Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
Chatlog 2012-09-06
From Provenance WG Wiki
See original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.
Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.
14:43:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov 14:43:03 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-irc 14:43:05 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world 14:43:05 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov 14:43:07 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 14:43:07 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:43:08 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference 14:43:08 <trackbot> Date: 06 September 2012 14:43:10 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV 14:43:11 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 17 minutes 14:43:22 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.09.06 14:44:01 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public 14:44:06 <Luc> chair: Luc Moreau 14:44:14 <Luc> Regrets: James Cheney, Timothy Lebo 14:51:48 <pgroth> pgroth has joined #prov 14:53:05 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov 14:54:37 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov 14:55:14 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started 14:55:20 <Zakim> +??P11 14:55:51 <smiles> zakim, ??P11 is me 14:55:53 <Zakim> +smiles; got it 14:57:11 <Luc> scribe: simon miles 14:58:12 <Zakim> + +44.238.059.aaaa 14:58:17 <Curt> Curt has joined #prov 14:58:26 <Luc> zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me 14:58:28 <Zakim> +Luc; got it 14:58:41 <TomDN> TomDN has joined #prov 14:58:42 <Zakim> +??P4 14:58:47 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes 14:58:49 <pgroth> Zakim, ??P4 is me 14:58:49 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it 14:59:22 <Dong> Dong has joined #prov 14:59:23 <Zakim> +Luc.a 14:59:33 <Luc> zakim, who is on the call? 14:59:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles, Luc, pgroth, Curt_Tilmes, Luc.a 15:00:39 <khalidBelhajjame> khalidBelhajjame has joined #prov 15:00:48 <Zakim> + +329331aabb 15:00:53 <Luc> topic: admin 15:00:59 <TomDN> zakim, +329 is me 15:00:59 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it 15:01:10 <TomDN> zakim, mute me 15:01:10 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted 15:01:19 <Zakim> +??P7 15:01:22 <satya> satya has joined #prov 15:01:38 <hook> hook has joined #prov 15:01:39 <Zakim> +??P16 15:01:45 <smiles> Luc: outlines agenda 15:01:50 <khalidBelhajjame> zakim, ??P16 is me 15:01:50 <Zakim> +khalidBelhajjame; got it 15:01:59 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has joined #prov 15:02:00 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov 15:02:01 <pgroth> Zakim, who is loud? 15:02:01 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, pgroth. 15:02:04 <TomDN> zakim, who is noisy? 15:02:04 <Luc> proposed: to approve Minutes of the Aug 9, 2012 Telecon 15:02:12 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo 15:02:15 <Zakim> TomDN, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (28%), khalidBelhajjame (19%) 15:02:19 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aacc 15:02:20 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-08-09 15:02:24 <TomDN> +1 15:02:24 <Curt> +1 15:02:32 <SamCoppens> +1 15:02:35 <satya> +1 15:02:36 <khalidBelhajjame> +1 15:02:41 <TomDN> zakim, samcoppens is with tomdn 15:02:41 <Zakim> +samcoppens; got it 15:02:44 <hook> +1 15:02:45 <smiles> +1 15:02:47 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip 15:02:47 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made 15:02:48 <Zakim> +Ivan 15:02:48 <stainPhone> stainPhone has joined #prov 15:02:49 <Paolo> 0 (not attended) 15:03:00 <Luc> accepted: Minutes of the Aug 9, 2012 Telecon 15:03:07 <stainPhone> 0 15:03:10 <Zakim> +??P13 15:03:27 <smiles> Luc: open actions for Paulo and Paul 15:03:35 <GK> GK has joined #prov 15:03:48 <Zakim> +??P3 15:03:51 <GK> zakim, ??p13 is me 15:03:51 <Zakim> +GK; got it 15:03:51 <smiles> Paul: Not yet done overview slide for Wiki 15:03:57 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software 15:04:02 <Luc> Topic: F2F4 <Luc>Summary: The group agreed to co-locate the fourth face to face meeting with ISWC'12, in Boston. F2F4 will take place on November 9-10, MIT CS department, details to follow. 