim> -??P39
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P39 ←
15:17:40 <Zakim> -tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←
15:17:41 <smiles> q?
Simon Miles: q? ←
15:17:54 <tlebo> @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model.
Timothy Lebo: @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model. ←
15:18:28 <tlebo> *what remains in Paul's new Radically Reduced Model
Timothy Lebo: *what remains in Paul's new Radically Reduced Model ←
15:19:13 <Zakim> +??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←
15:19:49 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
15:20:25 <tlebo> it's a problem in general for any information system.
Timothy Lebo: it's a problem in general for any information system. ←
15:20:43 <Paolo> got kicked out
got kicked out ←
15:20:45 <Zakim> -??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P11 ←
15:21:07 <tlebo> RT @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model.
Timothy Lebo: RT @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model. ←
15:21:28 <Zakim> +??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←
15:22:31 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni.a] ←
15:23:33 <pgroth> ?
Paul Groth: ? ←
15:23:35 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:23:38 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
15:23:38 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to run withj Paul's position
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to run withj Paul's position ←
15:23:58 <pgroth> ack smiles
Paul Groth: ack smiles ←
15:24:13 <jcheney> q?
James Cheney: q? ←
15:24:39 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
15:24:47 <Paolo> smiles: a consequence of Paul's proposal is that attributes disappear
Simon Miles: a consequence of Paul's proposal is that attributes disappear ←
15:25:13 <dgarijo> +q
Daniel Garijo: +q ←
15:25:21 <Stian> q+ would attributes be any different from normal RDF properties in an RDF resource?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ would attributes be any different from normal RDF properties in an RDF resource? ←
15:25:31 <Stian> q+
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←
15:25:32 <Paolo> Paolo is confused about this
Paolo is confused about this ←
15:25:35 <Paolo> q+
q+ ←
15:25:48 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
15:26:30 <Paolo> James, Ivan: lots to remove from the doc, then reconstruct
James, Ivan: lots to remove from the doc, then reconstruct ←
15:26:50 <Paolo> Luc: but with no prior art, we are starting from scratch at a late stage in the process
Luc Moreau: but with no prior art, we are starting from scratch at a late stage in the process ←
15:27:37 <tlebo> what prior art is missing?
Timothy Lebo: what prior art is missing? ←
15:27:42 <Paolo> Paul: most of the model stays, we just need to define a new domain for most of the relations. domains are "looser"
Paul Groth: most of the model stays, we just need to define a new domain for most of the relations. domains are "looser" ←
15:28:04 <Paolo> Paul: need to be careful about the ramifications.
Paul Groth: need to be careful about the ramifications. ←
15:28:16 <Paolo> jcheney what we have now is largely consistent
jcheney what we have now is largely consistent ←
15:28:41 <pgroth> ack dgarijo
Paul Groth: ack dgarijo ←
15:28:49 <Paolo> jcheney strip material first, then see what we can do with what is left
jcheney strip material first, then see what we can do with what is left ←
15:29:00 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
15:29:05 <Paolo> dgarijo: what happens to versions?
Daniel Garijo: what happens to versions? ←
15:29:36 <tlebo> Version isn't core, it can be phrased within core terms.
Timothy Lebo: Version isn't core, it can be phrased within core terms. ←
15:29:53 <GK> I thought we were exploring a possibility rather than trying to frame a proposal
Graham Klyne: I thought we were exploring a possibility rather than trying to frame a proposal ←
15:30:22 <Paolo> Luc: propose to remove distinction b/w entities and things, this is enough to address the scruffy provenance (SP)
Luc Moreau: propose to remove distinction b/w entities and things, this is enough to address the scruffy provenance (SP) ←
15:30:45 <Paolo> then address what more is required to formulate Proper Provenance (PP)
then address what more is required to formulate Proper Provenance (PP) ←
15:31:07 <kai> +1
Kai Eckert: +1 ←
15:31:18 <tlebo> ProP
Timothy Lebo: ProP ←
15:31:26 <dgarijo> :D
Daniel Garijo: :D ←
15:31:38 <dgarijo> ProP-O
Daniel Garijo: ProP-O ←
15:31:43 <Paolo> and ScruP?
and ScruP? ←
15:32:57 <tlebo> Characterized things are things....
Timothy Lebo: Characterized things are things.... ←
15:33:05 <GK> I think a formal semantics of "scruffy provenance" would be somewhat different from the current semantics, and either trivial or rather interesting.
Graham Klyne: I think a formal semantics of "scruffy provenance" would be somewhat different from the current semantics, and either trivial or rather interesting. ←
15:33:09 <tlebo> (so are turtles)
Timothy Lebo: (so are turtles) ←
15:34:09 <Stian> yes!
