Remaining Notes (prov-dc, prov-xml, prov-json, prov-bestpractice, prov-sem)
The group discussed the additional notes that were either not specified in the charter or had not received significant attention.
Discussed the progress on the mapping of dublin core to PROV. Comments from a release have been obtained and the team working on it was aiming to finish a first draft in note form by the end of the month. Daniel agreed to work with others to finalize a timetable of work. The working group resolved to publish a note on this mapping.
There is draft schema produced for XML schema but there have not been many people looking at it. Curt, Hook, Stephan and David offered to take a look at the xml schema. The group agreed that it would be good to have the schema as long as no significant narrative needed to be produced around it. The working group resolved to produce a Note for prov-xml with minimal narrative.
Southampton has produced a json version of prov. However, there has not been working group effort put on it. The group noted that there were other ways such (json-LD) to produce json for RDF. The group agreed that given the time constraints, a prov-json Note would not be produced. Southampton was encouraged to send their version in as a member submisssion.
The group discussed the requirements for best practice from the charter. It was noted that best practice usually comes from experience and are iterative documents. The group agreed that they would not include a specific best practice document in the charter extension request.
Given that the group agreed that prov-dictionary would be separated into a Note from an earlier discussion. The group made a resolution to produce such a Note. Additionally there was some discussion about mimetypes. Paul was actioned to seek advice on mimetypes from the w3c.
The group discussed the need for the constraints document and its role. James asked for an endorsement of the current approach and help in reading it. The group endorsed the current approach and emphasized the need for it as a basis for building validators. Reza and Tom agreed to help.
Call for implementations & exit criteria
Luc described the need for exit criteria and went over a draft of a proposed set of exit criteria made by the chairs. The draft was inspired by SKOS. The group discussed various kinds of exit criteria including the need for multiple implementations, a matrix of features, as well as validators. Paul was tasked to run the proposed exit criteria by the W3C. The notion of compliance to PROV and how that relates to exit criteria was discussed. Paul was tasked with checking that relationship with the W3C. The group was surveyed to see who was producing implementations of PROV. There were several. Paul, Dong, Reza and Stefan agreed to help with preparing the implementation report.
The group discussed the current state of prov-aq. Paul asked for any new technical issues to be raised. Two issues were briefly discussed around the need to allow for SOAP and the possibility of having the service described using a service description language (e.g. wadl). The group agreed to submit all feature requests on the prov-aq before June 30.
The group discussed the role of the semantics document, how it should be prioritized and who would contribute. It was clear that James would be the primary driver of the document and the group did not have much other expertise in the area. There was consensus that document was good to have but that because of the issue of group bandwidth that it should be put on a lower priority.
The group reviewed the timetable from F2F2. The group agreed to request an extension to extend the group to end March 2013. The group agreed to vote on last call July 12 fro prov-dm and prov-o. The aim would be to get the documents out by Aug 1 with a 6 week review period. Oct 15 would be for CR and then publication before the Christmas break as PR.
The group agreed that all Notes would be released for Last Call by Nov 1. The group agreed that an implementation report would be set-up by the end of September.
The group discussed the possibility of holding the next F2F meeting at the W3C's joint meeting in Lyon. A possibility of doing it at ISWC 2012 in boston was discussed. The group agreed to seek collocation with ISWC.
The group discussed getting the word out about the last call and encouraging implementations. Curt agreed to engage the earth systems community. Paul agreed to make a page to track implementations of PROV as well as make overview slides available on the main wiki.
There are some format problems with the chatlog. Please correct them and reload this page. They are labeled on this page in a red box, like this message.
It may be helpful to
15:47:09 <pgroth> trackbot, start telcon
Paul Groth: trackbot, start telcon ←
15:47:11 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
15:47:13 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be ←
15:47:13 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot ←
15:47:14 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Face-to-Face
15:47:14 <trackbot> Date: 23 June 2012
15:47:27 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
Paul Groth: Zakim, this will be Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference ←
15:47:27 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, pgroth
Zakim IRC Bot: I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, pgroth ←
15:47:37 <pgroth> Zakim, this with be PROV
Paul Groth: Zakim, this with be PROV ←
15:47:37 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this with be PROV', pgroth
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this with be PROV', pgroth ←
15:47:45 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
Paul Groth: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
15:47:45 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)12:00PM scheduled to start in 13 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)12:00PM scheduled to start in 13 minutes ←
15:47:53 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, make logs public ←
15:48:25 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F3Schedule
15:48:39 <pgroth> Zakim, who is here
Paul Groth: Zakim, who is here ←
15:48:39 <Zakim> pgroth, you need to end that query with '?'
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you need to end that query with '?' ←
15:48:42 <pgroth> Zakim, who is here?
Paul Groth: Zakim, who is here? ←
15:48:42 <Zakim> apparently SW_(PROV)12:00PM has ended, pgroth
Zakim IRC Bot: apparently SW_(PROV)12:00PM has ended, pgroth ←
15:48:43 <Zakim> On IRC I see Luc, pgroth, dgarijo, GK, Zakim, RRSAgent, sandro, trackbot, stain
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Luc, pgroth, dgarijo, GK, Zakim, RRSAgent, sandro, trackbot, stain ←
15:49:06 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
Paul Groth: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
15:49:06 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)12:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)12:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes ←
15:49:20 <pgroth> Guest: Hook Hua
15:52:28 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)12:00PM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)12:00PM has now started ←
15:52:35 <Zakim> + +1.805.893.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.805.893.aaaa ←
15:53:55 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
15:54:13 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P1 is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P1 is me ←
15:54:13 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it ←
15:55:23 <dgarijo> are the minutes from yesterday available somewhere? I'd like to know what happened with contextualization :)
Daniel Garijo: are the minutes from yesterday available somewhere? I'd like to know what happened with contextualization :) ←
15:57:25 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-06-22
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-06-22 ←
15:57:36 <dgarijo> thanks!
Daniel Garijo: thanks! ←
15:59:38 <Luc> Topic: Remaining Notes (prov-dc, prov-xml, prov-json, prov-bestpractice, prov-sem)
Summary: The group discussed the additional notes that were either not specified in the charter or had not received significant attention.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the additional notes that were either not specified in the charter or had not received significant attention.
16:00:42 <tlebo> Luc: We want to identify remaining work.
Luc Moreau: We want to identify remaining work. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:00:50 <tlebo> ... so we can write credible charter extension.
Timothy Lebo: ... so we can write credible charter extension. ←
16:01:26 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
16:01:34 <Luc> ack pau
Luc Moreau: ack pau ←
16:02:06 <pgroth> +q to respond
Paul Groth: +q to respond ←
16:03:10 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:03:12 <pgroth> 1-
Paul Groth: 1- ←
16:03:14 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
16:04:27 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:04:27 <pgroth> other notes?
Paul Groth: other notes? ←
16:04:38 <tlebo> Tim: RPI is looking to submit a member submission for PML 3.0
Timothy Lebo: RPI is looking to submit a member submission for PML 3.0 [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:05:03 <tlebo> Luc: The charter decided that mappings would not be done by the WG, but the individual organizations.
Luc Moreau: The charter decided that mappings would not be done by the WG, but the individual organizations. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
<pgroth> subtopic: prov-dc
Summary: Discussed the progress on the mapping of dublin core to PROV. Comments from a release have been obtained and the team working on it was aiming to finish a first draft in note form by the end of the month. Daniel agreed to work with others to finalize a timetable of work. The working group resolved to publish a note on this mapping.
<pgroth> Summary: Discussed the progress on the mapping of dublin core to PROV. Comments from a release have been obtained and the team working on it was aiming to finish a first draft in note form by the end of the month. Daniel agreed to work with others to finalize a timetable of work. The working group resolved to publish a note on this mapping.
16:06:04 <tlebo> Daniel: concerned that he has been the only one working on the prov-dc. Not enough feedback.
Scribe problem: the name 'Daniel' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Daniel Garijo Daniel Schutzer . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown Daniel: concerned that he has been the only one working on the prov-dc. Not enough feedback. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:06:34 <tlebo> Luc: moved everything to W3C infrastructure?
Luc Moreau: moved everything to W3C infrastructure? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:06:36 <tlebo> Daniel: yes.
Scribe problem: the name 'Daniel' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Daniel Garijo Daniel Schutzer . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown Daniel: yes. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:06:38 <pgroth> @tlebo you could use the irc names :-)
Paul Groth: @tlebo you could use the irc names :-) ←
16:06:43 <pgroth> use tab
Paul Groth: use tab ←
16:07:16 <tlebo> luc: schedule?
Luc Moreau: schedule? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:07:32 <tlebo> dgarijo: mappings by end of month, with bnodes.
Daniel Garijo: mappings by end of month, with bnodes. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:07:58 <tlebo> dgarijo: second stage of the mapping, removing the extra data - can't get to this.
Daniel Garijo: second stage of the mapping, removing the extra data - can't get to this. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:08:15 <tlebo> dgarijo: by end of month can get the document that they promised.
Daniel Garijo: by end of month can get the document that they promised. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:08:45 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:08:53 <tlebo> dgarijo: many members will be away.
Daniel Garijo: many members will be away. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:09:05 <tlebo> luc: how important is the second part? can it be self-contained?
Luc Moreau: how important is the second part? can it be self-contained? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:09:22 <tlebo> dgarijo: the most important part is the direct mappings (we have concensus).
Daniel Garijo: the most important part is the direct mappings (we have concensus). [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:10:13 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:10:17 <tlebo> luc: I'm trying to identify the reachable goals.
Luc Moreau: I'm trying to identify the reachable goals. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:10:25 <tlebo> ... end of july need charter extension.
Timothy Lebo: ... end of july need charter extension. ←
16:10:38 <tlebo> ... need to know what to put into the extension request. What to promise?
Timothy Lebo: ... need to know what to put into the extension request. What to promise? ←
16:11:00 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:11:01 <tlebo> dgarijo: will go discuss on Wed meeting with DC folks.
Daniel Garijo: will go discuss on Wed meeting with DC folks. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:11:25 <tlebo> pgroth: dc doc direct mappings are straight forward. No reason not to have direct mapping document.
Paul Groth: dc doc direct mappings are straight forward. No reason not to have direct mapping document. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:11:41 <tlebo> ... does not need to be delivered like Rec documents.
Timothy Lebo: ... does not need to be delivered like Rec documents. ←
16:11:56 <tlebo> ... reasonable to have direct mappings as a minimum.
Timothy Lebo: ... reasonable to have direct mappings as a minimum. ←
16:12:19 <tlebo> ... yes DC doc as Note, we're done and its small.
Timothy Lebo: ... yes DC doc as Note, we're done and its small. ←
16:12:35 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
16:12:39 <tlebo> ... no reason for @dgarijo to go nuts.
Timothy Lebo: ... no reason for @dgarijo to go nuts. ←
16:13:08 <tlebo> luc: the WG will produce a Note deliverable mapping DC and PROV.
Luc Moreau: the WG will produce a Note deliverable mapping DC and PROV. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:13:30 <Luc> proposed: the WG to produce a note DC to PROV mapping
PROPOSED: the WG to produce a note DC to PROV mapping ←
16:13:41 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:13:45 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:13:53 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
16:13:54 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
16:13:54 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
16:14:03 <zednik_> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
16:14:05 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
16:14:14 <Luc> accepted: the WG to produce a note DC to PROV mapping
RESOLVED: the WG to produce a note DC to PROV mapping ←
16:15:00 <tlebo> action: dgarijo to discuss note and make timetable and type of work with DC folks, when will it be done for final internal review?
ACTION: dgarijo to discuss note and make timetable and type of work with DC folks, when will it be done for final internal review? ←
16:15:00 <trackbot> Created ACTION-95 - Discuss note and make timetable and type of work with DC folks, when will it be done for final internal review? [on Daniel Garijo - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-95 - Discuss note and make timetable and type of work with DC folks, when will it be done for final internal review? [on Daniel Garijo - due 2012-06-30]. ←
16:15:16 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:15:31 <tlebo> topic prov-xml
Timothy Lebo: topic prov-xml ←
16:15:43 <tlebo> subtopic: prov-xml
Summary: There is draft schema produced for XML schema but there have not been many people looking at it. Curt, Hook, Stephan and David offered to take a look at the xml schema. The group agreed that it would be good to have the schema as long as no significant narrative needed to be produced around it. The working group resolved to produce a Note for prov-xml with minimal narrative.
<pgroth> Summary: There is draft schema produced for XML schema but there have not been many people looking at it. Curt, Hook, Stephan and David offered to take a look at the xml schema. The group agreed that it would be good to have the schema as long as no significant narrative needed to be produced around it. The working group resolved to produce a Note for prov-xml with minimal narrative.
16:16:05 <tlebo> luc: not much work on prov-xml. draft xml schema created and udpated by @luc
Luc Moreau: not much work on prov-xml. draft xml schema created and udpated by @luc [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:16:21 <tlebo> ... seems that since we're about LC for DM, prov-xml can start up.
Timothy Lebo: ... seems that since we're about LC for DM, prov-xml can start up. ←
16:16:51 <tlebo> zednik_: the stakeholders were interested in XML.
Stephan Zednik: the stakeholders were interested in XML. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:17:09 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:17:11 <tlebo> luc: would be nice to have a few people to look over the schema.
Luc Moreau: would be nice to have a few people to look over the schema. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:18:37 <tlebo> curt, hook, stephan, david offered to help.
Timothy Lebo: curt, hook, stephan, david offered to help. ←
16:18:58 <tlebo> hook: patterns on ISO lineage spec that we can borrow.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: patterns on ISO lineage spec that we can borrow. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:19:22 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:19:24 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:19:26 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:19:36 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:19:51 <tlebo> pgroth: more importantly, how much text does prov-xml want to write?
Paul Groth: more importantly, how much text does prov-xml want to write? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:20:10 <tlebo> ... as in prov-o, narrative around the constructs.
Timothy Lebo: ... as in prov-o, narrative around the constructs. ←
16:20:25 <tlebo> ... there hasn't been effort around the narrative on prov-xml.
Timothy Lebo: ... there hasn't been effort around the narrative on prov-xml. ←
16:20:36 <hook> q+
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: q+ ←
16:20:45 <Curt> Using PROV-XML will require the user to read PROV-DM
Curt Tilmes: Using PROV-XML will require the user to read PROV-DM ←
16:20:45 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
16:20:47 <tlebo> ... can we make sure that we have no major narrative.
Timothy Lebo: ... can we make sure that we have no major narrative. ←
16:20:50 <Luc> ack hook
Luc Moreau: ack hook ←
16:21:02 <tlebo> hook: mirror prov-o in that mirrors DM?
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: mirror prov-o in that mirrors DM? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:21:17 <tlebo> prov-o's "no constraints" in prov-xml?
Timothy Lebo: prov-o's "no constraints" in prov-xml? ←
16:21:32 <tlebo> pgroth: nobody explaining the prov-xml schema.
Paul Groth: nobody explaining the prov-xml schema. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:21:52 <tlebo> ... we should avoid that level of effort b/c we dont' have it.
Timothy Lebo: ... we should avoid that level of effort b/c we dont' have it. ←
16:22:00 <tlebo> ... what _exactly_ are we committing to.
Timothy Lebo: ... what _exactly_ are we committing to. ←
16:22:05 <reza_bfar> Is there an extension to Protege that generates XML from OWL?
Reza B'Far: Is there an extension to Protege that generates XML from OWL? ←
16:22:09 <reza_bfar> Can we just use a code generator?
Reza B'Far: Can we just use a code generator? ←
16:22:19 <reza_bfar> to go from Prov-O to Prov-XML?
Reza B'Far: to go from Prov-O to Prov-XML? ←
16:22:24 <Luc> accepted: the WG to produce a note for prov-xml with minimal narrative
RESOLVED: the WG to produce a note for prov-xml with minimal narrative ←
16:22:32 <Curt> a hand generated PROV-XML will be more friendly to use...
Curt Tilmes: a hand generated PROV-XML will be more friendly to use... ←
16:22:33 <tlebo> luc: not accepted!
Luc Moreau: not accepted! [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:22:36 <zednik_> Do we have UML that we can generate XML from?
Stephan Zednik: Do we have UML that we can generate XML from? ←
16:22:37 <Luc> proposed: the WG to produce a note for prov-xml with minimal narrative
PROPOSED: the WG to produce a note for prov-xml with minimal narrative ←
16:22:46 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
16:22:47 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
16:22:48 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
16:22:49 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
16:22:50 <zednik_> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
16:22:50 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:22:51 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:22:53 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
16:22:59 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
16:23:07 <CraigTrim> +1
Craig Trim: +1 ←
16:23:18 <Luc> accepted: the WG to produce a note for prov-xml with minimal narrative
RESOLVED: the WG to produce a note for prov-xml with minimal narrative ←
16:23:29 <tlebo> repeat: curt, hook, stephan, david offered to help.