15:04:02 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me 15:04:02 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it 15:04:04 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me 15:04:04 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted 15:04:32 <smiles> Luc: Idea to co-locate F2F4 with ISWC 15:04:38 <Luc> November 9 - 10, 2012 15:04:44 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aadd 15:05:04 <smiles> ... available before ISWC workshops/tutorials, 9-10 15:05:17 <Luc> q? 15:05:20 <smiles> ... any blocking reasons against? 15:05:26 <stainPhone> Zakim, +44.789.470.aadd is me 15:05:26 <Zakim> +stainPhone; got it 15:05:47 <pgroth> +q 15:05:50 <Luc> q? 15:05:53 <Luc> ack pg 15:05:53 <smiles> Luc: Vote or just accept those dates? 15:06:06 <Zakim> -TomDN 15:06:09 <smiles> Paul: Don't think we need a vote, but need sign-up page 15:06:16 <pgroth> yes 15:06:43 <Luc> ACCEPTED: F2F4 will take place in Boston, on November 9 - 10, 2012 15:06:55 <Zakim> -??P7 15:06:56 <Zakim> +TomDN 15:07:00 <smiles> Luc: details available later, but hosted at MIT 15:07:04 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me 15:07:04 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted 15:07:07 <Zakim> +??P25 15:07:11 <smiles> Ivan: at Computer Science 15:07:14 <Luc> q? 15:07:15 <TomDN> Zakim, samcoppens is with tomdn 15:07:15 <Zakim> +samcoppens; got it 15:07:16 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov 15:07:17 <Paolo> zakim, ??P25 is me 15:07:17 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it 15:07:24 <smiles> Luc: questions about F2F4? 15:07:27 <pgroth> action: paul to set-up web page f2f4 15:07:27 <trackbot> Created ACTION-104 - Set-up web page f2f4 [on Paul Groth - due 2012-09-13]. 15:07:29 <jun> jun has joined #prov 15:07:33 <Luc> topic: prov-constraints <Luc> Summary: Since the last teleconference, the editors of the prov-constraints document have addressed the remaining technical issues. The group voted for the release of prov-constraints as a last call working draft. The end of the review period is set to October 10, 2012. Paolo will initiate the drafting of a blog. Congratulations to the group for releasing LCWDs for all the deliverables on recommendation track. 15:07:40 <pgroth> Zakim, who is noisy? 15:07:47 <Zakim> +??P7 15:07:50 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (54%) 15:07:57 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P7 is me 15:07:57 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it 15:07:58 <smiles> Luc: At last telecon, we looked at remaining technical issues on the document 15:08:00 <GK> (I assume MIT is easily accessible from the ISWC and/or downtown location?) 15:08:02 <Zakim> +??P27 15:08:09 <jun> zakim, ??p27 is me 15:08:09 <Zakim> +jun; got it 15:08:23 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Aug/0228.html 15:08:24 <stainPhone> @gk yes, metro from downtown 15:08:25 <smiles> ... work was done over August 15:08:44 <Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/Overview.html 15:08:46 <smiles> ... distributed link above for feedback (seems good so far) 15:08:53 <pgroth> Zakim, who is noisy? 15:09:05 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (73%), Paolo (89%) 15:09:12 <MacTed> Zakim, mute Paolo 15:09:12 <Zakim> Paolo should now be muted 15:09:28 <Paolo> sorry -- new VOIP client 15:09:37 <smiles> ... before formal vote, is there any comment on the document? 