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes! ←
15:35:31 <tlebo> specializationOf and alternateOf leave RRM and go into ProP.
Timothy Lebo: specializationOf and alternateOf leave RRM and go into ProP. ←
15:36:45 <GK> q+ I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)
Graham Klyne: q+ I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper) ←
15:36:50 <tlebo> - owl:sameAs does NOT serve save purpose as alternativeOf or specializationOf...
Timothy Lebo: - owl:sameAs does NOT serve same purpose as alternativeOf or specializationOf... ←
15:36:56 <tlebo> s/save/same/
15:37:03 <GK> q+ to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)
Graham Klyne: q+ to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper) ←
15:37:43 <Stian> tlebo: no, but the need for alternativeOf/specializationOf changes slightly if we reconstruct what kind of links we really need on ye Frozen thingies
Timothy Lebo: no, but the need for alternativeOf/specializationOf changes slightly if we reconstruct what kind of links we really need on ye Frozen thingies [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
15:37:46 <pgroth> ack Stian
Paul Groth: ack Stian ←
15:37:50 <Stian> q-
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q- ←
15:38:31 <tlebo> what is being said?
Timothy Lebo: what is being said? ←
15:38:50 <pgroth> @tlebo can you hear now?
Paul Groth: @tlebo can you hear now? ←
15:38:53 <tlebo> no
Timothy Lebo: no ←
15:38:56 <tlebo> just voices
Timothy Lebo: just voices ←
15:39:44 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
15:40:00 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
15:40:10 <tlebo> q+ to ask for a recap of that last bit of discussion
Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask for a recap of that last bit of discussion ←
15:40:48 <Paolo> there are a few things I don't understand.
there are a few things I don't understand. ←
15:40:50 <Stian> Stian: I said had an old comment.. something like: I believe attributes on a prov:Entity is just like properties on an RDF resource within an RDF Graph, that is it is somehow valid within the scope of the graph. (ie. the prov:Account if you like). It is the general problem Ivan has talked about what that scope is.
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I said had an old comment.. something like: I believe attributes on a prov:Entity is just like properties on an RDF resource within an RDF Graph, that is it is somehow valid within the scope of the graph. (ie. the prov:Account if you like). It is the general problem Ivan has talked about what that scope is. [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
15:41:04 <Paolo> 1) what exactly happens to specializationOf
1) what exactly happens to specializationOf ←
15:41:10 <Paolo> 2) what happens to attributes
2) what happens to attributes ←
15:41:12 <satya> Can't hear properly
Satya Sahoo: Can't hear properly ←
15:41:28 <tlebo> satya, hop onto a skyper
Timothy Lebo: satya, hop onto a skyper ←
15:41:36 <satya> ah ok
Satya Sahoo: ah ok ←
15:41:54 <dgarijo> I can call you on skype satya
Daniel Garijo: I can call you on skype satya ←
15:42:03 <satya> thanks Daniel!
Satya Sahoo: thanks Daniel! ←
15:42:30 <Stian> now everyone is mumbling
Stian Soiland-Reyes: now everyone is mumbling ←
15:42:38 <Stian> I can't hear anything either :)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I can't hear anything either :) ←
15:42:41 <Stian> q?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q? ←
15:42:54 <tlebo> @stian, you're not there?
Timothy Lebo: @stian, you're not there? ←
15:43:09 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo ←
15:43:17 <Stian> Stian: propose to put a line, finish the queue, and then break
Stian Soiland-Reyes: propose to put a line, finish the queue, and then break [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
15:43:21 <Stian> NOTHING OUTSIDE QUEUE
Stian Soiland-Reyes: NOTHING OUTSIDE QUEUE ←
15:43:37 <Stian> Luc: Just 45 minutes left
Luc Moreau: Just 45 minutes left [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
15:43:55 <Stian> Luc: propose take 5 minutes brea, then include people on the phone in PROV-O talk
Luc Moreau: propose take 5 minutes brea, then include people on the phone in PROV-O talk [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
15:44:00 <tlebo> I guess I lost my window for a recap on the end of that discussion.
Timothy Lebo: I guess I lost my window for a recap on the end of that discussion. ←
15:44:11 <dgarijo> Tim and Satya are on Skype
Daniel Garijo: Tim and Satya are on Skype ←
15:44:19 <dgarijo> they can hear now well :)
Daniel Garijo: they can hear now well :) ←
15:44:31 <pgroth> who can not hear?
Paul Groth: who can not hear? ←
15:44:36 <satya> thanks again Daniel!