Scribe problem: the name 'repeat' does not match any of the 61 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Ilkay Altintas Reza B'Far Khalid Belhajjame James Cheney Sam Coppens David Corsar Stephen Cresswell Tom De Nies Helena Deus Simon Dobson Martin Doerr Kai Eckert Jean-Pierre EVAIN James Frew Irini Fundulaki Daniel Garijo Yolanda Gil Ryan Golden Paul Groth Olaf Hartig David Hau Sandro Hawke Jörn Hees Ivan Herman Ralph Hodgson Hook Hua Trung Huynh Graham Klyne Michael Lang Timothy Lebo James McCusker Deborah McGuinness Simon Miles Paolo Missier Luc Moreau James Myers Vinh Nguyen Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti Paulo Pinheiro da Silva Carl Reed Adam Retter Christine Runnegar Satya Sahoo david schaengold Daniel Schutzer Yogesh Simmhan Stian Soiland-Reyes Eric Stephan Linda Stewart Ed Summers Maria Theodoridou Ted Thibodeau Curt Tilmes Craig Trim Stephan Zednik Jun Zhao Yuting Zhao Hook Hua Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot
Unknown repeat: curt, hook, stephan, david offered to help. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:23:34 <tlebo> subtopic: prov-json
Summary: Southampton has produced a json version of prov. However, there has not been working group effort put on it. The group noted that there were other ways such (json-LD) to produce json for RDF. The group agreed that given the time constraints, a prov-json Note would not be produced. Southampton was encouraged to send their version in as a member submisssion.
<pgroth> Summary: Southampton has produced a json version of prov. However, there has not been working group effort put on it. The group noted that there were other ways such (json-LD) to produce json for RDF. The group agreed that given the time constraints, a prov-json Note would not be produced. Southampton was encouraged to send their version in as a member submisssion.
16:23:46 <tlebo> luc: charter did not mention json
Luc Moreau: charter did not mention json [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:24:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:24:14 <tlebo> ... Dong has been doing json at SH. There has been interest in prov-json.
Timothy Lebo: ... Dong has been doing json at SH. There has been interest in prov-json. ←
16:24:16 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:24:26 <reza_bfar> q+
Reza B'Far: q+ ←
16:24:29 <tlebo> pgroth: NO!
Paul Groth: NO! [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:24:34 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
16:24:39 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
16:25:00 <tlebo> ... it is important for uptake, but we have a lot of bandwidth issues on Rec docs already.
Timothy Lebo: ... it is important for uptake, but we have a lot of bandwidth issues on Rec docs already. ←
16:25:08 <tlebo> ... (feature creep)
Timothy Lebo: ... (feature creep) ←
16:25:15 <tlebo> ... use a member submission.
Timothy Lebo: ... use a member submission. ←
16:25:27 <tlebo> reza_bfar: xml and json, code generation from prov-o?
Reza B'Far: xml and json, code generation from prov-o? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:25:36 <jcheney> community group? see http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/
James Cheney: community group? see http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/ ←
16:25:48 <Curt> q-
Curt Tilmes: q- ←
16:25:51 <tlebo> ... a lot of work to keep in sync between all of the encodings.
Timothy Lebo: ... a lot of work to keep in sync between all of the encodings. ←
16:26:14 <tlebo> ... "Brazil" extension mapped OWL to XML.
Timothy Lebo: ... "Brazil" extension mapped OWL to XML. ←
16:26:26 <Curt> OWL-> XML is hard, XML -> JSON is easy
Curt Tilmes: OWL-> XML is hard, XML -> JSON is easy ←
16:26:32 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:26:35 <Dong> q+q+
Trung Huynh: q+q+ ←
16:26:38 <Dong> q+
Trung Huynh: q+ ←
16:26:51 <tlebo> zednik_: rdf to json (rdf-json)
Stephan Zednik: rdf to json (rdf-json) [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:26:52 <Luc> ack rez
Luc Moreau: ack rez ←
16:27:17 <tlebo> pgroth: as jcheney says, with json, there is "json-LD" which is json encodings of rdf.
Paul Groth: as jcheney says, with json, there is "json-LD" which is json encodings of rdf. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:27:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:27:40 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
16:27:44 <tlebo> ... we don't know enough to fix it.
Timothy Lebo: ... we don't know enough to fix it. ←
16:27:46 <Luc> ack q
Luc Moreau: ack q ←
16:27:52 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:27:55 <Luc> ack do
Luc Moreau: ack do ←
16:28:07 <tlebo> dong: tried json-ld mapping, result was undesireable.
Trung Huynh: tried json-ld mapping, result was undesireable. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:28:17 <tlebo> ... didn't serve purposes.
Timothy Lebo: ... didn't serve purposes. ←
16:28:18 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:28:26 <tlebo> ... big hassle.
Timothy Lebo: ... big hassle. ←
16:28:33 <pgroth> q+ to propose member submission from southampton
Paul Groth: q+ to propose member submission from southampton ←
16:29:01 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:29:05 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
16:29:25 <tlebo> pgroth: propose that SH does member submission.
Paul Groth: propose that SH does member submission. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:29:26 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
16:29:26 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to propose member submission from southampton
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to propose member submission from southampton ←
16:29:34 <Luc> ack jc
Luc Moreau: ack jc ←
16:29:50 <tlebo> @jcheney not that json-LD, but also a process for community groups to develop things like this.
Timothy Lebo: @jcheney not that json-LD, but also a process for community groups to develop things like this. ←
16:30:01 <tlebo> ... if a large group that wants it, then let them do it.
Timothy Lebo: ... if a large group that wants it, then let them do it. ←
16:30:10 <Luc> proposed: the WG will not produce a prov-json note
PROPOSED: the WG will not produce a prov-json note ←
16:30:17 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:30:22 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
16:30:22 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
16:30:22 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
16:30:22 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
16:30:22 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
16:30:23 <CraigTrim> +1
Craig Trim: +1 ←
16:30:25 <zednik_> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
16:30:28 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
16:30:31 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:30:31 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
16:30:39 <Luc> accepted: the WG will not produce a prov-json note
RESOLVED: the WG will not produce a prov-json note ←
16:30:58 <tlebo> subtopic: prov-best practice
Summary: The group discussed the requirements for best practice from the charter. It was noted that best practice usually comes from experience and are iterative documents. The group agreed that they would not include a specific best practice document in the charter extension request.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the requirements for best practice from the charter. It was noted that best practice usually comes from experience and are iterative documents. The group agreed that they would not include a specific best practice document in the charter extension request.
16:31:30 <tlebo> ( http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html ? )
Timothy Lebo: ( http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html ? ) ←
16:31:37 <tlebo> pgroth: reads from charter
Paul Groth: reads from charter [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:32:32 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
16:32:52 <jcheney> q+ to ask whether this is an appropriate home for collections
James Cheney: q+ to ask whether this is an appropriate home for collections ←
16:33:05 <zednik_> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
16:33:18 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:33:21 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:33:36 <tlebo> tlebo: best practices can help answer public question
Timothy Lebo: best practices can help answer public question [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:33:49 <Luc> ack jc
Luc Moreau: ack jc ←
16:33:49 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to ask whether this is an appropriate home for collections
Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to ask whether this is an appropriate home for collections ←
16:33:50 <tlebo> jcheney: can Collections go to best practices?
James Cheney: can Collections go to best practices? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:34:06 <tlebo> zednik_: best practices come from lots of experience. finding out what works.
Stephan Zednik: best practices come from lots of experience. finding out what works. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:34:19 <tlebo> ... picking a best practice from the beginning is odd.
Timothy Lebo: ... picking a best practice from the beginning is odd. ←
16:34:31 <tlebo> ... it is a development iteration.
Timothy Lebo: ... it is a development iteration. ←
16:34:39 <Luc> ack ze
Luc Moreau: ack ze ←
16:34:40 <tlebo> ... we need experience from the real world.
Timothy Lebo: ... we need experience from the real world. ←
16:34:43 <Curt> rename to PROV-EXAMPLES or PROV-COOKBOOK
Curt Tilmes: rename to PROV-EXAMPLES or PROV-COOKBOOK ←
16:34:53 <reza_bfar> Agree with Stephan. Could this be a document that we do post recommendation? I (and other implementers) could help
Reza B'Far: Agree with Stephan. Could this be a document that we do post recommendation? I (and other implementers) could help ←
16:35:05 <tlebo> pgroth: suggest not doing a best practice document. we have DC and Collections.
Paul Groth: suggest not doing a best practice document. we have DC and Collections. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:35:11 <tlebo> ... we have examples in the primer.
Timothy Lebo: ... we have examples in the primer. ←
16:35:45 <tlebo> ... best way to do it is to mint Notes out of thin air as we go along. But let's not commit to it.
Timothy Lebo: ... best way to do it is to mint Notes out of thin air as we go along. But let's not commit to it. ←
16:35:55 <tlebo> zednik_: best practices are iterative, needs time to evolve.
Stephan Zednik: best practices are iterative, needs time to evolve. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:36:07 <Zakim> - +1.805.893.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.805.893.aaaa ←
16:37:52 <dgarijo> (I've lost all sound)
Daniel Garijo: (I've lost all sound) ←
16:38:06 <Luc> hi daniel, we have to redial, we were running out of credit
Luc Moreau: hi daniel, we have to redial, we were running out of credit ←
16:38:32 <dgarijo> ah ok, sorry, I didn't hear the last part because had to attend a phone call.
Daniel Garijo: ah ok, sorry, I didn't hear the last part because had to attend a phone call. ←
16:38:49 <Luc> back in 10 sec
Luc Moreau: back in 10 sec ←
16:39:09 <Zakim> + +1.805.893.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.805.893.aabb ←
16:39:31 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:39:34 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
16:39:46 <tlebo> luc: seemed that best practice is not something that we should commit to doing. Because of iteration and development.
Luc Moreau: seemed that best practice is not something that we should commit to doing. Because of iteration and development. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:39:57 <tlebo> ... if we do it, we'll do it later. Not part of the extension request.
Timothy Lebo: ... if we do it, we'll do it later. Not part of the extension request. ←
16:40:02 <Luc> proposed: the WG will not include a best practice deliverable in the charter extension request
PROPOSED: the WG will not include a best practice deliverable in the charter extension request ←
16:40:09 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
16:40:10 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
16:40:11 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
16:40:11 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
16:40:12 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
16:40:12 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:40:12 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
16:40:13 <zednik_> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
16:40:13 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
16:40:32 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:40:37 <Luc> accepted: the WG will not include a best practice deliverable in the charter extension request
RESOLVED: the WG will not include a best practice deliverable in the charter extension request ←
16:41:18 <tlebo> subtopic: prov-dictionary
Summary: Given that the group agreed that prov-dictionary would be separated into a Note from an earlier discussion. The group made a resolution to produce such a Note. Additionally there was some discussion about mimetypes. Paul was actioned to seek advice on mimetypes from the w3c.
<pgroth> Summary: Given that the group agreed that prov-dictionary would be separated into a Note from an earlier discussion. The group made a resolution to produce such a Note. Additionally there was some discussion about mimetypes. Paul was actioned to seek advice on mimetypes from the w3c.
16:41:28 <pgroth> we agreed it was a note
Paul Groth: we agreed it was a note ←
16:41:28 <tlebo> luc: where do Dictionaries go?
Luc Moreau: where do Dictionaries go? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:41:32 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:41:35 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
16:41:50 <tlebo> pgroth: the resolution said into a Note
Paul Groth: the resolution said into a Note [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:42:34 <tlebo> luc: note by itself?
Luc Moreau: note by itself? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:42:42 <tlebo> pgroth: by itself, there's enough content.
Paul Groth: by itself, there's enough content. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:43:03 <tlebo> curt: needs to be its own primer.
Curt Tilmes: needs to be its own primer. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:43:26 <tlebo> luc: goes into charter extension?
Luc Moreau: goes into charter extension? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:43:51 <tlebo> ... a lot of work went into dictionaries.
Timothy Lebo: ... a lot of work went into dictionaries. ←
16:43:57 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
16:44:01 <Curt> It has 2 purposes: 1) define prov for collections 2) should how to build extensions on top of PROV-DM in general
Curt Tilmes: It has 2 purposes: 1) define prov for collections 2) show how to build extensions on top of PROV-DM in general ←
16:44:13 <Curt> s/should/show/
16:44:23 <tlebo> pgroth: its' something that we agreed on doing.
Paul Groth: its' something that we agreed on doing. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:44:32 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
16:44:38 <tlebo> ... we need to be careful about looking like were adding to the charter.
Timothy Lebo: ... we need to be careful about looking like were adding to the charter. ←
16:44:43 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:44:51 <zednik_> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
16:44:55 <tlebo> luc: "Collection" was already in the charter.
Luc Moreau: "Collection" was already in the charter. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:45:15 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
16:45:45 <zednik_> q-
Stephan Zednik: q- ←
16:45:54 <Luc> ack tl
Luc Moreau: ack tl ←
16:46:08 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
16:46:15 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:46:37 <tlebo> tlebo: it was almost Rec, would be drastic to drop it from a request for extension
Timothy Lebo: it was almost Rec, would be drastic to drop it from a request for extension [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:47:00 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/XGR-prov-20101214/#Proposed_Charter_for_a_Provenance_Interchange_Working_Group
James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/XGR-prov-20101214/#Proposed_Charter_for_a_Provenance_Interchange_Working_Group ←
16:47:07 <Luc> ack jch
Luc Moreau: ack jch ←
16:47:23 <tlebo> jcheney: cites from charter, which corresponds to our Collections decision.
James Cheney: cites from charter, which corresponds to our Collections decision. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:47:30 <tlebo> ... Dictionary fits as "best practice"
Timothy Lebo: ... Dictionary fits as "best practice" ←
16:47:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:47:46 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
16:48:14 <dgarijo> I can barely hear khalid.
Daniel Garijo: I can barely hear khalid. ←
16:48:46 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:49:11 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:49:28 <Luc> proposed: the WG will produce a prov-dictionary note as a form of "best practice"
PROPOSED: the WG will produce a prov-dictionary note as a form of "best practice" ←
16:49:38 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
16:49:39 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
16:49:39 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
16:49:40 <tlebo> tlebo: 1) stian has expressed (but with short term committment concerns) 2) the mateiral is "done" already, just needs rearranging.
Timothy Lebo: 1) stian has expressed (but with short term committment concerns) 2) the mateiral is "done" already, just needs rearranging. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:49:42 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
16:49:44 <CraigTrim> +1
Craig Trim: +1 ←
16:49:47 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
16:49:47 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
16:49:50 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:49:54 <zednik_> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
16:49:56 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
16:49:59 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
16:50:10 <tlebo> *stian has expressed _interest_
Timothy Lebo: *stian has expressed _interest_ ←
16:50:14 <Luc> accepted: the WG will produce a prov-dictionary note as a form of "best practice"
RESOLVED: the WG will produce a prov-dictionary note as a form of "best practice" ←
16:50:20 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:50:20 <khalidBelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
16:50:30 <Luc> ack kh
Luc Moreau: ack kh ←
16:50:49 <tlebo> khalidBelhajjame: timescales for Notes?
Khalid Belhajjame: timescales for Notes? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:50:56 <tlebo> Luc: it's up to us to decide.
Luc Moreau: it's up to us to decide. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:51:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:51:18 <tlebo> q+ to ask if there is any public review process for Notes (to make them better?)
Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask if there is any public review process for Notes (to make them better?) ←
16:51:38 <Luc> ack tl
Luc Moreau: ack tl ←
16:51:38 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to ask if there is any public review process for Notes (to make them better?)
Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to ask if there is any public review process for Notes (to make them better?) ←
16:52:03 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:52:19 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:52:24 <tlebo> luc: Primer has been doing through public review, so we have the spectrum of review.
Luc Moreau: Primer has been doing through public review, so we have the spectrum of review. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:52:36 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:53:04 <tlebo> luc: these are the deliverables that WG will be working on.
Luc Moreau: these are the deliverables that WG will be working on. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:53:13 <hook> q+
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: q+ ←
16:53:25 <tlebo> hook: mimetypes?
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: mimetypes? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
16:53:51 <tlebo> ... consistency on mimetype mechanisms to make it sync wiht prov-o and prov-xml
Timothy Lebo: ... consistency on mimetype mechanisms to make it sync wiht prov-o and prov-xml ←
16:54:05 <tlebo> ... looking at atom, rss, rdf all in application
Timothy Lebo: ... looking at atom, rss, rdf all in application ←
16:54:17 <tlebo> ... parameters define encoding scheme
Timothy Lebo: ... parameters define encoding scheme ←
16:54:22 <tlebo> rdf+xml
Timothy Lebo: rdf+xml ←
16:54:42 <tlebo> why isnt prov something like application/prov+rdf, application/prov+xml
Timothy Lebo: why isnt prov something like application/prov+rdf, application/prov+xml ←
16:54:52 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:55:02 <tlebo> ... why deviate?
Timothy Lebo: ... why deviate? ←
16:55:12 <TomDN> seems fair to me
Tom De Nies: seems fair to me ←
16:55:39 <TomDN> text is for prov notation, no?
Tom De Nies: text is for prov notation, no? ←
16:55:40 <tlebo> q+ to oppose any new mimetype for prov-o, we already have ~12 :-) "it's just a vocabulary"
Timothy Lebo: q+ to oppose any new mimetype for prov-o, we already have ~12 :-) "it's just a vocabulary" ←
16:55:49 <GK> Please don't go down the route of creating a new MIME type for PROV in RDF.
Graham Klyne: Please don't go down the route of creating a new MIME type for PROV in RDF. ←
16:56:02 <tlebo> +1 @GK
Timothy Lebo: +1 @GK ←
16:56:10 <TomDN> what zednik said
Tom De Nies: what zednik said ←
16:56:17 <Luc> ack hook
Luc Moreau: ack hook ←
16:56:24 <tlebo> does DC have a mimetype? changing a vocab doens't deserve a mimetype.
Timothy Lebo: does DC have a mimetype? changing a vocab doens't deserve a mimetype. ←
16:56:25 <GK> RDF is a perfectly good MIME type, and PROV in RDF may be combined with other information that is not PROV.