15:09:38 <Luc> q? 15:09:47 <ivan> q+ 15:09:52 <Luc> q? 15:10:18 <smiles> Ivan: one thread of discussion on terminology alignment of "top-level bundles". What is current status? 15:10:53 <smiles> Luc: Top-level bundle introduced in PROV-N, not part of PROV-DM 15:11:02 <stainPhone> q+ 15:11:09 <smiles> ... it is the structure of the complete document you would write in PROV-N 15:11:09 <ivan> ack ivan 15:11:27 <smiles> ... "top-level bundle" was not adequate term, because it is not a bundle 15:11:50 <smiles> ... James suggested talking about a "PROV document" instead, and this is adopted in PROV Constraints 15:12:10 <smiles> ... PROV documents can contain PROV statements or bundles 15:12:30 <smiles> ... In context of PROV-N, will propose that will align terminology to also use PROV document 15:12:30 <Luc> ack ivan 15:12:55 <smiles> stian: Thank you to the editor for addressing the issues I raised 15:13:10 <smiles> Luc: Also thank you and other reviewers for quality of reviews 15:13:12 <Luc> q? 15:13:14 <Luc> ack st 15:13:30 <Luc> PROPOSED: publish PROV-Constraints as Last Call Working Draft 15:13:41 <smiles> +1 15:13:42 <MacTed> +1 15:13:44 <stainPhone> +1 15:13:46 <ivan> +1 15:13:49 <khalidBelhajjame> +1 (University of Manchester) 15:13:51 <TomDN> +1 (IBBT) 15:13:53 <Curt> +1 (NASA) 15:13:55 <Paolo> +1 Newcastle University 15:13:57 <zednik> +1 (RPI) 15:13:57 <pgroth> +1 (VU University Amsterdam) 15:13:57 <SamCoppens> +1 (IBBT) 15:13:58 <satya> +1, Invited expert (CWRU) 15:13:58 <smiles> (invited expert, King's College London) 15:13:59 <GK> +1 Oxford U 15:14:03 <hook> +1 (IE) 15:14:07 <MacTed> (OpenLink Software) 15:14:08 <dgarijo> +1 (UPM) 15:14:12 <Luc> +1 (University of Southampton) 15:14:25 <stainPhone> (univ of Manchester as well) 15:14:33 <jun> +1 15:14:41 <Luc> Accepted: to publish PROV-Constraints as Last Call Working Draft 15:14:51 <pgroth> +q 15:15:24 <smiles> Luc: When are we going to release the document? And what is the review period? 15:15:27 <pgroth> q- 15:15:46 <pgroth> q+ 15:15:57 <smiles> ... Editors do not intend to make any changes, can prepare for release next Tuesday pending webmaster approval 15:16:05 <smiles> ... Release date 11 September 15:16:27 <smiles> ... Propose review period closes 10 October 15:17:05 <ivan> +10000 to Paul 15:17:09 <smiles> Paul: Have to also consider some blog post to go with document, it is heavy duty and needs context to interpret 15:17:22 <smiles> ... Who will write the post? 15:17:59 <smiles> Luc: Paolo, would you have bandwidth to draft blog entry? 15:18:00 <Paolo> zakim, unmute me 15:18:00 <Zakim> Paolo should no longer be muted 15:18:02 <ivan> q+ 15:18:10 <pgroth> q+ 15:18:39 <pgroth> i can then polish 15:18:46 <smiles> Paolo: Can try to first draft something tomorrow 15:18:53 <Luc> q? 15:18:53 <smiles> Luc: I could then work on it on Monday 15:19:06 <smiles> Paul: That's fine and can also run by me 15:19:08 <Luc> ack pgro 15:19:09 <ivan> q- 15:19:54 <Luc> q? 15:19:56 <pgroth> nice one everyone 15:20:00 <ivan> q+ 15:20:02 <smiles> Luc: Any other comments on constraints? 15:20:30 <smiles> Ivan: Reminder that we should finalise the timetable tomorrow 15:20:51 <Luc> ack iv 15:21:17 <smiles> Ivan: should become synchronised with other documents 15:21:21 <Luc> topic: Implementing constraints with SW technologies <Luc> Summary: There was a discussion on how much time should be spent on designing/discussing the implementation of prov-constraints using Semantic Web technologies such as OWL. It was agreed (see resolution) that the actual implementation is not to be carried out by the Working Group, but by its participants. Of course, we welcome interoperable implementations of constraints, and several individuals have indicated their intent to work on this. The PROV-WG will focus on defining what it means to be an inter-operable implementation of constraints, and will consider defining test suites. 