Satya Sahoo: thanks again Daniel! ←
15:44:42 <dgarijo> no prob
Daniel Garijo: no prob ←
15:45:15 <Stian> are we following the queue?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: are we following the queue? ←
15:45:59 <GK> My version of what happened in the last hour or so. We considered a radical alternative approach to address a "scruffy" use case for provenance, and did not come to a clear conclusion of which way to jump.
Graham Klyne: My version of what happened in the last hour or so. We considered a radical alternative approach to address a "scruffy" use case for provenance, and did not come to a clear conclusion of which way to jump. ←
15:45:59 <dgarijo> summary - replace entity with thing in the document. Accounts are going to be taken out and now there is a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions.
Daniel Garijo: summary - replace entity with thing in the document. Accounts are going to be taken out and now there is a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions. ←
15:46:02 <tlebo> so, Core, RRM, and ProP ?
Timothy Lebo: so, Core, RRM, and ProP ? ←
15:46:27 <tlebo> ivan: clearly separate sections in prov-dm for these three
Ivan Herman: clearly separate sections in prov-dm for these three [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
15:46:46 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
15:46:51 <dgarijo> 5 min break
Daniel Garijo: 5 min break ←
15:46:52 <Stian> ----- 5 minute break - then talk about PROV-O
Stian Soiland-Reyes: ----- 5 minute break - then talk about PROV-O ←
15:47:04 <GK> I think care is needed: if we address the scruffy use case as proposed, I think there are knock-on effects for the more formal uses.
Graham Klyne: I think care is needed: if we address the scruffy use case as proposed, I think there are knock-on effects for the more formal uses. ←
15:47:08 <GK> ack gk
Graham Klyne: ack gk ←
15:47:08 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper) ←
15:47:20 <Paolo> ack
ack ←
15:47:23 <Paolo> q?
q? ←
15:47:26 <Paolo> q-
q- ←
15:54:18 <tlebo> who is not physically at the meeting?
(No events recorded for 6 minutes)
Timothy Lebo: who is not physically at the meeting? ←
15:55:40 <dgarijo> satya, tim, yolanda, mcted, stephen, sandro, mike,
Daniel Garijo: satya, tim, yolanda, mcted, stephen, sandro, mike, ←
15:57:34 <tlebo> macted, are you tall ted from RDF 1.1 F2F2?
Timothy Lebo: macted, are you tall ted from RDF 1.1 F2F2? ←
15:58:18 <MacTed> tlebo - yes, that's me
Ted Thibodeau: tlebo - yes, that's me ←
15:59:26 <Paolo> TOPIC PROV-O
TOPIC PROV-O ←
15:59:27 <Stian> tlebo: oooh.. that's an entity!
Timothy Lebo: oooh.. that's an entity! [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
15:59:29 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
15:59:51 <smiles> q?
Simon Miles: q? ←
16:00:02 <tlebo> @paolo, scribed out? Is that like Paul's "interoperability-y" from earlier?
Timothy Lebo: @paolo, scribed out? Is that like Paul's "interoperability-y" from earlier? ←
16:00:07 <Stian> Satya and Tim - can you hear us?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Satya and Tim - can you hear us? ←
16:00:10 <tlebo> yes
Timothy Lebo: yes ←
16:00:17 <dgarijo> satya?
Daniel Garijo: satya? ←
16:00:19 <satya> yes - some mumbling
Satya Sahoo: yes - some mumbling ←
16:00:31 <Stian> Tim - can you talk?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Tim - can you talk? ←
16:01:18 <Paolo> Tim: it's been very difficult to make progress on it
Timothy Lebo: it's been very difficult to make progress on it ←
16:01:25 <GK> TOPIC: PROV-O
Summary: Concerns were raised about the ability to synchronize prov-o with prov-dm. In particular, about how to know what is changed and what is not in the prov-dm. A process was agreed on to facilate synchronization. An ontology that reflects the current WD-3 version would be produced for review. Because of the possibility of the change in accounts, the updated ontology does not need to reflect accounts. Again, it was encouraged that the ontology follow owl-rl.
<pgroth> Summary: Concerns were raised about the ability to synchronize prov-o with prov-dm. In particular, about how to know what is changed and what is not in the prov-dm. A process was agreed on to facilate synchronization. An ontology that reflects the current WD-3 version would be produced for review. Because of the possibility of the change in accounts, the updated ontology does not need to reflect accounts. Again, it was encouraged that the ontology follow owl-rl.
16:01:37 <Paolo> Tim: with RDF encoding being a second class citizen
Timothy Lebo: with RDF encoding being a second class citizen ←
16:01:45 <smiles> q?