Graham Klyne: RDF is a perfectly good MIME type, and PROV in RDF may be combined with other information that is not PROV. ←
16:57:05 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:57:08 <Luc> ack tl
Luc Moreau: ack tl ←
16:57:08 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to oppose any new mimetype for prov-o, we already have ~12 :-) "it's just a vocabulary"
Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to oppose any new mimetype for prov-o, we already have ~12 :-) "it's just a vocabulary" ←
16:57:09 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
16:57:29 <pgroth> graham are you on mute
Paul Groth: graham are you on mute ←
16:57:42 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/0129-mime
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/0129-mime ←
16:57:46 <GK> I'm noty on the phone. I'm not really here
Graham Klyne: I'm noty on the phone. I'm not really here ←
16:57:52 <tlebo> it doesn't seem like changing a vocabulary deserves a new mimetype.
Timothy Lebo: it doesn't seem like changing a vocabulary deserves a new mimetype. ←
16:58:04 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:58:26 <tlebo> it seems that only prov-n deserves a new mimetype. it's about syntax.
Timothy Lebo: it seems that only prov-n deserves a new mimetype. it's about syntax. ←
16:58:30 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:58:42 <GK> (Looking at link)
Graham Klyne: (Looking at link) ←
16:59:24 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:59:33 <GK> There's nothing in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/0129-mime that siuggests provenance in RDF should not be served as application/rdf+xml.
Graham Klyne: There's nothing in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/0129-mime that siuggests provenance in RDF should not be served as application/rdf+xml. ←
16:59:53 <pgroth> action: paul to seek advice on the mimetype for documents from w3c
ACTION: paul to seek advice on the mimetype for documents from w3c ←
16:59:53 <trackbot> Created ACTION-96 - Seek advice on the mimetype for documents from w3c [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-96 - Seek advice on the mimetype for documents from w3c [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30]. ←
17:00:16 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:00:30 <tlebo> @GK, mimetypes shouldn't be used to delineate the vocabulary used within a serialization, should they?
Timothy Lebo: @GK, mimetypes shouldn't be used to delineate the vocabulary used within a serialization, should they? ←
17:00:45 <tlebo> subtopic: prov-constraints
Summary: The group discussed the need for the constraints document and its role. James asked for an endorsement of the current approach and help in reading it. The group endorsed the current approach and emphasized the need for it as a basis for building validators. Reza and Tom agreed to help.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the need for the constraints document and its role. James asked for an endorsement of the current approach and help in reading it. The group endorsed the current approach and emphasized the need for it as a basis for building validators. Reza and Tom agreed to help.
17:00:46 <GK> (It's Saturday and I'm at home ... I just happen to have the IRC channel running so I can periodicaly peek at what's happening. But if I got on the phone, domestic unrest might ensue :) )
Graham Klyne: (It's Saturday and I'm at home ... I just happen to have the IRC channel running so I can periodicaly peek at what's happening. But if I got on the phone, domestic unrest might ensue :) ) ←
17:01:10 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:01:17 <pgroth> proposed: The current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services.
PROPOSED: The current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services. ←
17:01:19 <tlebo> pgroth: we should endorse what has been happening and its important.
Paul Groth: we should endorse what has been happening and its important. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:02:23 <tlebo> jcheney: looking at charter: conceptual model, formal model (with optional semantics).
James Cheney: looking at charter: conceptual model, formal model (with optional semantics). [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:02:24 <GK> @tlebo broadly, I agree. I think I've seen an even more compelling argument, but I can't bring it to mind. Unlike XML, where the document *syntax* depends on the XML scheme used, RDF is a single uniform syntax. MIME types aren't really up to conveying semantics.
Graham Klyne: @tlebo broadly, I agree. I think I've seen an even more compelling argument, but I can't bring it to mind. Unlike XML, where the document *syntax* depends on the XML scheme used, RDF is a single uniform syntax. MIME types aren't really up to conveying semantics. ←
17:02:32 <GK> ^^ RDF/XML
Graham Klyne: ^^ RDF/XML ←
17:02:36 <pgroth> q+ to say that this is fundamental
Paul Groth: q+ to say that this is fundamental ←
17:02:41 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
17:02:45 <tlebo> ... why do we need a prov-constraints? It's not in the charter, and we're facing timeline.
Timothy Lebo: ... why do we need a prov-constraints? It's not in the charter, and we're facing timeline. ←
17:02:51 <tlebo> ... we need to be clear on the rationale
Timothy Lebo: ... we need to be clear on the rationale ←
17:02:54 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
17:03:09 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
17:03:09 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say that this is fundamental
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to say that this is fundamental ←
17:03:18 <Paulo> q+
17:03:29 <tlebo> pgroth: key for me: constraints distinguishes scruffy and proper.
Paul Groth: key for me: constraints distinguishes scruffy and proper. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:03:39 <tlebo> ... scruffy shouldn't kill proper provenance.
Timothy Lebo: ... scruffy shouldn't kill proper provenance. ←
17:03:46 <tlebo> ... how do we realize the difference?
Timothy Lebo: ... how do we realize the difference? ←
17:04:01 <tlebo> ... prov-constraints is our definition of proper
Timothy Lebo: ... prov-constraints is our definition of proper ←
17:04:21 <zednik_> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
17:04:30 <tlebo> jcheney: we've discovered half way though that we have something that wasn't in the charter.
James Cheney: we've discovered half way though that we have something that wasn't in the charter. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:04:37 <GK> (Constraints is part of DM, which *is* mentioned in the charter - we decided to split it out to make the document more approachable.)
Graham Klyne: (Constraints is part of DM, which *is* mentioned in the charter - we decided to split it out to make the document more approachable.) ←
17:04:42 <tlebo> ... can at least do scruffy prov.
Timothy Lebo: ... can at least do scruffy prov. ←
17:04:42 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
17:04:48 <tlebo> ... prov-constraints could be a note.
Timothy Lebo: ... prov-constraints could be a note. ←
17:04:48 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:04:55 <pgroth> +1 to GK
Paul Groth: +1 to GK ←
17:05:15 <tlebo> ... wants to have the discussion and be clear on why we're taking this on and it wasn't in the charter.
Timothy Lebo: ... wants to have the discussion and be clear on why we're taking this on and it wasn't in the charter. ←
17:05:29 <tlebo> curt: the rational for the document is the feedback.
Curt Tilmes: the rational for the document is the feedback. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:05:35 <tlebo> ... responding to community.
Timothy Lebo: ... responding to community. ←
17:06:05 <tlebo> luc: prov-constraints split for editorial reasons.
Luc Moreau: prov-constraints split for editorial reasons. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:06:14 <tlebo> ... but it's really a single document
Timothy Lebo: ... but it's really a single document ←
17:06:19 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:06:25 <Luc> ack cu
Luc Moreau: ack cu ←
17:06:41 <tlebo> TomDN: it's even easier: we're making a standard. Logical step that computes the compliance with it.
Tom De Nies: it's even easier: we're making a standard. Logical step that computes the compliance with it. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:06:55 <jcheney> @GK Deliverable 1 says D1. PIL Conceptual Model (W3C Recommendation). This document consists of a natural language description and a graphical illustration of concepts involved in PIL. Such a document will help broaden the appeal and uptake of provenance beyond the community of technical experts.
James Cheney: @GK Deliverable 1 says D1. PIL Conceptual Model (W3C Recommendation). This document consists of a natural language description and a graphical illustration of concepts involved in PIL. Such a document will help broaden the appeal and uptake of provenance beyond the community of technical experts. ←
17:06:59 <tlebo> ... it's good, compact, quick read, structured well. going from PROV to Normal and validating.
Timothy Lebo: ... it's good, compact, quick read, structured well. going from PROV to Normal and validating. ←
17:07:07 <Luc> ack tom
Luc Moreau: ack tom ←
17:07:09 <jcheney> @GK Nothing about constraints or validity
James Cheney: @GK Nothing about constraints or validity ←
17:07:10 <tlebo> ... stress that and structure.
Timothy Lebo: ... stress that and structure. ←
17:07:25 <tlebo> Paulo: 1) what is relationship between prov-o, prov-constriants, prov-sem?
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: 1) what is relationship between prov-o, prov-constriants, prov-sem? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:07:45 <tlebo> luc: prov-o is a OWL encoding of DM.
Luc Moreau: prov-o is a OWL encoding of DM. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:07:53 <tlebo> .. DM does not contain constraints.
Timothy Lebo: .. DM does not contain constraints. ←
17:08:07 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:08:43 <tlebo> Paulo: we are missing 20 years of effort.
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: we are missing 20 years of effort. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:09:00 <tlebo> ... we are mixing approaches that others have had to deal with.
Timothy Lebo: ... we are mixing approaches that others have had to deal with. ←
17:09:09 <tlebo> ... planning community: robot planning.
Timothy Lebo: ... planning community: robot planning. ←
17:09:16 <tlebo> ... situation calculus.
Timothy Lebo: ... situation calculus. ←
17:09:23 <tlebo> ... event calculus
Timothy Lebo: ... event calculus ←
17:09:27 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:09:28 <tlebo> ... fluid calculus
Timothy Lebo: ... fluid calculus ←
17:09:53 <reza_bfar> IMHO, may be this can be alleviated by stating that these are not all the possible constraints, but constraints that are required for minimal validity
Reza B'Far: IMHO, may be this can be alleviated by stating that these are not all the possible constraints, but constraints that are required for minimal validity ←
17:10:09 <tlebo> ... my problem is implications of definitions .
Timothy Lebo: ... my problem is implications of definitions . ←
17:10:25 <tlebo> luc: this needs to be raised in the formal ISSUE process.
Luc Moreau: this needs to be raised in the formal ISSUE process. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:10:26 <TomDN> @Paulo: note that the definitions in the editors draft of the constraints are not up to date
Tom De Nies: @Paulo: note that the definitions in the editors draft of the constraints are not up to date ←
17:10:44 <Luc> action paulo to raise an issue regarding definitions of dm and their implication on constraint document
Luc Moreau: action paulo to raise an issue regarding definitions of dm and their implication on constraint document ←
17:10:44 <trackbot> Created ACTION-97 - Raise an issue regarding definitions of dm and their implication on constraint document [on Paulo Pinheiro da Silva - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-97 - Raise an issue regarding definitions of dm and their implication on constraint document [on Paulo Pinheiro da Silva - due 2012-06-30]. ←
17:10:47 <TomDN> (alternate, specialization, entity, are not the same as in the DM yet)
Tom De Nies: (alternate, specialization, entity, are not the same as in the DM yet) ←
17:10:54 <Luc> ack paulo
Luc Moreau: ack paulo ←
17:10:56 <GK> @jcheney but as I understand it, "constraints" were always part of the conceptual model.
Graham Klyne: @jcheney but as I understand it, "constraints" were always part of the conceptual model. ←
17:10:56 <reza_bfar> FWIW, the constraints document, as is, which I reviewed last night, is very useful for implementers.
Reza B'Far: FWIW, the constraints document, as is, which I reviewed last night, is very useful for implementers. ←
17:11:27 <tlebo> Paulo: to simplify the nature of the problems, constraints says "exists" all the time, "exists" means exists now. Tomorrow it may be invalid.
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: to simplify the nature of the problems, constraints says "exists" all the time, "exists" means exists now. Tomorrow it may be invalid. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:11:40 <reza_bfar> I'd say without the constraints document, the implementers may be either confused or just go in too many different directions and create interoperability issues.
Reza B'Far: I'd say without the constraints document, the implementers may be either confused or just go in too many different directions and create interoperability issues. ←
17:12:07 <Luc> action paulo to raise issue about the notion of 'exist' in prov-constraints
Luc Moreau: action paulo to raise issue about the notion of 'exist' in prov-constraints ←
17:12:07 <trackbot> Created ACTION-98 - Raise issue about the notion of 'exist' in prov-constraints [on Paulo Pinheiro da Silva - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-98 - Raise issue about the notion of 'exist' in prov-constraints [on Paulo Pinheiro da Silva - due 2012-06-30]. ←
17:12:10 <jcheney> @GK OK, and that is how it was interpreted, but (devil's advocate) I'm just saying that reading the charter, we could drop or delay it if we want.
James Cheney: @GK OK, and that is how it was interpreted, but (devil's advocate) I'm just saying that reading the charter, we could drop or delay it if we want. ←
17:12:25 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:12:51 <tlebo> zednik_: discussing a validator, validing scruffy PROV. very important for the community.
Stephan Zednik: discussing a validator, validing scruffy PROV. very important for the community. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:13:00 <tlebo> ... the constraints doc is what leads to a validator.
Timothy Lebo: ... the constraints doc is what leads to a validator. ←
17:13:03 <tlebo> ... where do they start?
Timothy Lebo: ... where do they start? ←
17:13:04 <reza_bfar> +1 to zednik_
Reza B'Far: +1 to zednik_ ←
17:13:08 <pgroth> +1
Paul Groth: +1 ←
17:13:10 <Luc> ack zed
Luc Moreau: ack zed ←
17:13:11 <tlebo> ... critical for making a validator.
Timothy Lebo: ... critical for making a validator. ←
17:13:11 <Dong> +1 to zednik_
Trung Huynh: +1 to zednik_ ←
17:13:29 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:13:32 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
17:13:35 <GK> @jcheney ack.
Graham Klyne: @jcheney ack. ←
17:13:47 <tlebo> luc: many have said that they wouldn' tknow what a validator would be without the constraints doc.
Luc Moreau: many have said that they wouldn' tknow what a validator would be without the constraints doc. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:13:48 <pgroth> proposed: The current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services.
PROPOSED: The current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services. ←
17:13:53 <Paulo> q+
17:13:56 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
17:14:02 <pgroth> ack Paulo
Paul Groth: ack Paulo ←
17:14:25 <tlebo> paulo: wants a regression validator.
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: wants a regression validator. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:14:39 <tlebo> ... yest. we're talking about time.
Timothy Lebo: ... yest. we're talking about time. ←
17:14:49 <tlebo> ... many possible things that can be executed.
Timothy Lebo: ... many possible things that can be executed. ←
17:14:59 <tlebo> ... the technical term is regression validation.
Timothy Lebo: ... the technical term is regression validation. ←
17:15:02 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
17:15:21 <Luc> ack jch
Luc Moreau: ack jch ←
17:15:23 <tlebo> jcheney: one thing to say it's important, another to know that we're in a position to do it.
James Cheney: one thing to say it's important, another to know that we're in a position to do it. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:15:47 <tlebo> ... coming up wiht something that fleshes out the consistency/validation that's suggested in document is feasible but will take work.
Timothy Lebo: ... coming up wiht something that fleshes out the consistency/validation that's suggested in document is feasible but will take work. ←
17:16:09 <tlebo> ... obvioulsy will be asking for help from those that say they want it.
Timothy Lebo: ... obvioulsy will be asking for help from those that say they want it. ←
17:16:31 <tlebo> ... don't see a feasible plan to do it in the 6 months that we have.
Timothy Lebo: ... don't see a feasible plan to do it in the 6 months that we have. ←
17:16:32 <reza_bfar> +1 to jcheney
Reza B'Far: +1 to jcheney ←
17:16:44 <tlebo> ... how to pin it down?
Timothy Lebo: ... how to pin it down? ←
17:16:58 <reza_bfar> The issue, IMHO, is the scope of validation. Having consistency, well-formed, provable validation is a completely different thing than having practical minimal validation.
Reza B'Far: The issue, IMHO, is the scope of validation. Having consistency, well-formed, provable validation is a completely different thing than having practical minimal validation. ←
17:16:59 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
17:17:03 <tlebo> ... nothing in DM that says an Actiivty has a computational content. Need a notion of that, but we don't have it.
Timothy Lebo: ... nothing in DM that says an Actiivty has a computational content. Need a notion of that, but we don't have it. ←
17:17:11 <tlebo> ... no way to standardize it.
Timothy Lebo: ... no way to standardize it. ←
17:17:19 <Luc> ?
Luc Moreau: ? ←
17:17:24 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:17:26 <Paulo> q+
17:17:26 <Curt> +1 reza
Curt Tilmes: +1 reza ←
17:17:27 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
17:17:41 <reza_bfar> The same problem exists when people write OWL reasoners...
Reza B'Far: The same problem exists when people write OWL reasoners... ←
17:17:46 <tlebo> pgroth: the naive people that read the constraints doc, from implementation angle say "that's super useful for us".
Paul Groth: the naive people that read the constraints doc, from implementation angle say "that's super useful for us". [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:17:53 <tlebo> ... "we can make a valdiator from that"
Timothy Lebo: ... "we can make a valdiator from that" ←
17:17:59 <tlebo> ... what more needs to be done?
Timothy Lebo: ... what more needs to be done? ←
17:18:10 <tlebo> ... does @jcheney see that there's more work?
Timothy Lebo: ... does @jcheney see that there's more work? ←
17:18:18 <tlebo> jcheney: what is there is a sketch of how to do it.
James Cheney: what is there is a sketch of how to do it. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:18:30 <tlebo> ... there are a bunch of rules with the same form that we need to spell out.
Timothy Lebo: ... there are a bunch of rules with the same form that we need to spell out. ←
17:18:39 <tlebo> ... how to expand optional attributes
Timothy Lebo: ... how to expand optional attributes ←
17:18:45 <tlebo> ... avoiding the special cases.
Timothy Lebo: ... avoiding the special cases. ←
17:18:54 <reza_bfar> +q
Reza B'Far: +q ←
17:19:00 <tlebo> ... waiiing for clear idea on how that will work from rest of docs.