15:21:58 <smiles> Paul: We have noticed that there is discussion around implementing constraints using SW tech 15:22:08 <smiles> ... great, but not part of the WG's responsibility 15:22:50 <smiles> ... should be done by individuals if interested, but implementation should not be done in WG time, cannot respond to all questions 15:22:56 <ivan> q+ 15:23:00 <smiles> ... encouraged but outside WG 15:23:37 <zednik> q+ 15:23:45 <ivan> ack ivan 15:23:46 <GK> I agree with Paul here, but I also note that we'll need interoperable implementations for REC track progress? 15:23:58 <smiles> Ivan: Agreed that deliverables need to be delivered, but if work is done WG might decide to publish in W3C Notes and could be valuable 15:24:15 <khalidBelhajjame> @Paul, agreed. With Jun and Stian, we decided to specify the constraints (that are speciable within OWL), outside the context of the working group 15:24:35 <Luc> q? 15:24:39 <smiles> Luc: Yes, are very keen for implementation of constraints using SW tech, but concerned about using WG bandwidth and mission creep 15:24:49 <zednik> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGM4cXZYMk0xaFBDT2VyRV92YkY5WkE6MQ 15:24:59 <Paolo> q+ 15:25:01 <smiles> zednik: Added constraints implementation section to implementation questionanire 15:25:07 <ivan> ack zednik 15:25:27 <smiles> .. not intended to be saying we will be creating these implementation, but part of implementation report 15:26:33 <pgroth> +q 15:26:33 <smiles> Paolo: Agree not done on WG time, but cannot claim have reference implementation without compliance validator 15:26:39 <Luc> q? 15:26:42 <satya> q+ 15:26:42 <Luc> ack pao 15:26:56 <Luc> ack pg 15:27:13 <pgroth> mute paolo 15:27:18 <MacTed> Zakim, mute pa 15:27:18 <Zakim> Paolo should now be muted 15:27:51 <smiles> Paul: Implement both specs, and if don't have implementations then spec can't be approved as recommendation 15:27:51 <stainPhone> @paolo, yes, our (khalid/jun) intent is to do what can practically be done in owl 15:27:55 <Luc> q? 15:27:57 <Paolo> agree -- and that's why Khalid's qualification worried me 15:28:28 <ivan> q+ 15:28:33 <stainPhone> As owl is not a constraint language 15:28:34 <ivan> ack satya 15:28:37 <smiles> satya: When talking about implementations/validators, are we talking about conforming to PROV-O or to constraints? 15:28:39 <GK> Hmmm... I thought we needed (interoperable) implementations of each feature rather than a "reference implementation" 15:28:41 <khalidBelhajjame> Just to clarify, within OWL, we will not aim to implement all constraints but only the one that are easy to express within OWL 15:28:56 <stainPhone> @gk +1 15:29:00 <smiles> Luc: We are talking about conforming to constraints, validity is not in scope of WG 15:29:04 <jun> @paolo, my understanding that exploring OWL for the implementation is our first step, to see what can be implemented in OWL and what can't 15:29:16 <Luc> q? 15:29:33 <Luc> ack ivan 15:29:50 <smiles> Ivan: What we in general need is not a reference implementation of everything, but interoperable implementation for each feature 15:30:22 <Paolo> @ khalidBelhajjame, jun I am doing the same in the deductive programming space, but there are unknown -- hence the difficulty to committing to a deliverable 15:30:27 <smiles> ... but more general point, what do we really mean by the implementation of the particular document or the whole PROV enivronment? 