Simon Miles: q? ←
16:01:46 <Paolo> TL not good RDF-based examples
TL not good RDF-based examples ←
16:01:57 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[OpenLink] ←
16:02:12 <GK> TL: Problem to make progress with PROV-O - lacking sufficient raw content to make progress.
Timothy Lebo: Problem to make progress with PROV-O - lacking sufficient raw content to make progress. [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ] ←
16:02:12 <MacTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me ←
16:02:15 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
16:02:25 <Paolo> Tim: prov-DM not useful to approach the ontology, and so unable to make progress for past few weeks
Timothy Lebo: prov-DM not useful to approach the ontology, and so unable to make progress for past few weeks ←
16:03:16 <pgroth> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Paul Groth: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
16:03:27 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
16:03:31 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
16:03:33 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
16:04:20 <Stian> Luc: Two aspects: a) writing ontology b) writing the document
Luc Moreau: Two aspects: a) writing ontology b) writing the document [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
16:04:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], ??P11, [VrijeUni.a], MacTed (muted)
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], ??P11, [VrijeUni.a], MacTed (muted) ←
16:04:27 <Paolo> Luc: there are two aspects: writing ontologies and docs
Luc Moreau: there are two aspects: writing ontologies and docs ←
16:04:43 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
16:04:59 <Paolo> Tim: both cannot be done but not against the current DM as it's a moving target.
Timothy Lebo: both cannot be done but not against the current DM as it's a moving target. ←
16:05:45 <Paolo> q+
q+ ←
16:05:47 <Paolo> q?
q? ←
16:06:27 <satya> @Paolo: Zakim is lagging in keeping up with speaker queue?
Satya Sahoo: @Paolo: Zakim is lagging in keeping up with speaker queue? ←
16:06:28 <Paolo> q+ to ask Tim what it would take for DM to be able to resume progress
q+ to ask Tim what it would take for DM to be able to resume progress ←
16:06:53 <Paolo> Satya: ontology cannot be built piecemeal
Satya Sahoo: ontology cannot be built piecemeal ←
16:07:15 <Paolo> Satya: it can only be modelled when DM is in mature state
Satya Sahoo: it can only be modelled when DM is in mature state ←
16:07:33 <Paolo> Satya: uncomfortable with the piecemeal approach
Satya Sahoo: uncomfortable with the piecemeal approach ←
16:07:55 <GK1> (I have a lot of sympathy with Tim et al -- it's hard to track DM -- especially after today's discussion)
Graham Klyne: (I have a lot of sympathy with Tim et al -- it's hard to track DM -- especially after today's discussion) ←
16:08:02 <Stian> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
16:09:01 <Paolo> Satya: as a consequence, current ontology is not a coherent whole
Satya Sahoo: as a consequence, current ontology is not a coherent whole ←
16:09:25 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
16:09:53 <tlebo> q?
Timothy Lebo: q? ←
16:10:17 <satya> q-
Satya Sahoo: q- ←
16:10:22 <Paolo> q-
q- ←
16:10:26 <Paolo> q?
q? ←
16:10:49 <Stian> Luc: we should talk about process instead of technical issues here now - if something in DM does not work, then that should be expressed [in the WG] and raised as issues
Luc Moreau: we should talk about process instead of technical issues here now - if something in DM does not work, then that should be expressed [in the WG] and raised as issues [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
16:10:58 <Paolo> Luc: need suggestions on how to proceed
Luc Moreau: need suggestions on how to proceed ←
16:11:19 <jcheney> q+ to point to ProvRDF mapping draft
James Cheney: q+ to point to ProvRDF mapping draft ←
16:11:30 <Stian> +1 the same, I have to re-read PROV-DM everytime I look at it
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 the same, I have to re-read PROV-DM everytime I look at it ←
16:11:33 <Paolo> Tim: every change to prov-o requires a fresh re-read of DM
Timothy Lebo: every change to prov-o requires a fresh re-read of DM ←
16:12:58 <Paolo> Tim: also, previous versions of prov-o are needed to rework each example for a new version
Timothy Lebo: also, previous versions of prov-o are needed to rework each example for a new version ←
16:13:56 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
16:14:35 <Paolo> GK: how long before you can complete ontology and doc once DM has been stabilized
Graham Klyne: how long before you can complete ontology and doc once DM has been stabilized ←
16:15:11 <Paolo> GK: propose to pause the -O work until DM is stable
Graham Klyne: propose to pause the -O work until DM is stable ←
16:16:17 <Paolo> q+
q+ ←
16:16:25 <pgroth> ack tlebo
Paul Groth: ack tlebo ←
16:16:32 <tlebo> @GK, yes, I like your suggestion. after DM is "frozen", we could nail it in a couple of weeks. But what we _produce_ needs to be reviewed by the group AND considered for each subsequent change to DM.