Timothy Lebo: ... waiiing for clear idea on how that will work from rest of docs. ←
17:19:19 <tlebo> ... if an algorithm, here is how you run it.
Timothy Lebo: ... if an algorithm, here is how you run it. ←
17:19:23 <tlebo> ... check computability.
Timothy Lebo: ... check computability. ←
17:19:38 <tlebo> ... slash until it's computable
Timothy Lebo: ... slash until it's computable ←
17:19:50 <tlebo> Paulo: I'm the trouble maker.
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: I'm the trouble maker. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:20:02 <tlebo> ... I'm very pragmatic.
Timothy Lebo: ... I'm very pragmatic. ←
17:20:10 <tlebo> ... the problem of validating a document.
Timothy Lebo: ... the problem of validating a document. ←
17:20:15 <reza_bfar> This sounds like a QA effort on the constraints doc that's only achievable via trying to implement a minimal validator based on these constraints. How much time do we have for this? If we have some time, then I can do the QA effort as a part of actually writing a validator...
Reza B'Far: This sounds like a QA effort on the constraints doc that's only achievable via trying to implement a minimal validator based on these constraints. How much time do we have for this? If we have some time, then I can do the QA effort as a part of actually writing a validator... ←
17:20:24 <tlebo> ... the theories have been discussed in W3C already.
Timothy Lebo: ... the theories have been discussed in W3C already. ←
17:20:46 <tlebo> ... OWL-S spent 2 years, and they failed.
Timothy Lebo: ... OWL-S spent 2 years, and they failed. ←
17:20:59 <tlebo> ... we are dealing with the same things with semantic web services.
Timothy Lebo: ... we are dealing with the same things with semantic web services. ←
17:21:07 <tlebo> ... we have a very naive approach to validation.
Timothy Lebo: ... we have a very naive approach to validation. ←
17:21:17 <tlebo> ... the theory behind it is not simple.
Timothy Lebo: ... the theory behind it is not simple. ←
17:21:22 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:21:26 <tlebo> ... do not want to get tangled in process.
Timothy Lebo: ... do not want to get tangled in process. ←
17:21:27 <Luc> ack pau
Luc Moreau: ack pau ←
17:21:43 <GK> Methinks it's not the group's job to implement a validator, but if someone outside the group were to do so that would support the spec's progress along the REC track
Graham Klyne: Methinks it's not the group's job to implement a validator, but if someone outside the group were to do so that would support the spec's progress along the REC track ←
17:21:53 <tlebo> ... concerned about formal specification.
Timothy Lebo: ... concerned about formal specification. ←
17:22:01 <tlebo> (I'm hearing contradictions)
Timothy Lebo: (I'm hearing contradictions) ←
17:22:04 <pgroth> @gk agree
Paul Groth: @gk agree ←
17:22:17 <Luc> ack rez
Luc Moreau: ack rez ←
17:22:20 <tlebo> reza_bfar: you need constraints on import/export.
Reza B'Far: you need constraints on import/export. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:22:27 <tlebo> ... I need to know its valid.
Timothy Lebo: ... I need to know its valid. ←
17:22:38 <tlebo> ... from a practical standpoint.
Timothy Lebo: ... from a practical standpoint. ←
17:22:40 <pgroth> +q to say we vote
Paul Groth: +q to say we vote ←
17:22:59 <tlebo> ... what jcheney needs is QA'ing the document.
Timothy Lebo: ... what jcheney needs is QA'ing the document. ←
17:23:15 <tlebo> ... willing to help jcheney QA it (as a user)
Timothy Lebo: ... willing to help jcheney QA it (as a user) ←
17:23:20 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
17:23:30 <tlebo> luc: part of the implementations process.
Luc Moreau: part of the implementations process. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:24:16 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:24:24 <tlebo> reza_bfar: freezing of doc?
Reza B'Far: freezing of doc? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:24:34 <tlebo> pgroth: with LC, WG is done
Paul Groth: with LC, WG is done [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:24:58 <tlebo> ... then WG must respond to all criticisms to fix them.
Timothy Lebo: ... then WG must respond to all criticisms to fix them. ←
17:25:18 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:25:22 <tlebo> ... even after Cand Rec, proposed changes can affect it.
Timothy Lebo: ... even after Cand Rec, proposed changes can affect it. ←
17:25:35 <tlebo> ... prov-constraints will LC after DM and PROV-O
Timothy Lebo: ... prov-constraints will LC after DM and PROV-O ←
17:25:51 <tlebo> reza_bfar: I'll take it offline to help jcheney
Reza B'Far: I'll take it offline to help jcheney [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:26:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:26:07 <tlebo> jcheney: paolo has been looking at it, too.
James Cheney: paolo has been looking at it, too. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:26:37 <tlebo> jcheney: I've need to hear that people think it' a good idea. If it's a good idea, I need more feedback.
James Cheney: I've need to hear that people think it' a good idea. If it's a good idea, I need more feedback. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:27:50 <Luc> ack to
Luc Moreau: ack to ←
17:27:58 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
17:27:58 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say we vote
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to say we vote ←
17:28:14 <tlebo> TomDN: I'll help. Not much left, it needs to wait to fix the frozen versions of DM to get consitent.
Tom De Nies: I'll help. Not much left, it needs to wait to fix the frozen versions of DM to get consitent. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
17:28:34 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:28:43 <pgroth> proposed: the current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services.
PROPOSED: the current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services. ←
17:28:48 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
17:28:48 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
17:28:49 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
17:28:50 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
17:28:51 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
17:28:51 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
17:28:54 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
17:28:54 <khalidBelhajjame> I+1
Khalid Belhajjame: I+1 ←
17:29:11 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
17:29:20 <pgroth> accepted: the current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services.
RESOLVED: the current approach to the constraints document is a good pattern and should be taken forward. The constraints document is important for providing a foundation for the development of validation services. ←
17:29:54 <Zakim> - +1.805.893.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.805.893.aabb ←
17:47:08 <Zakim> + +1.805.893.aacc
(No events recorded for 17 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.805.893.aacc ←
17:47:16 <Luc> scribe: dong
(Scribe set to Trung Huynh)
17:47:29 <Luc> topic: Call for implementations & exit criteria
Summary: Luc described the need for exit criteria and went over a draft of a proposed set of exit criteria made by the chairs. The draft was inspired by SKOS. The group discussed various kinds of exit criteria including the need for multiple implementations, a matrix of features, as well as validators. Paul was tasked to run the proposed exit criteria by the W3C. The notion of compliance to PROV and how that relates to exit criteria was discussed. Paul was tasked with checking that relationship with the W3C. The group was surveyed to see who was producing implementations of PROV. There were several. Paul, Dong, Reza and Stefan agreed to help with preparing the implementation report.
<pgroth> Summary: Luc described the need for exit criteria and went over a draft of a proposed set of exit criteria made by the chairs. The draft was inspired by SKOS. The group discussed various kinds of exit criteria including the need for multiple implementations, a matrix of features, as well as validators. Paul was tasked to run the proposed exit criteria by the W3C. The notion of compliance to PROV and how that relates to exit criteria was discussed. Paul was tasked with checking that relationship with the W3C. The group was surveyed to see who was producing implementations of PROV. There were several. Paul, Dong, Reza and Stefan agreed to help with preparing the implementation report.
17:47:40 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria ←
17:48:53 <Dong> Luc: We'll need to have exit criteria for the WG to demonstrate the recommendations are implementable
Luc Moreau: We'll need to have exit criteria for the WG to demonstrate the recommendations are implementable ←
17:50:04 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
17:50:23 <reza_bfar> Can you please clarify "have been demonstrated"?
Reza B'Far: Can you please clarify "have been demonstrated"? ←
17:50:26 <Dong> Luc: Looked at SKOS for examples
Luc Moreau: Looked at SKOS for examples ←
17:50:46 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
17:50:49 <Dong> Luc: 2 independent implementations needed
Luc Moreau: 2 independent implementations needed ←
17:51:05 <Dong> ... for each feature
... for each feature ←
17:51:55 <Dong> ... implementations can produce or consume a "feature"
... implementations can produce or consume a "feature" ←
17:52:24 <Dong> Luc: There'll be vocabularies extending PROV
Luc Moreau: There'll be vocabularies extending PROV ←
17:52:43 <Dong> ... these are examples of PROV adoption
... these are examples of PROV adoption ←
17:52:52 <reza_bfar> +q
Reza B'Far: +q ←
17:53:34 <Dong> Luc: An implementation report will be needed
Luc Moreau: An implementation report will be needed ←
17:53:44 <Dong> ... with matrixes of implemented features
... with matrixes of implemented features ←
17:54:20 <pgroth> here is an example of an implementation report from skos: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html
Paul Groth: here is an example of an implementation report from skos: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html ←
17:54:54 <tlebo> q+ to ask if "implementation" is API, application, or either?
Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask if "implementation" is API, application, or either? ←
17:55:00 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
17:55:19 <Dong> Luc: we'll need to track issues raised against CR and respond to all of them
Luc Moreau: we'll need to track issues raised against CR and respond to all of them ←
17:56:17 <Dong> Luc: care must be taken when defining exit criteria
Luc Moreau: care must be taken when defining exit criteria ←
17:56:52 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
17:56:58 <khalidBelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
17:57:37 <tlebo> +1 to rename "use" to something like "support"
Timothy Lebo: +1 to rename "use" to something like "support" ←
17:57:59 <Dong> zednik: for each feature, "support" is better than "use"
Stephan Zednik: for each feature, "support" is better than "use" ←
17:58:55 <Dong> pgroth: if there is only one implemetation uses a particular feature
Paul Groth: if there is only one implemetation uses a particular feature ←
17:59:06 <Dong> ... should it be in the rec
... should it be in the rec ←
17:59:35 <pgroth> SPARQL implementation report: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/implementations
Paul Groth: SPARQL implementation report: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/implementations ←
17:59:42 <Dong> luc: 1. implementability of a features
Luc Moreau: 1. implementability of a features ←
17:59:56 <Luc> ack ze
Luc Moreau: ack ze ←
17:59:59 <Dong> Luc: 2. interoperability of features
Luc Moreau: 2. interoperability of features ←
17:59:59 <pgroth> sorry this one: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/impl-report-ql
Paul Groth: sorry this one: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/impl-report-ql ←
18:00:18 <Dong> pgroth: links to other impl. reports
Paul Groth: links to other impl. reports ←
18:00:48 <Dong> pgroth: prefers the SKOS's report
Paul Groth: prefers the SKOS's report ←
18:01:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:01:14 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
18:01:19 <Dong> pgroth: in SKOS, a lots of constructs were not supported by impl.
Paul Groth: in SKOS, a lots of constructs were not supported by impl. ←
18:01:41 <Dong> reza_bfar: Does impl need to be public?
Reza B'Far: Does impl need to be public? ←
18:02:04 <Dong> pgroth: just need to list the impl.
Paul Groth: just need to list the impl. ←
18:02:14 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:02:18 <Luc> ack re
Luc Moreau: ack re ←
18:02:21 <reza_bfar> -q
Reza B'Far: -q ←
18:02:34 <Dong> ... with responses to questionaires
... with responses to questionaires ←
18:02:38 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
18:02:49 <tlebo> (yes, APIs and applications are "implementations")
Timothy Lebo: (yes, APIs and applications are "implementations") ←
18:03:07 <Dong> TomDN: should we include the notion of interchangability between encodings
Tom De Nies: should we include the notion of interchangability between encodings ←
18:03:32 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:03:32 <pgroth> q+ to suggest a new phrase
Paul Groth: q+ to suggest a new phrase ←
18:03:32 <Dong> zednik: this has been addressed in Luc's point 2
Stephan Zednik: this has been addressed in Luc's point 2 ←
18:03:35 <Luc> ack tom
Luc Moreau: ack tom ←
18:04:03 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
18:04:08 <Luc> ack kh
Luc Moreau: ack kh ←
18:04:41 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
18:04:53 <Dong> khalidBelhajjame: concerned about point 2, the interchangability of a feature
Khalid Belhajjame: concerned about point 2, the interchangability of a feature ←
18:04:59 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:05:12 <pgroth> suggested change = At least two implementations have been demonstrated to interchange provenance that is they consume provenance features generated by other implementations.
Paul Groth: suggested change = At least two implementations have been demonstrated to interchange provenance that is they consume provenance features generated by other implementations. ←
18:05:19 <Dong> pgroth: propose update to no. 2
Paul Groth: propose update to no. 2 ←
18:05:48 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:05:53 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
18:05:53 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to suggest a new phrase
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to suggest a new phrase ←
18:05:55 <tlebo> we lost "for all features" in there!
Timothy Lebo: we lost "for all features" in there! ←
18:06:29 <Dong> khalidBelhajjame: it's hard to show 2 impls interchange provenance for every feature
Khalid Belhajjame: it's hard to show 2 impls interchange provenance for every feature ←
18:06:33 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:06:34 <tlebo> I feel like we should be writing a \sigma equation :-)
Timothy Lebo: I feel like we should be writing a \sigma equation :-) ←
18:07:04 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:07:08 <Luc> ack zed
Luc Moreau: ack zed ←
18:07:15 <Dong> zednik: should not add encoding conversions to the criteria
Stephan Zednik: should not add encoding conversions to the criteria ←
18:07:27 <reza_bfar> +q
Reza B'Far: +q ←
18:08:03 <Dong> Luc: A validator, if implemented, should be able to consume every feature
Luc Moreau: A validator, if implemented, should be able to consume every feature ←
18:08:31 <tlebo> luc: validators, visualizers, and converters tend to cover them all
Luc Moreau: validators, visualizers, and converters tend to cover them all [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ] ←
18:08:33 <Dong> Luc: Visualisations and converters for PROV do as well
Luc Moreau: Visualisations and converters for PROV do as well ←
18:09:15 <Dong> Luc: PROV-XML will not in REC
Luc Moreau: PROV-XML will not in REC ←
18:09:32 <Dong> ... no obligation to demonstrate the exit criteria for it
... no obligation to demonstrate the exit criteria for it ←
18:09:48 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:09:52 <Luc> ack
Luc Moreau: ack ←
18:10:01 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
18:10:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:10:18 <Dong> reza_bfar: Can we defined a impl to support at least 4 major PROV concepts?
Reza B'Far: Can we defined a impl to support at least 4 major PROV concepts? ←
18:10:22 <pgroth> q+ to respond
Paul Groth: q+ to respond ←
18:10:38 <Luc> ack re
Luc Moreau: ack re ←
18:10:38 <Dong> reza_bfar: how about 3 out of 4?
Reza B'Far: how about 3 out of 4? ←
18:10:39 <khalidBelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
18:11:12 <reza_bfar> q-
Reza B'Far: q- ←
18:11:18 <Curt> a library just wants to attach attribution and nothing else
Curt Tilmes: a library just wants to attach attribution and nothing else ←
18:11:21 <Dong> pgroth: there might be validation systems that look only at derivations, for ex.
Paul Groth: there might be validation systems that look only at derivations, for ex. ←
18:11:41 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:11:45 <Luc> ack p
Luc Moreau: ack p ←
18:11:45 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to respond
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to respond ←
18:11:53 <Dong> ... so it's possible there are systems do not support all the core features
... so it's possible there are systems do not support all the core features ←
18:12:02 <Luc> ack kh
Luc Moreau: ack kh ←
18:12:10 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:12:19 <hook> q+
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: q+ ←
18:12:20 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:12:24 <Dong> khalidBelhajjame: in some cases, activities are not needed for ex.
Khalid Belhajjame: in some cases, activities are not needed for ex. ←
18:13:22 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
18:13:34 <Luc> ack hoo
Luc Moreau: ack hoo ←
18:13:34 <Dong> hook: in RDF impl. report, there is a good mixture of impl.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: in RDF impl. report, there is a good mixture of impl. ←
18:13:37 <TomDN> +1 hook
Tom De Nies: +1 hook ←
18:13:51 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:14:08 <Dong> hook: can be sure there are real applications that use PROV, rather than just API implementions.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: can be sure there are real applications that use PROV, rather than just API implementions. ←
18:14:10 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
18:14:12 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:14:18 <Dong> pgroth: agreed with hook
Paul Groth: agreed with hook ←
18:14:18 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
18:14:44 <Dong> pgroth: but there a leading time before uptake of the rec
Paul Groth: but there a leading time before uptake of the rec ←
18:15:14 <Dong> ... we'll need to push for implementations
... we'll need to push for implementations ←
18:15:40 <hook> reference for RDFCore Working Group Implementation Report http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030331-advance.html
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: reference for RDFCore Working Group Implementation Report http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030331-advance.html ←
18:15:43 <pgroth> straw poll?
Paul Groth: straw poll? ←
18:15:50 <Dong> Luc: we don't need to agree on the exit criteria today
Luc Moreau: we don't need to agree on the exit criteria today ←
18:16:10 <Dong> ... but how do the WG feel about the current criteria?
... but how do the WG feel about the current criteria? ←
18:16:19 <Luc> straw poll: should the WG adopt these CR exit criteria ?
Luc Moreau: straw poll: should the WG adopt these CR exit criteria ? ←
18:16:23 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
18:16:30 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
18:16:34 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
18:16:35 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
18:16:37 <CraigTrim> +1
Craig Trim: +1 ←
18:16:38 <TomDN> +1 (good basis)
Tom De Nies: +1 (good basis) ←
18:16:38 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
18:16:48 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
18:16:49 <Dong> +1
+1 ←
18:16:50 <zednik> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
18:16:51 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
18:17:09 <tlebo> +.9
Timothy Lebo: +.9 ←
18:18:04 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:18:08 <Dong> tlebo: the basis for exit criteria is good, but phrasing needs improvement
Timothy Lebo: the basis for exit criteria is good, but phrasing needs improvement ←
18:18:28 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:19:02 <tlebo> Zakim, you should wonder where .1 is!