15:30:46 <smiles> ... no fixed rules, but need to show world this is not just a paper exercise and can be put into practice 15:31:05 <smiles> ... not clear what this means for constraints document in relation to other documents 15:31:13 <Luc> q? 15:31:16 <Luc> q+ 15:31:25 <smiles> ... will need to be clear when we present to the management 15:31:57 <smiles> Luc: Not discussed yet, and may be an item of discussion of implementation report skeleton 15:32:15 <stainMobile> stainMobile has joined #prov 15:32:15 <smiles> ... WG will have to identify features to implement in constraints document (e.g. type checking) 15:32:35 <smiles> ... Question is then how we demonstrate whether this is implemented properly 15:32:45 <smiles> ... In my own implementation, am using test cases 15:32:53 <Luc> q- 15:33:07 <smiles> Ivan: For me, test cases is very much what I would like to see 15:33:15 <smiles> Luc: Discussion of test cases are in scope of WG 15:33:16 <Luc> q? 15:33:58 <smiles> Luc: We want to come up with an agreement that we will not spend WG time defining constraints in SW technologies 15:34:00 <pgroth> @stefan can I get edit access to the implementation questionnaire? 15:34:00 <Luc> PROPOSED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed 15:34:03 <GK> (Test cases are a good way to illustrate the consequences of specified features.) 15:34:30 <Luc> q? 15:34:38 <GK> +1 15:34:39 <Zakim> -stainPhone 15:34:46 <jun> +1 15:34:49 <satya> seems reasonable 15:34:49 <dgarijo> +1 15:34:52 <smiles> +1 15:34:52 <satya> +1 15:34:52 <TomDN> +1 15:34:55 <ivan> +1 15:34:58 <SamCoppens> +1 15:34:58 <khalidBelhajjame> +1 15:34:59 <hook> +1 15:34:59 <Curt> +1 15:34:59 <MacTed> +1 15:35:13 <Paolo> +1 15:35:22 <Luc> ACCEPTED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed 15:35:49 <Luc> topic: Public Comments <Luc>Summary: We are still hoping for further feedback on the specifications recently released. The release of prov-constraints as LCWD presents us with a good opportunity to send kind reminders to our various contacts. Editors have now to tackle public comments and initiate discussions by email. 15:36:09 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/ 15:36:49 <smiles> Paul: We had a number of public comments, one needs cutting up, some we've started discussing 15:37:19 <smiles> ... All can be handled, but maybe we should readvertise to get more comments 15:37:30 <Luc> should we take the opportunity to ask for feedback as we release prov-constraints? 15:37:51 <Luc> q? 15:38:01 <smiles> Luc: comments? 15:38:04 <pgroth> in particular on advertising? 15:38:34 <pgroth> +q 15:38:36 <smiles> Luc: Now we've released constraints document, we can take the opportunity to go back to groups and individuals to get feedback on that 15:38:52 <Luc> q? 15:38:59 <smiles> ... then editors need to go through comments one by one and address 15:39:00 <pgroth> ack pgroth 15:39:16 <smiles> ... Ivan, you said RDF group would give us feedback but not received yet 15:39:41 <smiles> Ivan: Will prompt again, have discussion paper but not yet dealt with 15:39:51 <Luc> q? 15:39:51 <pgroth> talking to guus is difficult 15:40:18 <smiles> Luc: Once constraints document out, easy to get back to them 15:40:27 <pgroth> sure 15:40:29 <Luc> q? 15:40:37 <pgroth> zakim, who is noisy? 15:40:40 <Luc> topic: Implementation Report Skeleton <Luc>Summary: Stephan updated us on the form to be completed by implementers. The group is invited to send comments on the mailing list. Paul, Stephan, and Dong are going to produce a first version of the implementation report skeleton by the next teleconference. 15:40:48 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (30%) 15:40:57 <smiles> Luc: Now time to think about structure of this report 15:41:15 <smiles> ... identifying kinds of feedback expected from implementors 15:41:31 <stainMobile> stainMobile has joined #prov 15:41:56 <smiles> zednik: Have gone through and updated skeleton, Paolo will update actual questionairres 15:42:11 <smiles> s/Paolo/Paul 15:42:11 <Luc> s/Paolo/Paul 15:42:47 <smiles> Paul: Currently based on SKOS, If we decide we need to test cases that might change this 15:42:51 <Luc> q? 15:43:21 <smiles> Luc: Have you received feedback on questionnaire? 