Timothy Lebo: @GK, yes, I like your suggestion. after DM is "frozen", we could nail it in a couple of weeks. But what we _produce_ needs to be reviewed by the group AND considered for each subsequent change to DM. ←
16:16:32 <pgroth> ack satya
Paul Groth: ack satya ←
16:16:47 <Stian> tlebo: exactly - need to close the loop
Timothy Lebo: exactly - need to close the loop [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
16:16:57 <Stian> for instance we made QualifiedInvolvement - that has not influenced DM
Stian Soiland-Reyes: for instance we made QualifiedInvolvement - that has not influenced DM ←
16:17:06 <Paolo> Satya: the whole of the ontology is impacted whenever changes are made to -DM
Satya Sahoo: the whole of the ontology is impacted whenever changes are made to -DM ←
16:17:26 <tlebo> for each proposed change to DM, it's affect on PROV-O should be a first class citizen (not "prov-o" will figure it out)
Timothy Lebo: for each proposed change to DM, it's affect on PROV-O should be a first class citizen (not "prov-o" will figure it out) ←
16:17:33 <pgroth> but I thought QualifiedInvolvement was to support the relastions in DM
Paul Groth: but I thought QualifiedInvolvement was to support the relastions in DM ←
16:17:37 <Paolo> Satya: are we introducing contradictory concepts in the DM
Satya Sahoo: are we introducing contradictory concepts in the DM ←
16:17:48 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
16:17:54 <dgarijo> @Tim: I think that the core of the model has been "frozen" for some time: use, generation, association, activities and entities.
Daniel Garijo: @Tim: I think that the core of the model has been "frozen" for some time: use, generation, association, activities and entities. ←
16:18:02 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:18:39 <Paolo> Luc: some of the core concepts have been stable in DM for a long time
Luc Moreau: some of the core concepts have been stable in DM for a long time ←
16:19:20 <tlebo> there is a difference between "stable" and "stagnant"
Timothy Lebo: there is a difference between "stable" and "stagnant" ←
16:19:31 <tlebo> we've been stagnant, unfortunately.
Timothy Lebo: we've been stagnant, unfortunately. ←
16:20:00 <Paolo> Satya: difference between entities and entity records has an impact in -O
Satya Sahoo: difference between entities and entity records has an impact in -O ←
16:20:15 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:20:21 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
16:20:21 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to point to ProvRDF mapping draft
Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to point to ProvRDF mapping draft ←
16:20:53 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF
James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF ←
16:21:03 <satya> @Tim, Stian: I also agree with "closing the loop" from DM->O->DM and so on
Satya Sahoo: @Tim, Stian: I also agree with "closing the loop" from DM->O->DM and so on ←
16:22:12 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:22:13 <MacTed> RDF isn't a syntax... do you mean RDF/XML, RDFa, Turtle, N3....?
Ted Thibodeau: RDF isn't a syntax... do you mean RDF/XML, RDFa, Turtle, N3....? ←
16:22:43 <jcheney> @MacTed: No idea, just writing abstract triples.
James Cheney: @MacTed: No idea, just writing abstract triples. ←
16:23:03 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
16:23:12 <tlebo> a frozen DM will help.
Timothy Lebo: a frozen DM will help. ←
16:23:14 <ivan> ack Paolo
Ivan Herman: ack Paolo ←
16:23:16 <pgroth> ack Paolo
Paul Groth: ack Paolo ←
16:23:41 <dgarijo> @tlebo: I thought that we were working with the releases of the dm.
Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: I thought that we were working with the releases of the dm. ←
16:23:52 <dgarijo> @tlebo: as "frozen"
Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: as "frozen" ←
16:24:13 <ivan> q-
Ivan Herman: q- ←
16:26:06 <pgroth> @MacTed - i'm sorry
Paul Groth: @MacTed - i'm sorry ←
16:26:10 <pgroth> it's been a nightmare
Paul Groth: it's been a nightmare ←
16:26:29 <pgroth> I have a speaker phone on but that seems to fall off
Paul Groth: I have a speaker phone on but that seems to fall off ←
16:27:44 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:28:17 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame
Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame ←
16:28:35 <satya> Can't hear anything!
Satya Sahoo: Can't hear anything! ←
16:28:49 <tlebo> q+ to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o
Timothy Lebo: q+ to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o ←
16:28:53 <satya> oh Daniel lost connection I believe
Satya Sahoo: oh Daniel lost connection I believe ←
16:28:54 <tlebo> ( I can't hear anything)
Timothy Lebo: ( I can't hear anything) ←
16:29:14 <jcheney> out phone connection dropped!