Timothy Lebo: Zakim, you should wonder where .1 is! ←
18:19:02 <Zakim> I don't understand 'you should wonder where .1 is!', tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'you should wonder where .1 is!', tlebo ←
18:19:14 <Dong> pgroth: should check the criteria with W3C
Paul Groth: should check the criteria with W3C ←
18:19:20 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
18:19:36 <Dong> Luc: The list of features need to be there
Luc Moreau: The list of features need to be there ←
18:19:55 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
18:19:58 <Paulo> q+
18:20:02 <pgroth> action: paul to run exit criteria pass the w3c team
ACTION: paul to run exit criteria pass the w3c team ←
18:20:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Run exit criteria pass the w3c team [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-99 - Run exit criteria pass the w3c team [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30]. ←
18:20:03 <Dong> Luc: What are the features the WG have in mind?
Luc Moreau: What are the features the WG have in mind? ←
18:20:19 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
18:20:23 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
18:20:35 <Luc> ack zed
Luc Moreau: ack zed ←
18:20:36 <zednik> q-
Stephan Zednik: q- ←
18:20:37 <tlebo> q+ to show an example "passing" tables.
Timothy Lebo: q+ to show an example "passing" tables. ←
18:20:51 <Dong> @zednik could you repeat what you said here
@zednik could you repeat what you said here ←
18:21:14 <Dong> Paulo: Do we have any use case for PROV?
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: Do we have any use case for PROV? ←
18:21:15 <Curt> we have frequently referred back to them
Curt Tilmes: we have frequently referred back to them ←
18:21:19 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:21:20 <Dong> Luc: No
Luc Moreau: No ←
18:21:32 <Luc> ack paulo
Luc Moreau: ack paulo ←
18:21:32 <Dong> ... it's not part of the charter
... it's not part of the charter ←
18:21:34 <zednik> zednik: we should include a description of how we intend to structure our implementation report when taking the criteria to the W3
Stephan Zednik: we should include a description of how we intend to structure our implementation report when taking the criteria to the W3 [ Scribe Assist by Stephan Zednik ] ←
18:22:03 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
18:22:03 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:22:04 <Dong> tlebo: it's useful to have an example report against the criteria
Timothy Lebo: it's useful to have an example report against the criteria ←
18:22:12 <khalidBelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
18:22:16 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
18:22:29 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
18:22:36 <Dong> khalidBelhajjame: is that every term a feature?
Khalid Belhajjame: is that every term a feature? ←
18:22:39 <pgroth> does someone have a us phone, so we can call the pizza guy?
Paul Groth: does someone have a us phone, so we can call the pizza guy? ←
18:22:51 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:22:58 <zednik> @pgroth, I do
Stephan Zednik: @pgroth, I do ←
18:23:23 <Dong> khalidBelhajjame: suggest to list all the relations as features
Khalid Belhajjame: suggest to list all the relations as features ←
18:23:25 <pgroth> list in dm terms all relations as features
Paul Groth: list in dm terms all relations as features ←
18:23:38 <Luc> ack khal
Luc Moreau: ack khal ←
18:23:43 <TomDN> So every relation that's described in PROV-N, essentially?
Tom De Nies: So every relation that's described in PROV-N, essentially? ←
18:23:59 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:24:05 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
18:24:17 <Dong> pgroth: suggests to follow the section headings in Prov-dm
Paul Groth: suggests to follow the section headings in Prov-dm ←
18:24:25 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:24:28 <Dong> ... use them as features
... use them as features ←
18:24:41 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
18:25:35 <Dong> jcheney: are we expected to have 2 implementations of optional features, like prov-constraint
James Cheney: are we expected to have 2 implementations of optional features, like prov-constraint ←
18:26:05 <reza_bfar> q+
Reza B'Far: q+ ←
18:26:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:26:16 <jcheney> q-
James Cheney: q- ←
18:27:11 <Luc> ack jch
Luc Moreau: ack jch ←
18:27:19 <Dong> pgroth: we could have generic criteria or specific ones for each document
Paul Groth: we could have generic criteria or specific ones for each document ←
18:28:50 <Dong> jcheney: needs clarification on the "at risk" features
James Cheney: needs clarification on the "at risk" features ←
18:29:38 <Dong> Luc: contextualisation should be a feature
Luc Moreau: contextualisation should be a feature ←
18:29:56 <Dong> ... but if feedback is not good, we can drop it
... but if feedback is not good, we can drop it ←
18:30:25 <Dong> ... interchangeability does not apply to contraints
... interchangeability does not apply to contraints ←
18:30:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:30:40 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
18:30:46 <Dong> ... so 2 implementations are sufficient
... so 2 implementations are sufficient ←
18:31:07 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:32:10 <Dong> reza_bfar: is there forward influence on what PROV compliance means?
Reza B'Far: is there forward influence on what PROV compliance means? ←
18:32:54 <Dong> pgroth: the way we list features can be used to make statements about compliance
Paul Groth: the way we list features can be used to make statements about compliance ←
18:33:20 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:33:20 <Curt> compliance = all the "MUST"s in the spec
Curt Tilmes: compliance = all the "MUST"s in the spec ←
18:33:25 <Luc> ack rez
Luc Moreau: ack rez ←
18:33:40 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:33:44 <Dong> reza_bfar: is there a link between the features being discussed now with a definition of compliance later?
Reza B'Far: is there a link between the features being discussed now with a definition of compliance later? ←
18:33:57 <Dong> pgroth: will check this
Paul Groth: will check this ←
18:33:59 <pgroth> action: paul to ask about the notion of compliance to the w3c and its connection to the implementation report
ACTION: paul to ask about the notion of compliance to the w3c and its connection to the implementation report ←
18:34:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Ask about the notion of compliance to the w3c and its connection to the implementation report [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-100 - Ask about the notion of compliance to the w3c and its connection to the implementation report [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30]. ←
18:34:28 <Dong> Luc: who plans to do impl. of PROV?
Luc Moreau: who plans to do impl. of PROV? ←
18:35:03 <Dong> Luc: producing the impl. report is a significant effort
Luc Moreau: producing the impl. report is a significant effort ←
18:35:16 <Dong> ... which is important for PROV to be a REC
... which is important for PROV to be a REC ←
18:35:33 <Dong> ... who could help with this effort?
... who could help with this effort? ←
18:35:49 <Dong> pgroth: we will implement PROV
Paul Groth: we will implement PROV ←
18:36:03 <Dong> ... generate PROV assertions
... generate PROV assertions ←
18:36:12 <Dong> ... shell script tracking
... shell script tracking ←
18:37:41 <Dong> TomDN: we will have applications producing provenance
Tom De Nies: we will have applications producing provenance ←
18:37:53 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
18:38:02 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
18:38:05 <Dong> ... there will be ones consuming provenance as well
... there will be ones consuming provenance as well ←
18:38:27 <pgroth> +q to ask about pizza
Paul Groth: +q to ask about pizza ←
18:38:37 <TomDN> (remove 's' :) one of each will be sufficient this summer)
Tom De Nies: (remove 's' :) one of each will be sufficient this summer) ←
18:39:04 <Dong> CraigTrim: there are plans to use PROV-O, but cannot disclose yet
Craig Trim: there are plans to use PROV-O, but cannot disclose yet ←
18:39:37 <Dong> Luc: proof of concept prototypes will also be good
Luc Moreau: proof of concept prototypes will also be good ←
18:39:44 <tlebo> Four from me: 1) abstracting csv2rdf4lod's PML 2.0 to PROV 2) native PROV generation in DataFAQs data quality evaluation framework 3) PML 3.0 ontology 4) PROV vis to OmniGraffle
Timothy Lebo: Four from me: 1) abstracting csv2rdf4lod's PML 2.0 to PROV 2) native PROV generation in DataFAQs data quality evaluation framework 3) PML 3.0 ontology 4) PROV vis to OmniGraffle ←
18:39:52 <Dong> tlebo: see above
Timothy Lebo: see above ←
18:40:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:40:07 <Dong> tlebo: thanks, tlebo :)
Timothy Lebo: thanks, tlebo :) ←
18:40:38 <jcheney> pepperoni
James Cheney: pepperoni ←
18:40:42 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
18:40:51 <reza_bfar> +1 to Pepperoni
Reza B'Far: +1 to Pepperoni ←
18:40:52 <tlebo> subtopic fooding
Timothy Lebo: subtopic fooding ←
18:41:28 <Dong> Dong: Southampton will have 2-3 applications producing provenance using a python library that fully supports PROV-DM
Trung Huynh: Southampton will have 2-3 applications producing provenance using a python library that fully supports PROV-DM ←
18:42:03 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:42:06 <Dong> ... and a Provenance Web Service (i.e. provenance repository) is also in the pipeline
... and a Provenance Web Service (i.e. provenance repository) is also in the pipeline ←
18:42:08 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
18:42:08 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask about pizza
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to ask about pizza ←
18:42:50 <Dong> Paulo: coordinate with RPI to develop PROV extension to PML3
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: coordinate with RPI to develop PROV extension to PML3 ←
18:42:57 <satya> We are also developing a query dashboard for proteomics data using PROV-O based ontology for molecular systems biology (SemPoD)
Satya Sahoo: We are also developing a query dashboard for proteomics data using PROV-O based ontology for molecular systems biology (SemPoD) ←
18:43:44 <Luc> thanks satya
Luc Moreau: thanks satya ←
18:43:52 <satya> SemPoD initial prototype: http://ncsserver.case.edu:3001/homes
Satya Sahoo: SemPoD initial prototype: http://ncsserver.case.edu:3001/homes ←
18:43:55 <Dong> hook: will likely to migrate the OPM-based earth sci sys. to PROV
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: will likely to migrate the OPM-based earth sci sys. to PROV ←
18:44:35 <dgarijo> @satya: the link doesn't work for me :(
Daniel Garijo: @satya: the link doesn't work for me :( ←
18:44:38 <Dong> Curt: definitely generating PROV, likely visualisation + browsing
Curt Tilmes: definitely generating PROV, likely visualisation + browsing ←
18:45:08 <TomDN> +q to ask later what the timeframe is? august? september? october? ...
Tom De Nies: +q to ask later what the timeframe is? august? september? october? ... ←
18:45:09 <satya> Sorry, maybe a univ. firewall issue (I will post more permanent link soon)
Satya Sahoo: Sorry, maybe a univ. firewall issue (I will post more permanent link soon) ←
18:45:59 <Dong> dcorsar: applications generating + consuming PROV-O
David Corsar: applications generating + consuming PROV-O ←
18:46:20 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
18:46:54 <Dong> khalidBelhajjame: exporting PROV, workflow and PROV (Taverna), validating PROV-N
Khalid Belhajjame: exporting PROV, workflow and PROV (Taverna), validating PROV-N ←
18:47:22 <Paulo> q+
18:47:26 <satya> Another application is in clinical medicine - integration of provenance-driven querying of patient information using PROV-O based ontology (PhysioMIMI: http://physiomimi.case.edu/physiomimi/index.php/Main_Page)
Satya Sahoo: Another application is in clinical medicine - integration of provenance-driven querying of patient information using PROV-O based ontology (PhysioMIMI: http://physiomimi.case.edu/physiomimi/index.php/Main_Page) ←
18:47:29 <Dong> Luc: ProvToolkit
Luc Moreau: ProvToolkit ←
18:47:54 <Dong> satya: What is the timeline for impl.?
Satya Sahoo: What is the timeline for impl.? ←
18:47:59 <hook> migration of Earth Science extension of OPM-O to PROV-O. needs to be simple to be practical, simple Jena rules + classification, visualization, faceted navigation of provenance
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: migration of Earth Science extension of OPM-O to PROV-O. needs to be simple to be practical, simple Jena rules + classification, visualization, faceted navigation of provenance ←
18:48:09 <Dong> Luc: we'll look at the timetable later today
Luc Moreau: we'll look at the timetable later today ←
18:48:23 <Dong> ... but hope the impl. will start from Sep/Oct
... but hope the impl. will start from Sep/Oct ←
18:48:33 <TomDN> ack tom
Tom De Nies: ack tom ←
18:48:33 <Zakim> TomDN, you wanted to ask later what the timeframe is? august? september? october? ...
Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN, you wanted to ask later what the timeframe is? august? september? october? ... ←
18:48:34 <Dong> ... and results soon, hopefully
... and results soon, hopefully ←
18:49:54 <Dong> satya: what are the criteria for working impl.?
Satya Sahoo: what are the criteria for working impl.? ←
18:50:04 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:50:07 <TomDN> +q to say that if the implementation deadline is indeed in the fall, I might have bandwidth for a validator as well
Tom De Nies: +q to say that if the implementation deadline is indeed in the fall, I might have bandwidth for a validator as well ←
18:50:13 <Dong> Luc: Questionaires for implementor to fill
Luc Moreau: Questionaires for implementor to fill ←
18:50:13 <satya> q-
Satya Sahoo: q- ←
18:50:26 <reza_bfar> +q
Reza B'Far: +q ←
18:50:50 <Dong> dgarijo: exporting PROV, mydata?
Daniel Garijo: exporting PROV, mydata? ←
18:52:05 <Luc> ack pau
Luc Moreau: ack pau ←
18:52:05 <dgarijo> @Dong: export provenance traces from scientific workflows, and several projects from UPM have expressed interest in the model, but I can't say how we will be using it right now.
Daniel Garijo: @Dong: export provenance traces from scientific workflows, and several projects from UPM have expressed interest in the model, but I can't say how we will be using it right now. ←
18:52:16 <Dong> Paulo: could people contribute to a wiki telling about what they will be doing?
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: could people contribute to a wiki telling about what they will be doing? ←
18:52:16 <Luc> ack tom
Luc Moreau: ack tom ←
18:52:16 <Zakim> TomDN, you wanted to say that if the implementation deadline is indeed in the fall, I might have bandwidth for a validator as well
Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN, you wanted to say that if the implementation deadline is indeed in the fall, I might have bandwidth for a validator as well ←
18:52:21 <Dong> Luc: Agreed
Luc Moreau: Agreed ←
18:52:41 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:52:44 <Luc> ack rez
Luc Moreau: ack rez ←
18:53:53 <Dong> Luc: Can any one help with the impl. report?
Luc Moreau: Can any one help with the impl. report? ←
18:53:55 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
18:54:08 <Dong> zednik: I will help
Stephan Zednik: I will help ←
18:54:13 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:54:18 <Dong> q+
q+ ←
18:54:20 <reza_bfar> What are the list of things to do?
Reza B'Far: What are the list of things to do? ←
18:54:26 <reza_bfar> I'm not clear... example actions/tasks?
Reza B'Far: I'm not clear... example actions/tasks? ←
18:54:33 <Dong> pgroth: I'll participate, keep track of the tracker
Paul Groth: I'll participate, keep track of the tracker ←
18:54:44 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
18:55:29 <reza_bfar> I volunteer to help Stephan
Reza B'Far: I volunteer to help Stephan ←
18:55:43 <Dong> Luc: in response to reza_bfar, we need to finalise the criteria, produce list of features, produce the questionaire, collection impl. data, write the impl. report
Luc Moreau: in response to reza_bfar, we need to finalise the criteria, produce list of features, produce the questionaire, collection impl. data, write the impl. report ←
18:56:03 <Dong> ... we need to make sure that things get implemented in the group
... we need to make sure that things get implemented in the group ←
18:56:38 <Dong> Luc: someone needs to read all the feedbacks and track them in the tracker
Luc Moreau: someone needs to read all the feedbacks and track them in the tracker ←
18:56:55 <Dong> pgroth: some activities are not part of the impl. report though
Paul Groth: some activities are not part of the impl. report though ←
18:57:08 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:57:13 <reza_bfar> I'm not familiar with the W3C tools, etc. (tracker?, etc.), but I can help with listing features, producing tables, etc...
Reza B'Far: I'm not familiar with the W3C tools, etc. (tracker?, etc.), but I can help with listing features, producing tables, etc... ←
18:57:22 <Luc> ack dong
Luc Moreau: ack dong ←
18:57:53 <Dong> Dong: will help with data collection and the impl. report
Trung Huynh: will help with data collection and the impl. report ←
18:58:03 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:58:47 <Dong> Luc: so Paul, Dong, reza_bfar, Stefan will help with the impl. report
Luc Moreau: so Paul, Dong, reza_bfar, Stefan will help with the impl. report ←
18:58:56 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
18:59:18 <Dong> Luc: will put a call the the WG as well
Luc Moreau: will put a call the the WG as well ←
18:59:25 <Luc> topic timetable for all work
Luc Moreau: topic timetable for all work ←
19:00:12 <Dong> pgroth: suggest to discuss on PROV-AQ, PROV-SEM first
Paul Groth: suggest to discuss on PROV-AQ, PROV-SEM first ←
19:00:35 <Dong> Luc: What remains before last call?
Luc Moreau: What remains before last call? ←
19:00:48 <Luc> topic: prov-aq
Summary: The group discussed the current state of prov-aq. Paul asked for any new technical issues to be raised. Two issues were briefly discussed around the need to allow for SOAP and the possibility of having the service described using a service description language (e.g. wadl). The group agreed to submit all feature requests on the prov-aq before June 30.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the current state of prov-aq. Paul asked for any new technical issues to be raised. Two issues were briefly discussed around the need to allow for SOAP and the possibility of having the service described using a service description language (e.g. wadl). The group agreed to submit all feature requests on the prov-aq before June 30.