15:43:31 <smiles> zednik: Not yet, but good opportunity to now re-ask 15:43:51 <Dong> @Paul: I can help with the implementation report as well 15:43:57 <smiles> Luc: Will make clear in minutes summary, please send an email again with link to questionnaire 15:44:09 <Luc> q? 15:44:44 <Luc> action on Paul to draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires 15:44:44 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - on 15:44:49 <pgroth> +q 15:44:55 <Luc> action on pgroth to draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires 15:44:55 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - on 15:45:07 <hook> hook has joined #prov 15:45:08 <pgroth> action: pgroth draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires 15:45:08 <trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - Draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires [on Paul Groth - due 2012-09-13]. 15:45:28 <Luc> q? 15:45:40 <smiles> Paul: Ivan, have Google questionnaire, does it need to be a W3C poll? 15:45:40 <Luc> ack pgr 15:46:01 <smiles> Ivan: Questionnaire is just for activity of group, not deliverable? 15:46:28 <smiles> Paul: Yes. Easy to collect by web poll 15:46:49 <pgroth> ok 15:46:51 <smiles> ... Will copy part of result of poll into implementation report 15:46:55 <Luc> q? 15:47:03 <smiles> Ivan: Yes, that's OK. How you collected data is your business 15:47:13 <pgroth> ok 15:47:30 <stainMobile> stainMobile has joined #prov 15:47:58 <smiles> Ivan: RDFa had many tests, running on site outside of W3C, but results collected into static page on W3C as implementation report 15:48:06 <pgroth> yes 15:48:13 <Luc> q? 15:48:26 <Luc> q? 15:48:40 <Luc> Topic:PROV-XML <Luc>Summary: The prov-xml subgroup has been writing examples according to the draft schema and has been raising issues on the tracker. The issues are mostly about aligning the prov-xml schema with the latest prov-dm. In line with the resolution on constraints, implementation of constraints for prov-xml is left to individual members. Version 1 of the XML schema is planned to be released by the next teleconference. The issue of prov:type (ISSUE-493) was briefly mentioned at the end of the call. More email discussion is required. 15:49:03 <smiles> Luc: Some emails sent, issues raised, what is the progess? 15:49:30 <smiles> zednik: Split up DM terms and encoded in XML schema, published and raised issues 15:49:42 <smiles> ... Reza has been working on implementation at Oracle 15:50:38 <smiles> ... also interested in constraints, and had a side discussion on this, decided not to pursue as part of WG but instead side-activity at Oracle or NASA for implementation report 15:51:00 <smiles> ... looked into Schematron and XSD inadequate for expressing constraints 15:51:16 <hook> Schematrons have been used by ISO working groups for constraints checks 15:51:23 <smiles> ... For schema, implemented almost all terms and should not be too many issues raised 15:51:27 <Curt> q+ 15:51:28 <Luc> q? 15:51:53 <Luc> ack cur 15:52:06 <Luc> @curt +1 15:52:09 <smiles> Curt: Most of the issues are minor inconsistencies, and inclined to take from DM and make XML match, even copying non-normative language 15:52:40 <Luc> q? 15:52:42 <hook> We also tried to sync the XML examples with the PROV-DM examples. 15:52:45 <smiles> Luc: Schema was still a bit behind DM, and issues raised are good 15:53:14 <smiles> hook: We also tried to make XML examples match one-to-one those in DM document 15:53:31 <pgroth> +q to ask about prove xml html 15:53:33 <Luc> q? 15:53:39 <smiles> ... this forces us to make sure DM is in sync with XSD (and PROV-O) 15:54:03 <smiles> Paul: Is editors draft of document on XML up to date, can be looked at? Or just XSD? 15:54:09 <pgroth> ok 15:54:13 <Curt> agreed -- not ready 15:54:15 <smiles> zednik: XSD up to date, not the document 15:54:15 <Luc> ack pg 15:54:16 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask about prove xml html 15:54:48 <smiles> Luc: When can say have version 1 of XML schema? 