James Cheney: out phone connection dropped! ←
16:29:23 <Paolo> Khalid: most of the -O time has been used in resolving mapping issues rather than in making updates wrt older versions
Khalid Belhajjame: most of the -O time has been used in resolving mapping issues rather than in making updates wrt older versions ←
16:29:33 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
16:29:37 <jcheney> khalid: most of prov-o telecon has been on how to model PROV-DM.
Khalid Belhajjame: most of prov-o telecon has been on how to model PROV-DM. [ Scribe Assist by James Cheney ] ←
16:29:48 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
16:30:22 <tlebo> q?
Timothy Lebo: q? ←
16:30:49 <dgarijo> khalid: most of the time on the prov-o telecons was spent on the n-ary relationships modeling.
Khalid Belhajjame: most of the time on the prov-o telecons was spent on the n-ary relationships modeling. [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ] ←
16:30:49 <Paolo> Khalid: mapping took a long time
Khalid Belhajjame: mapping took a long time ←
16:31:01 <Paolo> Khalid: but there was indeed some chasing
Khalid Belhajjame: but there was indeed some chasing ←
16:31:44 <satya> @Khalid +1
Satya Sahoo: @Khalid +1 ←
16:31:46 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
16:31:48 <tlebo> +1 to reorganizing for a better story, instead of a dump of properties.
Timothy Lebo: +1 to reorganizing for a better story, instead of a dump of properties. ←
16:31:50 <tlebo> q?
Timothy Lebo: q? ←
16:31:58 <pgroth> ack tlebo
Paul Groth: ack tlebo ←
16:31:58 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o
Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o ←
16:32:20 <Paolo> Tim: what would help is a measure of "up-to-dateness" and of coverage
Timothy Lebo: what would help is a measure of "up-to-dateness" and of coverage ←
16:32:48 <dgarijo> @tlebo: so basically, more feedback from the rest of the group?
Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: so basically, more feedback from the rest of the group? ←
16:32:49 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:33:05 <Paolo> Tim: we don't have a good perception of the completeness of the work.
Timothy Lebo: we don't have a good perception of the completeness of the work. ←
16:33:18 <satya> @Tim: agree, we should have feedback on PROV-O also
Satya Sahoo: @Tim: agree, we should have feedback on PROV-O also ←
16:33:18 <Paolo> Tim: raising issues against the document is fine
Timothy Lebo: raising issues against the document is fine ←
16:33:50 <Paolo> Luc: there hasn't been any request for review of the draft
Luc Moreau: there hasn't been any request for review of the draft ←
16:35:05 <Paolo> Satya: got no feedback after first draft
Satya Sahoo: got no feedback after first draft ←
16:35:13 <tlebo> @satya, but that makes us the "target movers" :-)
Timothy Lebo: @satya, but that makes us the "target movers" :-) ←
16:37:14 <satya> @Tim ;)
Satya Sahoo: @Tim ;) ←
16:37:15 <Paolo> Tim: need feedback on current draft
Timothy Lebo: need feedback on current draft ←
16:37:18 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:38:11 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:38:18 <Paolo> Stian, dgarijo: missed a clear iteration loop for -O, with stable milestones
Stian, dgarijo: missed a clear iteration loop for -O, with stable milestones ←
16:38:27 <Luc2> Q?
Luc Moreau: Q? ←
16:38:31 <tlebo> q+ to verify that latest WD of DM is coming out "today"?
Timothy Lebo: q+ to verify that latest WD of DM is coming out "today"? ←
16:38:44 <Paolo> Satya: next iteration should begin once DM is frozen
Satya Sahoo: next iteration should begin once DM is frozen ←
16:39:14 <tlebo> wanted to propose that we develop the complete OWL of the latest DM.
Timothy Lebo: wanted to propose that we develop the complete OWL of the latest DM. ←
16:39:22 <tlebo> is "latest" coming out today?