19:00:49 <reza_bfar> Is it permissible to discuss a technical topic that was not brought up (with Prov-QA) prior to F2F3? If not, no big deal.
Reza B'Far: Is it permissible to discuss a technical topic that was not brought up (with Prov-QA) prior to F2F3? If not, no big deal. ←
19:01:00 <reza_bfar> Kind of a question actually...
Reza B'Far: Kind of a question actually... ←
19:01:02 <Dong> pgroth: There a a number of outstanding issues on PROV-AQ
Paul Groth: There a a number of outstanding issues on PROV-AQ ←
19:01:11 <reza_bfar> +q
Reza B'Far: +q ←
19:01:24 <Dong> pgroth: first, all the issues need to be resolved
Paul Groth: first, all the issues need to be resolved ←
19:01:43 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:01:46 <Dong> ... need to finalise the features as well
... need to finalise the features as well ←
19:02:10 <Dong> ... the current issues can be resolved
... the current issues can be resolved ←
19:02:29 <Dong> ... before the end of summer, PROV-AQ can go to last call
... before the end of summer, PROV-AQ can go to last call ←
19:02:35 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:03:16 <Dong> reza_bfar: can the protocol and service can be decoupled?
Reza B'Far: can the protocol and service can be decoupled? ←
19:04:09 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:04:11 <pgroth> issue: can the protocol be decoupled from the service definition in prov-aq
ISSUE: can the protocol be decoupled from the service definition in prov-aq ←
19:04:11 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-433 - Can the protocol be decoupled from the service definition in prov-aq ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/433/edit .
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-433 - Can the protocol be decoupled from the service definition in prov-aq ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/433/edit . ←
19:04:18 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:04:22 <Luc> ack rez
Luc Moreau: ack rez ←
19:05:01 <hook> +q zednik_
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: +q zednik_ ←
19:05:11 <Dong> reza_bfar: prov-aq seems to refer to REST
Reza B'Far: prov-aq seems to refer to REST ←
19:05:21 <Dong> ... but there are users of SOAP
... but there are users of SOAP ←
19:05:26 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:06:08 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:06:16 <Dong> pgroth: we'll try to decouple completely the protocol and the content
Paul Groth: we'll try to decouple completely the protocol and the content ←
19:06:50 <Dong> Luc: could people have a look at the document and make suggestions?
Luc Moreau: could people have a look at the document and make suggestions? ←
19:06:54 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:07:28 <hook> q+
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: q+ ←
19:07:38 <Dong> reza_bfar: a recommendation for REST-SOAP mapping could also be useful
Reza B'Far: a recommendation for REST-SOAP mapping could also be useful ←
19:07:47 <Dong> pgroth: we'll look into this issue
Paul Groth: we'll look into this issue ←
19:08:23 <Luc> q/
Luc Moreau: q/ ←
19:08:26 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:08:29 <Luc> ack ze
Luc Moreau: ack ze ←
19:08:31 <zednik> q-
Stephan Zednik: q- ←
19:09:11 <Dong> hook: should there be a formal service description for prov. service?
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: should there be a formal service description for prov. service? ←
19:09:17 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:09:19 <Luc> ack ho
Luc Moreau: ack ho ←
19:09:34 <zednik> WADL: http://www.w3.org/Submission/wadl/
Scribe problem: the name 'WADL' does not match any of the 61 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Ilkay Altintas Reza B'Far Khalid Belhajjame James Cheney Sam Coppens David Corsar Stephen Cresswell Tom De Nies Helena Deus Simon Dobson Martin Doerr Kai Eckert Jean-Pierre EVAIN James Frew Irini Fundulaki Daniel Garijo Yolanda Gil Ryan Golden Paul Groth Olaf Hartig David Hau Sandro Hawke Jörn Hees Ivan Herman Ralph Hodgson Hook Hua Trung Huynh Graham Klyne Michael Lang Timothy Lebo James McCusker Deborah McGuinness Simon Miles Paolo Missier Luc Moreau James Myers Vinh Nguyen Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti Paulo Pinheiro da Silva Carl Reed Adam Retter Christine Runnegar Satya Sahoo david schaengold Daniel Schutzer Yogesh Simmhan Stian Soiland-Reyes Eric Stephan Linda Stewart Ed Summers Maria Theodoridou Ted Thibodeau Curt Tilmes Craig Trim Stephan Zednik Jun Zhao Yuting Zhao Hook Hua Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot
Unknown WADL: http://www.w3.org/Submission/wadl/ [ Scribe Assist by Stephan Zednik ] ←
19:09:54 <Dong> hook: a machine-readable service desc. will be useful
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: a machine-readable service desc. will be useful ←
19:10:05 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:10:20 <Dong> Luc: concerned about the available resources
Luc Moreau: concerned about the available resources ←
19:10:30 <pgroth> issue: look at wadl or some other description language for the service - is it possible? do we have time? paq
ISSUE: look at wadl or some other description language for the service - is it possible? do we have time? paq ←
19:10:31 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-434 - Look at wadl or some other description language for the service - is it possible? do we have time? paq ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/434/edit .
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-434 - Look at wadl or some other description language for the service - is it possible? do we have time? paq ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/434/edit . ←
19:11:02 <hook> q+
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: q+ ←
19:11:30 <Dong> hook: is AQ is part of impl. plan?
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: is AQ is part of impl. plan? ←
19:11:57 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:12:05 <Luc> ack hook
Luc Moreau: ack hook ←
19:12:23 <Dong> ... there are existing tools that do AQ, generate WADL
... there are existing REST frameworks to implement AQ with, that also auto-generates WADL for PROV-AQ ←
19:12:59 <Dong> pgroth: we don't have a good impl. of the protocol yet
Paul Groth: we don't have a good impl. of the protocol yet ←
19:13:21 <Dong> ... although it is simple, before going to LC, we need at least 1 implementation
... although it is simple, before going to LC, we need at least 1 implementation ←
19:13:29 <Dong> ... to make sure it works
... to make sure it works ←
19:14:09 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:14:15 <Dong> Luc: suggests make PAQ as a feature, not as a rec criteria, but as a way of getting feedback from implementators
Luc Moreau: suggests make PAQ as a feature, not as a rec criteria, but as a way of getting feedback from implementators ←
19:14:21 <Dong> pgroth: OK
Paul Groth: OK ←
19:14:55 <Dong> pgroth: if anyone has more issues with PAQ, pls raise them now
Paul Groth: if anyone has more issues with PAQ, pls raise them now ←
19:15:13 <Dong> pgroth: Any other extra feature for PAQ?
Paul Groth: Any other extra feature for PAQ? ←
19:16:10 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:16:19 <hook> s/existing tools that do AQ, generate WADL/existing REST frameworks to implement AQ with, that also auto-generates WADL for PROV-AQ/
19:16:32 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
19:16:40 <Luc> ack tl
Luc Moreau: ack tl ←
19:18:00 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
19:18:11 <reza_bfar> Question: are you trying to "stream" provenance records between multiple points?
Scribe problem: the name 'Question' does not match any of the 61 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Ilkay Altintas Reza B'Far Khalid Belhajjame James Cheney Sam Coppens David Corsar Stephen Cresswell Tom De Nies Helena Deus Simon Dobson Martin Doerr Kai Eckert Jean-Pierre EVAIN James Frew Irini Fundulaki Daniel Garijo Yolanda Gil Ryan Golden Paul Groth Olaf Hartig David Hau Sandro Hawke Jörn Hees Ivan Herman Ralph Hodgson Hook Hua Trung Huynh Graham Klyne Michael Lang Timothy Lebo James McCusker Deborah McGuinness Simon Miles Paolo Missier Luc Moreau James Myers Vinh Nguyen Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti Paulo Pinheiro da Silva Carl Reed Adam Retter Christine Runnegar Satya Sahoo david schaengold Daniel Schutzer Yogesh Simmhan Stian Soiland-Reyes Eric Stephan Linda Stewart Ed Summers Maria Theodoridou Ted Thibodeau Curt Tilmes Craig Trim Stephan Zednik Jun Zhao Yuting Zhao Hook Hua Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot
Unknown Question: are you trying to "stream" provenance records between multiple points? [ Scribe Assist by Reza B'Far ] ←
19:18:14 <Dong> tlebo: suggests we need a mechanism to post back provenance to the source
Timothy Lebo: suggests we need a mechanism to post back provenance to the source ←
19:18:43 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
19:19:09 <Luc> looks like PAQ is becoming PAQR (R for record ...)
Luc Moreau: looks like PAQ is becoming PAQR (R for record ...) ←
19:19:55 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
19:20:21 <Dong> tlebo: can downstream client file copies back
Timothy Lebo: can downstream client file copies back ←
19:21:00 <reza_bfar> Don't want to interrupt the conversation, but can someone type in a use-case here? I'm confused
Reza B'Far: Don't want to interrupt the conversation, but can someone type in a use-case here? I'm confused ←
19:21:15 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:21:17 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
19:21:24 <Dong> Luc: asks tlebo whether he wants an interface to store any provenance, or a mechanism to tell about the existence of provenance
Luc Moreau: asks tlebo whether he wants an interface to store any provenance, or a mechanism to tell about the existence of provenance ←
19:21:25 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
19:21:38 <Curt> q-
Curt Tilmes: q- ←
19:22:32 <Dong> tlebo: use-case desc.: data.gov's data (CSV) -> RPI (linked data) -> Oxford
Timothy Lebo: use-case desc.: data.gov's data (CSV) -> RPI (linked data) -> Oxford ←
19:22:38 <Curt> If a scientist d/ls data from a data center, then writes a paper about that data, he cites it from his side, but it would be nice to also tell the data center that he used their data
Curt Tilmes: If a scientist d/ls data from a data center, then writes a paper about that data, he cites it from his side, but it would be nice to also tell the data center that he used their data ←
19:22:49 <Dong> ... but data.gov not aware of this
... but data.gov not aware of this ←
19:23:02 <TomDN> ack pizzaguy ?
Tom De Nies: ack pizzaguy ? ←
19:23:14 <Dong> ... there is no forward linking that allows this to happen
... there is no forward linking that allows this to happen ←
19:23:52 <hook> @tlebo, sounds like you are describing a PROV repository and/or LOD? "prov-pedia"?
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: @tlebo, sounds like you are describing a PROV repository and/or LOD? "prov-pedia"? ←
19:24:00 <Dong> Curt: suggests providing a way to tell the data center that we're using your data
Curt Tilmes: suggests providing a way to tell the data center that we're using your data ←
19:24:14 <Dong> ... it is currently done manually
... it is currently done manually ←
19:24:25 <Dong> ... agreed this is a good idea
... agreed this is a good idea ←
19:26:07 <Dong> Luc: due to resource constraint, storing provenance by a prov service was not on the plan
Luc Moreau: due to resource constraint, storing provenance by a prov service was not on the plan ←
19:26:26 <khalidBelhajjame> zakim, who"s on the phone
Khalid Belhajjame: zakim, who"s on the phone ←
19:26:26 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who"s on the phone', khalidBelhajjame
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'who"s on the phone', khalidBelhajjame ←
19:26:53 <Curt> zakim, who is here?
Curt Tilmes: zakim, who is here? ←
19:26:53 <Zakim> On the phone I see dgarijo, +1.805.893.aacc, Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see dgarijo, +1.805.893.aacc, Satya_Sahoo ←
19:26:54 <Zakim> On IRC I see satya, tlebo, jcheney, Dong, TomDN, Paulo, khalidBelhajjame, GK_, dcorsar, hook, reza_bfar, CraigTrim, Curt, Luc, pgroth, dgarijo, GK, Zakim, RRSAgent, sandro,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see satya, tlebo, jcheney, Dong, TomDN, Paulo, khalidBelhajjame, GK_, dcorsar, hook, reza_bfar, CraigTrim, Curt, Luc, pgroth, dgarijo, GK, Zakim, RRSAgent, sandro, ←
19:26:54 <Zakim> ... trackbot, stain
Zakim IRC Bot: ... trackbot, stain ←
19:27:40 <Dong> reza_bfar: is "track-back" optional or not?
Reza B'Far: is "track-back" optional or not? ←
19:27:56 <Dong> tlebo: it's optional
Timothy Lebo: it's optional ←
19:28:36 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:29:54 <Dong> tlebo: is is not recording prov., it's a notification (a la ping back)
Timothy Lebo: is is not recording prov., it's a notification (a la ping back) ←
19:30:11 <reza_bfar> just an idea is you could have optional parameters in the POST that identify track-back. That's also ACID and Atomic.
Reza B'Far: just an idea is you could have optional parameters in the POST that identify track-back. That's also ACID and Atomic. ←
19:31:08 <reza_bfar> In fact, I THINK for REST at least, that was one of the intents of POST. That the parameters that get sent to the server and what come back are packed in a single thing...
Reza B'Far: In fact, I THINK for REST at least, that was one of the intents of POST. That the parameters that get sent to the server and what come back are packed in a single thing... ←
19:31:44 <Dong> Luc: will we have a good PAQ doc before extension request
Luc Moreau: will we have a good PAQ doc before extension request ←
19:32:09 <Dong> pgroth: sees no significant challenge
Paul Groth: sees no significant challenge ←
19:32:30 <Dong> ... we can spend something discussing the features being proposed
... we can spend some time discussing the features being proposed ←
19:32:31 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:32:42 <Dong> s/something/some time
19:33:21 <reza_bfar> Paul\Tim - thanks for the explanation...
Reza B'Far: Paul\Tim - thanks for the explanation... ←
19:33:36 <Dong> ... to see whether it is feasible to implement those
... to see whether it is feasible to implement those ←
19:34:48 <Luc> proposed: all features requests for PAQ to be submitted as issue before June 30th
PROPOSED: all features requests for PAQ to be submitted as issue before June 30th ←
19:35:05 <Luc> accepted: all features requests for PAQ to be submitted as issue before June 30th
RESOLVED: all features requests for PAQ to be submitted as issue before June 30th ←
19:35:08 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
19:35:28 <Zakim> - +1.805.893.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.805.893.aacc ←
19:35:36 <Dong> we break for lunch
we break for lunch ←
19:35:42 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo ←
20:02:15 <Zakim> + +1.805.893.aadd
(No events recorded for 26 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.805.893.aadd ←
20:02:19 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
20:02:21 <pgroth> we are back
Paul Groth: we are back ←
20:03:06 <dgarijo> It's getting late here in Spain, so I will leave now. Good bye!
Daniel Garijo: It's getting late here in Spain, so I will leave now. Good bye! ←
20:03:37 <Zakim> -dgarijo
Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo ←
20:03:42 <pgroth> thanks daniel
Paul Groth: thanks daniel ←
20:07:38 <pgroth> Topic: prov-sem
Summary: The group discussed the role of the semantics document, how it should be prioritized and who would contribute. It was clear that James would be the primary driver of the document and the group did not have much other expertise in the area. There was consensus that document was good to have but that because of the issue of group bandwidth that it should be put on a lower priority.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the role of the semantics document, how it should be prioritized and who would contribute. It was clear that James would be the primary driver of the document and the group did not have much other expertise in the area. There was consensus that document was good to have but that because of the issue of group bandwidth that it should be put on a lower priority.
20:07:50 <reza_bfar> Paul: we want to talk about the status of the semantics document
Paul Groth: we want to talk about the status of the semantics document [ Scribe Assist by Reza B'Far ] ←
20:08:28 <reza_bfar> jcheney: document itself was reconciled with the third working draft back in March or April and very little has been done since then.
James Cheney: document itself was reconciled with the third working draft back in March or April and very little has been done since then. [ Scribe Assist by Reza B'Far ] ←
20:08:32 <pgroth> @reza if you use tab you get the names of people
Paul Groth: @reza if you use tab you get the names of people ←
20:08:43 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsWD5
James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsWD5 ←
20:08:49 <Dong> Scribe: reza_bfar
(Scribe set to Reza B'Far)
20:09:41 <reza_bfar> jcheney: If we talk about bundles talking about SPARQL data sets, then there may be number of issues that force refactoring
James Cheney: If we talk about bundles talking about SPARQL data sets, then there may be number of issues that force refactoring ←
20:10:56 <reza_bfar> jcheney: would like to see what the group thinks needs to be published before making the final push to finishing
James Cheney: would like to see what the group thinks needs to be published before making the final push to finishing ←
20:10:57 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:11:07 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
20:11:11 <pgroth> ack lu
Paul Groth: ack lu ←
20:11:24 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsWD5#Semantics_of_Bundles_and_Contextualization
James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsWD5#Semantics_of_Bundles_and_Contextualization ←
20:11:52 <reza_bfar> luc: I haven't had the chance to look at Contextualization, but I see Semantics as important in the sense that in DM we've been intentionally loose with the definitions (English definitions as indicated in the charter)
Luc Moreau: I haven't had the chance to look at Contextualization, but I see Semantics as important in the sense that in DM we've been intentionally loose with the definitions (English definitions as indicated in the charter) ←
20:12:53 <reza_bfar> luc: I don't know what the message will be with the document. It could be many other possible semantic interpretation for DM. Is the message that this is the one and only one or is it that this is one of the possible interpretations?