15:54:57 <Curt> I'll address the issues I've raised by this weekend 15:55:02 <smiles> zednik: Need to ensure no open issues, but pretty close 15:55:20 <smiles> ... aim for Tuesday/Wednesday next week 15:55:25 <Luc> action stephan to produce version 1 of xml schema 15:55:25 <trackbot> Sorry, ambiguous username (more than one match) - stephan 15:55:25 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. estephan, szednik) 15:55:36 <Luc> action zednik to produce version 1 of xml schema 15:55:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Produce version 1 of xml schema [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-09-13]. 15:56:10 <smiles> Luc: Can come back to at next week's telecon 15:56:51 <smiles> ... PROV-O spent long time looking at tools to convert their schema into HTML document 15:57:19 <pgroth> +q 15:58:01 <smiles> Paul: On the editors draft, there is an XSD/HTML document, who created? 15:58:12 <smiles> Luc: I created 15:58:18 <Luc> q? 15:58:57 <Curt> q+ 15:58:57 <pgroth> ack pgroth 15:59:01 <smiles> Paul: We said that for the XML, we wouldnt worry about the verbiage around the schema, right? Just need schema 15:59:25 <smiles> Luc: Want to minimise work, but need something readable. Can extract lots of text from DM document 15:59:53 <pgroth> sure 16:00:00 <smiles> Luc: Paul and I will identify editor(s) for this document 16:00:00 <Luc> q? 16:00:23 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo 16:00:27 <Luc> ack cur 16:00:40 <smiles> Curt: Considered adding links to anchors in XSD HTML document to link to DM, rather than copy 16:00:54 <Luc> q? 16:01:13 <hook> hook has joined #prov 16:01:28 <smiles> Luc: XML schema editors, are there specific issues you want to discuss? 16:01:32 <Zakim> -??P3 16:01:35 <zednik_> zednik_ has joined #prov 16:01:37 <zednik_> sorry, disconnected 16:01:59 <Zakim> +??P6 16:02:00 <Luc> q? 16:02:41 <smiles> zednik: Issue on representing prov:type 16:03:16 <smiles> ... Type of prov:type is defined as a value (effectively a literal) 16:03:26 <smiles> ... Consequence is that 42 is a prov:type, etc. 16:03:33 <smiles> ... Is that what we want? 16:03:58 <Luc> q? 16:04:06 <Curt> zednik: could discuss prov:Agent vs. prov:Person too? (or is that resolved?) 16:04:11 <smiles> ... In XSD would be xsd:anySimpleType, not constraints 16:04:22 <pgroth> +q 16:04:24 <zednik_> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/493 16:05:17 <smiles> Paul: QName would improve interop, but are there examples where you don't want than (Java package names?) 16:05:41 <smiles> Luc: DM contains examples of types that are just strings 16:06:00 <stainMobile> stainMobile has joined #prov 16:06:07 <zednik_> @curt raise as an issue 16:06:28 <smiles> Luc: Will not resolve issue now, but is important as has potential impact on DM, so suggest continue over email and will revisit 16:06:37 <TomDN> bye 16:06:39 <ivan> bye everyone 16:06:39 <jun> bye 16:06:40 <Dong> Thanks, bye 16:06:41 <Zakim> -Paolo 16:06:42 <SamCoppens> bye 16:06:42 <Zakim> -TomDN 16:06:42 <pgroth> congrats - another last call 16:06:43 <Zakim> -dgarijo 16:06:43 <Zakim> -jun 16:06:44 <pgroth> bye 16:06:45 <Zakim> -Ivan 16:06:46 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes 16:06:46 <zednik_> bye 16:06:46 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has left #prov 16:06:46 <khalidBelhajjame> bye 16:06:48 <Zakim> -smiles 16:06:49 <Zakim> -pgroth 16:06:49 <Zakim> -Luc 16:06:51 <Zakim> -khalidBelhajjame 16:06:51 <Zakim> -MacTed 16:06:53 <Zakim> -??P6 16:06:56 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public 16:06:59 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aacc #16:07:01 <Zakim> -Luc.a 16:07:02 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes 16:07:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-minutes.html Luc 16:07:06 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon 16:07:06 <trackbot> Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help # SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC. DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW. SRCLINESUSED=00000452