Timothy Lebo: is "latest" coming out today? ←
16:39:39 <Luc2> Yes, release today
Luc Moreau: Yes, release today ←
16:39:59 <satya> @Tim: good one :)
Satya Sahoo: @Tim: good one :) ←
16:42:32 <tlebo> 1) we catch up to WD3 2) we ask for review from wg
Timothy Lebo: 1) we catch up to WD3 2) we ask for review from wg ←
16:42:41 <Paolo> Paul: propose that the PROV-O team attempts to reflect on the current -DM release
Paul Groth: propose that the PROV-O team attempts to reflect on the current -DM release ←
16:43:05 <Paolo> Paul: when done, it is released for feedback
Paul Groth: when done, it is released for feedback ←
16:43:23 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:43:27 <dgarijo> @Paul: +1
Daniel Garijo: @Paul: +1 ←
16:43:50 <Paolo> Paul: then Paul will work to identify the further changes needed in view of the upcoming changes to PROV-DM that are happening starting tomorrow
Paul Groth: then Paul will work to identify the further changes needed in view of the upcoming changes to PROV-DM that are happening starting tomorrow ←
16:44:04 <tlebo> both
Timothy Lebo: both ←
16:44:17 <Paolo> Luc: what is the next PROV-O release: ontology, doc?
Luc Moreau: what is the next PROV-O release: ontology, doc? ←
16:44:23 <satya> both
Satya Sahoo: both ←
16:44:54 <tlebo> for each construct: edit HTML, edit OWL.
Timothy Lebo: for each construct: edit HTML, edit OWL. ←
16:45:17 <pgroth> why not just ontology?
Paul Groth: why not just ontology? ←
16:45:36 <tlebo> b/c the axioms need an explanation and a connection back to DM.
Timothy Lebo: b/c the axioms need an explanation and a connection back to DM. ←
16:46:55 <Paolo> Paul: suggest to circulate ontology first, it's faster and nearly everyone in the group can understand and provide feedback
Paul Groth: suggest to circulate ontology first, it's faster and nearly everyone in the group can understand and provide feedback ←
16:46:55 <tlebo> @pgroth, makes sense.
Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, makes sense. ←
16:47:27 <jun> how about including some brief annotations in the ontology?
Jun Zhao: how about including some brief annotations in the ontology? ←
16:47:35 <pgroth> +1 jun
Paul Groth: +1 jun ←
16:47:40 <jun> @pgroth +1
16:48:34 <pgroth> ivan saying owl rl is important
Paul Groth: ivan saying owl rl is important ←
16:48:52 <tlebo> +1 @ivan, heavy semantics is undesired.
Timothy Lebo: +1 @ivan, heavy semantics is undesired. ←
16:48:54 <Paolo> Ivan: prov-o looks like an OWL-RL ontology
Ivan Herman: prov-o looks like an OWL-RL ontology ←
16:49:24 <Stian> what current document also does is show RDF examples (OK, in RDF/XML) which for myself is also a good way to visualise an ontology (Given only an OWL file, I would write down such examples)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: what current document also does is show RDF examples (OK, in RDF/XML) which for myself is also a good way to visualise an ontology (Given only an OWL file, I would write down such examples) ←
16:49:46 <tlebo> @stian, let's make an examples file, too.
Timothy Lebo: @stian, let's make an examples file, too. ←
16:49:51 <Paolo> Ivan and that's good news from the perspective of a path to implementation
Ivan and that's good news from the perspective of a path to implementation ←
16:49:53 <Stian> which is what Tim used to do back in the good days :)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: which is what Tim used to do back in the good days :) ←
16:49:59 <Stian> yes
Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes ←
16:50:18 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_components ?
Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_components ? ←
16:50:19 <khalidbelhajjame> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-profiles/#OWL_2_RL
Khalid Belhajjame: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-profiles/#OWL_2_RL ←
16:50:39 <Paolo> Paul: (explains the process again -- see above)
Paul Groth: (explains the process again -- see above) ←
16:50:43 <satya> audio dropping intermittently
Satya Sahoo: audio dropping intermittently ←
16:50:44 <ivan> q=
Ivan Herman: q= ←
16:50:46 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
16:51:07 <satya> can't hear
Satya Sahoo: can't hear ←
16:51:27 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
16:51:29 <satya> Paul can you please repeat?
Satya Sahoo: Paul can you please repeat? ←
16:51:35 <tlebo> +1^10
Timothy Lebo: +1^10 ←
16:51:39 <Paolo> Luc: we have also agreed to coordinate the two groups in a specific confcall
Luc Moreau: we have also agreed to coordinate the two groups in a specific confcall ←
16:51:50 <pgroth> Process
Paul Groth: Process ←
16:51:55 <Paolo> Ivan: please avoid RDF/XML, use Turtle itself
Ivan Herman: please avoid RDF/XML, use Turtle itself ←
16:52:04 <Stian> (in the document)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: (in the document) ←
16:52:08 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:52:14 <MacTed> +1^1000 Turtle, -1^1000 RDF/XML :-)
Ted Thibodeau: +1^1000 Turtle, -1^1000 RDF/XML :-) ←
16:52:18 <tlebo> http://prefix.cc/prov
Timothy Lebo: http://prefix.cc/prov ←
16:52:27 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/
Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/ ←
16:53:01 <satya> didn't hear anything in last 5 mins
Satya Sahoo: didn't hear anything in last 5 mins ←
16:53:07 <Paolo> @Satya Paul essentially repeated the process as I tried to capture earlier
@Satya Paul essentially repeated the process as I tried to capture earlier ←
16:53:08 <pgroth> are you on zakim
Paul Groth: are you on zakim ←
16:53:14 <tlebo> I can hear
Timothy Lebo: I can hear ←
16:53:26 <Paolo> @Satya we are trying to skype you back in
@Satya we are trying to skype you back in ←
16:53:46 <satya> ok thanks!