Luc Moreau: I don't know what the message will be with the document. It could be many other possible semantic interpretation for DM. Is the message that this is the one and only one or is it that this is one of the possible interpretations? ←
20:13:29 <reza_bfar> jcheney: From the beginning the goal was to provide a rational as opposed to something that is the only way to think about things
James Cheney: From the beginning the goal was to provide a rational as opposed to something that is the only way to think about things ←
20:14:09 <reza_bfar> jcheney: one alternative is that if there is overlap with things that are in the constraints, we could move what's there in the semantics as an appendix to constraints.
James Cheney: one alternative is that if there is overlap with things that are in the constraints, we could move what's there in the semantics as an appendix to constraints. ←
20:14:13 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:14:43 <reza_bfar> jcheney: it would be good to have it somewhere close to the part of the recommendations that it is most relevant to.
James Cheney: it would be good to have it somewhere close to the part of the recommendations that it is most relevant to. ←
20:15:02 <reza_bfar> jcheney: We want people who would implement to pay close attention to it.
James Cheney: We want people who would implement to pay close attention to it. ←
20:15:27 <reza_bfar> luc: Should this be informative, not normative?
Luc Moreau: Should this be informative, not normative? ←
20:15:35 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:15:35 <reza_bfar> pgroth: you have to be very careful about that.
Paul Groth: you have to be very careful about that. ←
20:16:17 <reza_bfar> pgroth: scheduling forces: do we dump it, do we commit to it, or do we leave it for later?
Paul Groth: scheduling forces: do we dump it, do we commit to it, or do we leave it for later? ←
20:16:42 <reza_bfar> jcheney: Contextualization will be straight-forward to integrate, but need help.
James Cheney: Contextualization will be straight-forward to integrate, but need help. ←
20:17:08 <Paulo> q+
20:17:29 <reza_bfar> pgroth: I think it can wait till after the last call specially given that we have given overwhelming support for the constraints document and this is all a bit much for one person to do.
Paul Groth: I think it can wait till after the last call specially given that we have given overwhelming support for the constraints document and this is all a bit much for one person to do. ←
20:17:47 <reza_bfar> jcheney: There are not hundreds of developers emailing us and asking us about semantics
James Cheney: There are not hundreds of developers emailing us and asking us about semantics ←
20:18:27 <reza_bfar> jcheney: Correction - contextualization will not be easy to integrate...
James Cheney: Correction - contextualization will not be easy to integrate... ←
20:18:34 <pgroth> ack Paulo
Paul Groth: ack Paulo ←
20:19:10 <Curt> we've defined precedence of specs with DM on top
Curt Tilmes: we've defined precedence of specs with DM on top ←
20:19:39 <reza_bfar> luc: Within the context of the recommendation, these are the technical features that must be complied with to be comliant with the standard. We can't suddenly make it normative. This is decided by the charter.
Luc Moreau: Within the context of the recommendation, these are the technical features that must be complied with to be comliant with the standard. We can't suddenly make it normative. This is decided by the charter. ←
20:20:07 <reza_bfar> paulo: can we move to make something that is eventually normative?
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: can we move to make something that is eventually normative? ←
20:20:35 <reza_bfar> pgroth: We can make a number what are called Notes. These are referrencable documents for the community at large.
Paul Groth: We can make a number what are called Notes. These are referrencable documents for the community at large. ←
20:21:01 <reza_bfar> pgroth: You produce notes as a way to inform the commuinty about the WG thoughts as opposed to making things a standard.
Paul Groth: You produce notes as a way to inform the commuinty about the WG thoughts as opposed to making things a standard. ←
20:21:28 <reza_bfar> paulo: I'm more favorable to semantics that lead to 1 interpretation than those that can lead to multiple interpretations
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: I'm more favorable to semantics that lead to 1 interpretation than those that can lead to multiple interpretations ←
20:21:53 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:22:27 <reza_bfar> pgroth: At the last F2F, there was a huge discussion about the difficulties in rectifying proper provenance versus scruffy provenance
Paul Groth: At the last F2F, there was a huge discussion about the difficulties in rectifying proper provenance versus scruffy provenance ←
20:23:20 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:23:53 <reza_bfar> pgroth: No resolution. Plan to move forward is we still want to do this, but not the highest priority thing.
Paul Groth: No resolution. Plan to move forward is we still want to do this, but not the highest priority thing. ←
20:24:29 <reza_bfar> jcheney: if we really want to make this happen, we want additional resources than just James working on this or get a time extension.
James Cheney: if we really want to make this happen, we want additional resources than just James working on this or get a time extension. ←
20:24:30 <tlebo> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
20:25:11 <pgroth> ack tlebo
Paul Groth: ack tlebo ←
20:25:45 <reza_bfar> tlebo: I can't read the semantics document because I have no background in it and I don't understand it. But knowing that it is there gives our efforts some credibility. I also know that I've seen this kind of response when discussing Prov-O.
Timothy Lebo: I can't read the semantics document because I have no background in it and I don't understand it. But knowing that it is there gives our efforts some credibility. I also know that I've seen this kind of response when discussing Prov-O. ←
20:25:57 <reza_bfar> Seems to appease folks when they know those semantics exist.
Seems to appease folks when they know those semantics exist. ←
20:26:20 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
20:26:22 <reza_bfar> tlebo: Seems to appease folks when they know those semantics exist. For me, it's important to have that box checked.
Timothy Lebo: Seems to appease folks when they know those semantics exist. For me, it's important to have that box checked. ←
20:26:28 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
20:26:29 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:26:34 <pgroth> ack TomDN
Paul Groth: ack TomDN ←
20:26:52 <reza_bfar> TomDN: I have the same issue as tlebo. Do we have people who can review this document?
Tom De Nies: I have the same issue as tlebo. Do we have people who can review this document? ←
20:27:35 <reza_bfar> jcheney: You don't want to stick something like this out there without proper review.
James Cheney: You don't want to stick something like this out there without proper review. ←
20:27:59 <Paulo> q+
20:28:06 <reza_bfar> jcheney: For some sense, that is an argument for having it to be part of the process so that external folks with the right background can do the proper level of review.
James Cheney: For some sense, that is an argument for having it to be part of the process so that external folks with the right background can do the proper level of review. ←
20:28:37 <pgroth> ack Paulo
Paul Groth: ack Paulo ←
20:28:42 <reza_bfar> jcheney: Are there people within or outside of the group that can do the type of review needed?
James Cheney: Are there people within or outside of the group that can do the type of review needed? ←
20:29:13 <reza_bfar> jcheney: I will send out the presentations shared at the second F2F and send it out to the team.
James Cheney: I will send out the presentations shared at the second F2F and send it out to the team. ←
20:29:33 <reza_bfar> Paulo: I see some mismatches between the terms used in the semantics document and Prov-DM
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: I see some mismatches between the terms used in the semantics document and Prov-DM ←
20:29:56 <reza_bfar> jcheney: are there specific problems you see? Can you send me those?
James Cheney: are there specific problems you see? Can you send me those? ←
20:30:29 <reza_bfar> pgroth: when we get to the last call on Prov-DM, James - would you be willing to update the document?
Paul Groth: when we get to the last call on Prov-DM, James - would you be willing to update the document? ←
20:30:57 <reza_bfar> jcheney: I don't think anything will prop up in the semantics that will make us want to change DM.
James Cheney: I don't think anything will prop up in the semantics that will make us want to change DM. ←
20:31:23 <reza_bfar> pgroth: It seems more reasonable to investigate and discuss any potential mismatches off-line
Paul Groth: It seems more reasonable to investigate and discuss any potential mismatches off-line ←
20:32:08 <reza_bfar> Paulo: I still need to understand some definitions when I read the DM and Constraints document
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: I still need to understand some definitions when I read the DM and Constraints document ←
20:32:12 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:32:49 <reza_bfar> jcheney: if there are gaps where the semantics document is required for understanding DM or Constraints document, then issues should be raised against DM and constraints documents instead of making semantics document required.
James Cheney: if there are gaps where the semantics document is required for understanding DM or Constraints document, then issues should be raised against DM and constraints documents instead of making semantics document required. ←
20:33:37 <reza_bfar> luc: Ultimately, the problem is that there are dependencies between the documents and some are out-of-sync
Luc Moreau: Ultimately, the problem is that there are dependencies between the documents and some are out-of-sync ←
20:34:20 <reza_bfar> pgroth: the usual mechanism is that when you review a document that pops out at you, then you either email the mailing list or you raise an issue
Paul Groth: the usual mechanism is that when you review a document that pops out at you, then you either email the mailing list or you raise an issue ←
20:34:43 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
20:35:02 <reza_bfar> pgroth: Another way is that we have a mechanism to take feedback from the outside world. We synchronize things before releasing to the outside world.
Paul Groth: Another way is that we have a mechanism to take feedback from the outside world. We synchronize things before releasing to the outside world. ←
20:35:19 <pgroth> ack TomDN
Paul Groth: ack TomDN ←
20:35:42 <reza_bfar> TomDN: I don't think Paulo you need to worry about synchronization of documents. If you see a problem with a document, just raise an issue.
Tom De Nies: I don't think Paulo you need to worry about synchronization of documents. If you see a problem with a document, just raise an issue. ←
20:35:46 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
20:35:47 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:36:10 <reza_bfar> pgroth: James wants to know who can contribute to the semantics
Paul Groth: James wants to know who can contribute to the semantics ←
20:36:22 <reza_bfar> luc: I will do my best to contribute.
Luc Moreau: I will do my best to contribute. ←
20:36:55 <Paulo> I will also do my best to help with the semantics
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: I will also do my best to help with the semantics ←
20:37:16 <reza_bfar> jcheney: it would be much easier if we had people with formal backgrounds to review at least.
James Cheney: it would be much easier if we had people with formal backgrounds to review at least. ←
20:38:26 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:38:29 <reza_bfar> pgroth: Is anyone interested in semantics
Paul Groth: Is anyone interested in semantics ←
20:39:07 <reza_bfar> jcheney: I guess the conclusion is that if it slides, it slides.
James Cheney: I guess the conclusion is that if it slides, it slides. ←
20:39:40 <reza_bfar> jcheney: I'll do what i can.
James Cheney: I'll do what i can. ←
20:40:22 <reza_bfar> pgroth: I think that's a reasonable conclusion. The response is that it's a good idea and people like it, but we're running out of bandwidth
Paul Groth: I think that's a reasonable conclusion. The response is that it's a good idea and people like it, but we're running out of bandwidth ←
20:40:35 <reza_bfar> luc: for the record, Jan had some comments.
Luc Moreau: for the record, Jan had some comments. ←
20:40:44 <reza_bfar> jan (sp?)
jan (sp?) ←
20:41:07 <reza_bfar> pgroth: next up - time-table and planning
Paul Groth: next up - time-table and planning ←
20:41:08 <TomDN> (he was very positive)
Tom De Nies: (he was very positive) ←
20:41:25 <pgroth> Topic: timetable
Summary: The group reviewed the timetable from F2F2. The group agreed to request an extension to extend the group to end March 2013. The group agreed to vote on last call July 12 fro prov-dm and prov-o. The aim would be to get the documents out by Aug 1 with a 6 week review period. Oct 15 would be for CR and then publication before the Christmas break as PR.
<pgroth> Summary: The group reviewed the timetable from F2F2. The group agreed to request an extension to extend the group to end March 2013. The group agreed to vote on last call July 12 fro prov-dm and prov-o. The aim would be to get the documents out by Aug 1 with a 6 week review period. Oct 15 would be for CR and then publication before the Christmas break as PR.
20:41:48 <reza_bfar> pgroth: we should focus on last-call time-tables
Paul Groth: we should focus on last-call time-tables ←
20:42:04 <Luc> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An15kLxkaMA3dFVCWm9aREZFemNOYjlGQjdPRkdFZXc#gid=0
Luc Moreau: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An15kLxkaMA3dFVCWm9aREZFemNOYjlGQjdPRkdFZXc#gid=0 ←
20:42:49 <reza_bfar> pgroth - The draft for internal review of Prov-DM was 2 weeks late.
pgroth - The draft for internal review of Prov-DM was 2 weeks late. ←
20:43:40 <reza_bfar> pgroth: question is given that we have either addressed or resolved all technical results, how long will it take to produce another draft for review?
Paul Groth: question is given that we have either addressed or resolved all technical results, how long will it take to produce another draft for review? ←
20:44:29 <reza_bfar> luc: 3 key changes to make - 1. Dictionaries out. 2. Get contextualization sorted out 3. Clean up Influence\traced-to. For DM, I should be able to finish before end of next week
Luc Moreau: 3 key changes to make - 1. Dictionaries out. 2. Get contextualization sorted out 3. Clean up Influence\traced-to. For DM, I should be able to finish before end of next week ←
20:44:46 <reza_bfar> Luc: It would be good to have some people review the docs.
Luc Moreau: It would be good to have some people review the docs. ←
20:45:20 <reza_bfar> Luc: For Prov-N, I'm working on the hypothesis that Paolo can't help here so it would take a few days after that or maybe Paolo can help and it could happen at the same time.
Luc Moreau: For Prov-N, I'm working on the hypothesis that Paolo can't help here so it would take a few days after that or maybe Paolo can help and it could happen at the same time. ←
20:45:38 <reza_bfar> pgroth: July 5th? next call, but the one after that?
Paul Groth: July 5th? next call, but the one after that? ←
20:46:34 <reza_bfar> luc: 6/29 for Prov-DM and 7/4 for Prov-N
Luc Moreau: 6/29 for Prov-DM and 7/4 for Prov-N ←
20:47:39 <reza_bfar> pgroth: creating an updated spreadsheet as a copy
Paul Groth: creating an updated spreadsheet as a copy ←
20:49:52 <reza_bfar> tlebo: don't we agree that Contextualization is at risk?
Timothy Lebo: don't we agree that Contextualization is at risk? ←
20:50:01 <reza_bfar> pgroth: we agree on that, bu it would be better to rename and get it in.
Paul Groth: we agree on that, bu it would be better to rename and get it in. ←
20:50:29 <reza_bfar> luc: We could have contextualization as a topic for teleconference on Thursday
Luc Moreau: We could have contextualization as a topic for teleconference on Thursday ←
20:50:50 <reza_bfar> tlebo: Then, in addition to the ontology, I can do the narrative for bundle.
Timothy Lebo: Then, in addition to the ontology, I can do the narrative for bundle. ←
20:52:42 <reza_bfar> pgroth: can we vote on 7/12 to release as last call?
Paul Groth: can we vote on 7/12 to release as last call? ←
20:53:25 <reza_bfar> tlebo: I will have narrative done by 7/6
Timothy Lebo: I will have narrative done by 7/6 ←
20:53:34 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
20:53:36 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
20:53:40 <pgroth> ack Curt
Paul Groth: ack Curt ←
20:54:42 <reza_bfar> pgroth: Reviewers on DM have already reviewed DM and identified the defects so ideally, you don't have to do a full regression of the entire document
Paul Groth: Reviewers on DM have already reviewed DM and identified the defects so ideally, you don't have to do a full regression of the entire document ←
20:57:06 <reza_bfar> pgroth: given that, I would suggest that we move everything back a month
Paul Groth: given that, I would suggest that we move everything back a month ←
20:57:22 <reza_bfar> pgroth: we releae mid-July.
Paul Groth: we releae mid-July. ←
20:58:32 <reza_bfar> luc: we have to release by the end of July
Luc Moreau: we have to release by the end of July ←
20:59:27 <reza_bfar> luc: To simplify, let's assume the docs are out Aug 1st. That means that mid-sept we're at the end of review period.
Luc Moreau: To simplify, let's assume the docs are out Aug 1st. That means that mid-sept we're at the end of review period. ←
21:00:44 <reza_bfar> pgroth: from Ivan - 2 months for the PR to REC transition is fine.
Paul Groth: from Ivan - 2 months for the PR to REC transition is fine. ←
21:01:34 <reza_bfar> luc: my view is that may be we can get it out last week of July, but let's be safe and go for Aug 1st.
Luc Moreau: my view is that may be we can get it out last week of July, but let's be safe and go for Aug 1st. ←
21:02:16 <reza_bfar> luc: This means that Oct 15th would be the publication of the CR.
Luc Moreau: This means that Oct 15th would be the publication of the CR. ←
21:02:39 <reza_bfar> luc: we need to check with Ivan to make sure this is reasonable.
Luc Moreau: we need to check with Ivan to make sure this is reasonable. ←
21:03:07 <reza_bfar> luc: public review is 4 weeks after publication of CR so that would be Nov 15th.
Luc Moreau: public review is 4 weeks after publication of CR so that would be Nov 15th. ←
21:05:02 <reza_bfar> +q
+q ←
21:05:13 <reza_bfar> luc: does this work with your time-table Curt?
Luc Moreau: does this work with your time-table Curt? ←
21:06:13 <pgroth> reza_bfar: the amount of time seems fine
Reza B'Far: the amount of time seems fine [ Scribe Assist by Paul Groth ] ←
21:07:04 <reza_bfar> pgroth: after the last call announcement, we'll have a call for implementation, because we said we want it that. We don't necessarily have to have that if we can prove we have enough for exit criteria.
Paul Groth: after the last call announcement, we'll have a call for implementation, because we said we want it that. We don't necessarily have to have that if we can prove we have enough for exit criteria. ←
21:08:30 <reza_bfar> pgroth: According to Ivan - 2 months for the PR to REC transition is fine. Minimal voting period is 6 weeks.
Paul Groth: According to Ivan - 2 months for the PR to REC transition is fine. Minimal voting period is 6 weeks. ←
21:08:52 <reza_bfar> pgroth: ... if the voting includes a major holiday, then you add 2 weeks.
Paul Groth: ... if the voting includes a major holiday, then you add 2 weeks. ←
21:09:42 <reza_bfar> luc: I think this is the best guess we can make now.
Luc Moreau: I think this is the best guess we can make now. ←
21:09:56 <reza_bfar> luc: The best place we could save time, is CR.
Paul Groth: The best place we could save time, is CR. ←
21:10:33 <reza_bfar> s/luc/pgroth
21:10:43 <reza_bfar> +q
+q ←
21:11:24 <pgroth> ack reza_bfar
Paul Groth: ack reza_bfar ←
21:12:02 <reza_bfar> pgroth: I don't want implementation, development, etc. to go too far into 2013
Paul Groth: I don't want implementation, development, etc. to go too far into 2013 ←
21:12:50 <tlebo> q+ to ask what is happening between dec 15 PR publish and end of Feb?
Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask what is happening between dec 15 PR publish and end of Feb? ←
21:13:26 <reza_bfar> pgroth: we would be safe to go 2 years since typical charter goes for 2 years and we shot for 18 months to begin with.
Paul Groth: we would be safe to go 2 years since typical charter goes for 2 years and we shot for 18 months to begin with. ←
21:13:39 <reza_bfar> luc: so, let's make it end of March and that will be exactly 2 years
Luc Moreau: so, let's make it end of March and that will be exactly 2 years ←
21:14:43 <tlebo> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
21:14:55 <reza_bfar> pgroth: Let's talk about constraints.
Paul Groth: Let's talk about constraints. ←
21:16:00 <reza_bfar> jcheney: this entire conversation has reinforced that I want to stay away from recommendation as possible. I think it's feasible to have something for people by August. what makes me nervous is that there are some large gaps with unlike the other documents
James Cheney: this entire conversation has reinforced that I want to stay away from recommendation as possible. I think it's feasible to have something for people by August. what makes me nervous is that there are some large gaps with unlike the other documents ←
21:16:11 <reza_bfar> jcheney: I could write something that I'm happy with.
James Cheney: I could write something that I'm happy with. ←
21:16:42 <reza_bfar> jcheney: I think there is a pretty substantial risk that it will take longer if there is not consensus or if there are technical issues.
James Cheney: I think there is a pretty substantial risk that it will take longer if there is not consensus or if there are technical issues. ←
21:17:27 <reza_bfar> jcheney: It will also help me once the other documents are finalized
James Cheney: It will also help me once the other documents are finalized ←
21:19:24 <reza_bfar> luc: Are we going for 6 weeks or 4 weeks?
Luc Moreau: Are we going for 6 weeks or 4 weeks? ←
21:19:35 <reza_bfar> curt: In sync is better
Curt Tilmes: In sync is better ←
21:20:23 <reza_bfar> luc: that would mean last call review for constraints is 15th of Sept.
Luc Moreau: that would mean last call review for constraints is 15th of Sept. ←
21:20:59 <reza_bfar> pgroth: we need to decide what is the implementation of constraints?
Paul Groth: we need to decide what is the implementation of constraints? ←
21:21:42 <reza_bfar> pgroth: I would try to shorten the last call for review cycle.
Paul Groth: I would try to shorten the last call for review cycle. ←
21:21:52 <reza_bfar> jcheney: we better let people know this is coming.
James Cheney: we better let people know this is coming. ←
21:22:59 <reza_bfar> jcheney: if we think this is important, but there is a descent chance that we won't have a great product, then it's better to make it a note and not a recommendation.
James Cheney: if we think this is important, but there is a descent chance that we won't have a great product, then it's better to make it a note and not a recommendation. ←
21:23:14 <reza_bfar> jcheney: that's a likely out-come anyways
James Cheney: that's a likely out-come anyways ←
21:25:12 <reza_bfar> luc: what we can do (to be on the safe side) is to delay things by 2 weeks.
Luc Moreau: what we can do (to be on the safe side) is to delay things by 2 weeks. ←
21:25:35 <reza_bfar> pgroth: black-out period is week of 16th of July
Paul Groth: black-out period is week of 16th of July ←
21:26:29 <reza_bfar> pgroth: Dec 14th to Jan 2nd no publication
Paul Groth: Dec 14th to Jan 2nd no publication ←
21:27:46 <reza_bfar> break
break ←
21:41:29 <pgroth> beginning again
(No events recorded for 13 minutes)
Paul Groth: beginning again ←
21:41:37 <pgroth> Topic: Timetable for Notes
Summary: The group agreed that all Notes would be released for Last Call by Nov 1. The group agreed that an implementation report would be set-up by the end of September.
<pgroth> Summary: The group agreed that all Notes would be released for Last Call by Nov 1. The group agreed that an implementation report would be set-up by the end of September.
21:41:50 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
21:42:40 <reza_bfar> @pgroth: am I still the scribe?
@pgroth: am I still the scribe? ←
21:42:56 <Luc> scribe: zednik
(Scribe set to Stephan Zednik)
21:43:03 <pgroth> proposed: for all notes 1 Nov last call release Jan 15 final release
PROPOSED: for all notes 1 Nov last call release Jan 15 final release ←
21:43:04 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
21:43:13 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
21:43:26 <zednik> +1
+1 ←
21:43:38 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
21:43:50 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
21:43:59 <zednik> luc: caveat on prov-sem note, is best effort
Luc Moreau: caveat on prov-sem note, is best effort ←
21:44:12 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
21:44:24 <pgroth> accepted: for all notes 1 Nov last call release Jan 15 final release
RESOLVED: for all notes 1 Nov last call release Jan 15 final release ←
21:44:24 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
21:44:27 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
21:45:08 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
21:46:44 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
21:46:57 <zednik> luc: implementation TF members happy with questionnaire, CR exit criteria, implementation report plan settled by end of Sept.
Luc Moreau: implementation TF members happy with questionnaire, CR exit criteria, implementation report plan settled by end of Sept. ←
21:47:26 <zednik> luc: ^ above was a question
Luc Moreau: ^ above was a question ←
21:47:41 <pgroth> accepted: end of september for set-up of the implementation report (e.g. questionnaire, exit criteria, plan)
RESOLVED: end of september for set-up of the implementation report (e.g. questionnaire, exit criteria, plan) ←
21:48:01 <pgroth> Topic: Timetable next f2f
Summary: The group discussed the possibility of holding the next F2F meeting at the W3C's joint meeting in Lyon. A possibility of doing it at ISWC 2012 in boston was discussed. The group agreed to seek collocation with ISWC.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the possibility of holding the next F2F meeting at the W3C's joint meeting in Lyon. A possibility of doing it at ISWC 2012 in boston was discussed. The group agreed to seek collocation with ISWC.
21:49:09 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
21:49:12 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
21:49:13 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
21:49:28 <zednik> pgroth: W3C encourage another F2F 29 Oct. - 2 Nov in Leon, France
Paul Groth: W3C encourage another F2F 29 Oct. - 2 Nov in Leon, France ←
21:49:46 <reza_bfar> q+
Reza B'Far: q+ ←
21:49:47 <TomDN> (probably only relevant to me, but those are exactly the dates of ACM Multimedia in Japan)
Tom De Nies: (probably only relevant to me, but those are exactly the dates of ACM Multimedia in Japan) ←
21:49:51 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
21:50:04 <pgroth> ack reza_bfar
Paul Groth: ack reza_bfar ←
21:50:06 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
21:50:44 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
21:54:19 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
21:54:23 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
21:55:39 <zednik> pgroth: co-locating our next F2F meeting with ISWC in Boston (ISWC Nov 11 - 15) is a possibility
Paul Groth: co-locating our next F2F meeting with ISWC in Boston (ISWC Nov 11 - 15) is a possibility ←
21:56:19 <hook> http://iswc2012.semanticweb.org
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: http://iswc2012.semanticweb.org ←
21:57:03 <pgroth> proposed: seek to colocate next f2f with iswc 2012 in boston
PROPOSED: seek to colocate next f2f with iswc 2012 in boston ←
21:57:12 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
21:57:13 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
21:57:14 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
21:57:16 <CraigTrim> +1
Craig Trim: +1 ←
21:57:16 <jcheney> +1 (prefer to avoid 14th though)
James Cheney: +1 (prefer to avoid 14th though) ←
21:57:17 <zednik> +1
+1 ←
21:57:19 <tlebo> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
21:57:21 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
21:57:21 <reza_bfar> +1
Reza B'Far: +1 ←
21:57:38 <pgroth> accepted: seek to colocate next f2f with iswc 2012 in boston
RESOLVED: seek to colocate next f2f with iswc 2012 in boston ←
21:58:02 <GK_> I'm getting a bit concerned at what I'm reading about expanding the scope of PROV-AQ (WADL, PAQR) about 12:15 your time. I think it's too late to consider adding significant new material.
Graham Klyne: I'm getting a bit concerned at what I'm reading about expanding the scope of PROV-AQ (WADL, PAQR) about 12:15 your time. I think it's too late to consider adding significant new material. ←
21:58:41 <pgroth> topic: Messaging
Summary: The group discussed getting the word out about the last call and encouraging implementations. Curt agreed to engage the earth systems community. Paul agreed to make a page to track implementations of PROV as well as make overview slides available on the main wiki.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed getting the word out about the last call and encouraging implementations. Curt agreed to engage the earth systems community. Paul agreed to make a page to track implementations of PROV as well as make overview slides available on the main wiki.
21:58:56 <Curt> @gk -- there are issues to *consider* them
Curt Tilmes: @gk -- there are issues to *consider* them ←
21:59:08 <GK_> Also, the discussion of track-back - we don't have a spec yet.
Graham Klyne: Also, the discussion of track-back - we don't have a spec yet. ←
21:59:10 <zednik> pgroth: opportunity when sending out last calls to engage community
Paul Groth: opportunity when sending out last calls to engage community ←
21:59:21 <zednik> pgroth: ... having the right messaging is important
Paul Groth: ... having the right messaging is important ←
21:59:40 <Curt> @gk track-back also -- the issue is to consider it
Curt Tilmes: @gk track-back also -- the issue is to consider it ←
22:00:02 <GK> @curt I'm not aware of any issue to consider WADL - I thought I checked the issue list fairly recently
Graham Klyne: @curt I'm not aware of any issue to consider WADL - I thought I checked the issue list fairly recently ←
22:00:11 <zednik> pgroth: ... blog posts have been very helpful to the community
Paul Groth: ... blog posts have been very helpful to the community ←
22:00:16 <hook> q+
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: q+ ←
22:00:23 <TomDN> @GK the issues were raised today
Tom De Nies: @GK the issues were raised today ←
22:00:25 <reza_bfar> q+
Reza B'Far: q+ ←
22:00:29 <GK> ... and I thought we'd decided to defer track-back.
Graham Klyne: ... and I thought we'd decided to defer track-back. ←
22:00:30 <pgroth> ack luc
Paul Groth: ack luc ←
22:00:34 <zednik> pgroth: asking for new/fresh messaging ideas
Paul Groth: asking for new/fresh messaging ideas ←
22:00:59 <Curt> @gk wadl is issue 434
Curt Tilmes: @gk wadl is ISSUE-434 ←
22:01:15 <Zakim> - +1.805.893.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.805.893.aadd ←
22:02:12 <zednik> hook: domain specific communities can be used to evangelize use of prov (e.g. ESIP Fed, NASA ESDSWG)
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: domain specific communities can be used to evangelize use of prov (e.g. ESIP Fed, NASA ESDSWG) ←
22:02:22 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo ←
22:02:23 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)12:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)12:00PM has ended ←
22:02:23 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.805.893.aaaa, dgarijo, +1.805.893.aabb, +1.805.893.aacc, Satya_Sahoo, +1.805.893.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were +1.805.893.aaaa, dgarijo, +1.805.893.aabb, +1.805.893.aacc, Satya_Sahoo, +1.805.893.aadd ←
22:02:45 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)12:00PM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)12:00PM has now started ←
22:02:50 <pgroth> zakim, this will be prov
Paul Groth: zakim, this will be prov ←
22:02:50 <Zakim> ok, pgroth, I see SW_(PROV)12:00PM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pgroth, I see SW_(PROV)12:00PM already started ←
22:02:53 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
22:03:01 <Zakim> + +1.805.893.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.805.893.aaaa ←
22:03:10 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, make logs public ←
22:04:11 <Curt> even have a "PROV tutorial" there
Curt Tilmes: even have a "PROV tutorial" there ←
22:04:37 <pgroth> action: curt to engage esdwg community
ACTION: curt to engage esdwg community ←
22:04:37 <trackbot> Created ACTION-101 - Engage esdwg community [on Curt Tilmes - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-101 - Engage esdwg community [on Curt Tilmes - due 2012-06-30]. ←
22:06:04 <zednik> reza_bfar: is the messaging focused on provenance users or implementors?
Reza B'Far: is the messaging focused on provenance users or implementors? ←
22:06:52 <zednik> pgroth: messaging primarily aimed right now for potential implementors
Paul Groth: messaging primarily aimed right now for potential implementors ←
22:07:06 <hook> q+
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: q+ ←
22:07:09 <zednik> pgroth: also, we should be careful to not make the documents sounds too complicated
Paul Groth: also, we should be careful to not make the documents sounds too complicated ←
22:07:20 <pgroth> ack hook
Paul Groth: ack hook ←
22:07:50 <zednik> hook: should there be a coordinated effort to track domain-specific prov extensions?
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: should there be a coordinated effort to track domain-specific prov extensions? ←
22:09:14 <pgroth> action: pgroth to make available a overview slide on prov on the main page
ACTION: pgroth to make available a overview slide on prov on the main page ←
22:09:14 <trackbot> Created ACTION-102 - Make available a overview slide on prov on the main page [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-102 - Make available a overview slide on prov on the main page [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30]. ←
22:09:32 <zednik> pgroth: implementation report should track community vocabularies that extend prov
Paul Groth: implementation report should track community vocabularies that extend prov ←
22:10:13 <zednik> luc: we should maintain a messaging page to coordinate
Luc Moreau: we should maintain a messaging page to coordinate ←
22:10:16 <Dong> I guess we need manual ping back from the WG
Trung Huynh: I guess we need manual ping back from the WG ←
22:10:28 <pgroth> action: make a uses of prov wiki page
ACTION: make a uses of prov wiki page ←
22:10:28 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - make
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - make ←
22:10:40 <pgroth> action pgroth: make a uses of prov wiki page
Paul Groth: action pgroth: make a uses of prov wiki page ←
22:10:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-103 - Make a uses of prov wiki page [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-103 - Make a uses of prov wiki page [on Paul Groth - due 2012-06-30]. ←
22:11:26 <hook> @pgroth, how would overview slides be different from a subset of PROV tutorial slides at ISWC2012? should there be a consolidated list of known W3C PROV tutorial resources?
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Scribe problem: the name 'hook' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Hook Hua Hook Hua . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.
Unknown hook: @pgroth, how would overview slides be different from a subset of PROV tutorial slides at ISWC2012? should there be a consolidated list of known W3C PROV tutorial resources? ←
22:11:31 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
22:13:19 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo ←
22:13:22 <pgroth> trackbot end telcon
Paul Groth: trackbot end telcon ←
22:13:42 <pgroth> rrsagent make logs public
Paul Groth: rrsagent make logs public ←
22:14:03 <pgroth> rrsagent, set logs public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, set logs public ←
22:14:31 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
Paul Groth: trackbot, end telcon ←
22:14:31 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←
22:14:31 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Satya_Sahoo, +1.805.893.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Satya_Sahoo, +1.805.893.aaaa ←
22:14:39 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←
22:14:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-minutes.html trackbot
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-minutes.html trackbot ←
22:14:40 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> I see 10 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-prov-actions.rdf :
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 10 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-prov-actions.rdf : ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ivan to look at resolution on usage of a specific version of rdf datatypes. is it ok? what are the ramifications? [1]
ACTION: ivan to look at resolution on usage of a specific version of rdf datatypes. is it ok? what are the ramifications? [1] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-prov-irc#T22-58-55
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-prov-irc#T22-58-55 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ivan to check when we should do internationalization and how for PROV-N [2]
ACTION: ivan to check when we should do internationalization and how for PROV-N [2] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T00-12-01
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T00-12-01 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dgarijo to discuss note and make timetable and type of work with DC folks, when will it be done for final internal review? [3]
ACTION: dgarijo to discuss note and make timetable and type of work with DC folks, when will it be done for final internal review? [3] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T16-15-00
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T16-15-00 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: paul to seek advice on the mimetype for documents from w3c [4]
ACTION: paul to seek advice on the mimetype for documents from w3c [4] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T16-59-53
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T16-59-53 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: paul to run exit criteria pass the w3c team [5]
ACTION: paul to run exit criteria pass the w3c team [5] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T18-20-02
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T18-20-02 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: paul to ask about the notion of compliance to the w3c and its connection to the implementation report [6]
ACTION: paul to ask about the notion of compliance to the w3c and its connection to the implementation report [6] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T18-33-59
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T18-33-59 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: curt to engage esdwg community [7]
ACTION: curt to engage esdwg community [7] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-04-37
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-04-37 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth to make available a overview slide on prov on the main page [8]
ACTION: pgroth to make available a overview slide on prov on the main page [8] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-09-14
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-09-14 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: make a uses of prov wiki page [9]
ACTION: make a uses of prov wiki page [9] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-10-28
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-10-28 ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth to make a uses of prov wiki page [10]
ACTION: pgroth to make a uses of prov wiki page [10] ←
22:14:40 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-10-40
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/23-prov-irc#T22-10-40 ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#8) generated 2012-07-03 15:53:00 UTC by 'unknown', comments: None