Satya Sahoo: ok thanks! ←
16:54:12 <tlebo> rdfa
Timothy Lebo: rdfa ←
16:54:20 <GK> Ivan: why not prov: instead of prov-o:
Ivan Herman: why not prov: instead of prov-o: [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ] ←
16:54:55 <tlebo> @ivan, hash or slash ;-)
Timothy Lebo: @ivan, hash or slash ;-) ←
16:55:04 <satya> yes, I can hear now!
Satya Sahoo: yes, I can hear now! ←
16:55:18 <ivan> tim, I let you decide that:-)
Ivan Herman: tim, I let you decide that:-) ←
16:55:20 <pgroth> Process-
Paul Groth: Process- ←
16:55:32 <ivan> actually? with a document of this size, I think slash is simpler
Ivan Herman: actually? with a document of this size, I think slash is simpler ←
16:55:34 <tlebo> +1 to process Paul outlined.
Timothy Lebo: +1 to process Paul outlined. ←
16:55:40 <pgroth> 1) prov-o team to reflect wd3 prov-dm only in an ontology
Paul Groth: 1) prov-o team to reflect wd3 prov-dm only in an ontology ←
16:55:54 <pgroth> 2) when complete prov-wg to review after notification
Paul Groth: 2) when complete prov-wg to review after notification ←
16:56:21 <tlebo> @ivan, size is big or small?
Timothy Lebo: @ivan, size is big or small? ←
16:56:21 <pgroth> 3) when new prov-dm becomes available chairs will compare and determine what they think is necessary to update
Paul Groth: 3) when new prov-dm becomes available chairs will compare and determine what they think is necessary to update ←
16:56:28 <ivan> By the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement)
Ivan Herman: By the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement) ←
16:56:32 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:56:35 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:56:58 <ivan> tlebo: what I meant is the number of terms in the ontology is relatively small
Timothy Lebo: what I meant is the number of terms in the ontology is relatively small [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ] ←
16:57:07 <tlebo> Thanks.
Timothy Lebo: Thanks. ←
16:57:14 <Luc2> Btw, without Account ....
Luc Moreau: Btw, without Account .... ←
16:57:35 <dgarijo> @Luc: we don't have account in prov-o right now.
Daniel Garijo: @Luc: we don't have account in prov-o right now. ←
16:58:32 <tlebo> mission - owl:Annotations and rdfs:comments galore in prov.owl
Timothy Lebo: mission - owl:Annotations and rdfs:comments galore in prov.owl ←
16:59:22 <pgroth> luc: don't spend cycles on modeling accounts
Luc Moreau: don't spend cycles on modeling accounts [ Scribe Assist by Paul Groth ] ←
16:59:39 <khalidbelhajjame> Alignment with prov-dm as released today minus accounts
Khalid Belhajjame: Alignment with prov-dm as released today minus accounts ←
16:59:53 <tlebo> lost sound
Timothy Lebo: lost sound ←
16:59:58 <tlebo> and your food is getting cold.
Timothy Lebo: and your food is getting cold. ←
17:00:13 <pgroth> we start at 9:00 cet
Paul Groth: we start at 9:00 cet ←
17:00:22 <pgroth> thanks!
Paul Groth: thanks! ←
17:00:24 <pgroth> thanks tlebo
Paul Groth: thanks tlebo ←
17:00:25 <tlebo> i get to sleep in tomorrow!
Timothy Lebo: i get to sleep in tomorrow! ←
17:00:26 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
17:00:30 <tlebo> ttyl, all.
Timothy Lebo: ttyl, all. ←
17:00:34 <satya> bye
Satya Sahoo: bye ←
17:00:36 <khalidbelhajjame> Tim, well deserved :-)
Khalid Belhajjame: Tim, well deserved :-) ←
17:01:50 <Zakim> -[VrijeUni.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[VrijeUni.a] ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#4) generated 2012-02-23 13:40:35 UTC by 'pgroth', comments: 'prov-dm summary now showing'