Minutes of April 4 Telcon were approved
PR voting by W3C members closed. Votes were all positive except for 1 abstention.
Editors were asked to update http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PublicationRequestApril30 with information for the final publication request.
All recommendations are staged. The group was asked to perform a sanity check on the documents (typos, grammar, missing links, etc). James, Simon, Khalid, Dong, Satya agreed to perform the check.
Discussion of status of prov-aq. There were no blocking issues but changes were still being implemented and acknowledgments need to be provided. The group voted to release the document as a working group note.
Noted that the primer was already voted to be published as a working group note at the last telco.
For PROV-Links, Luc addressed all the suggestions and responded to reviewers. The group voted to publish PROV-Links as a working group note.
The group voted to publish prov-implemenations as a working group note
Discussion about the blocking issues from Stian on prov-dc. In particular, a discussion was had about whether dct:isVersionOf is equivalent to prov:wasRevisionOf. Stian was asked to provide examples of the case where this is not the case. In addition, there was a discussion about whether dct:references should be a sub-property of Influence. The argument was made that this is not following our recommended practice of not using influence. On the other hand, there was an argument that being a sub-property of derivation was too much ontological commitment. Stian agreed not to block on leaving dct:references as a sub-property of prov:wasDerivedFrom.
a vote on prov-dictionary wad delayed until next week.
The group voted to publish PROV-SEM as a working group note.
Changes are still being processed. It was decided to delay the vote until next week.
Paul asked for a quick review of prov-overview. James and Daniel agreed to have a look.
editors should check whether the provenance produced by Luc is correct for their documents.
The editors were asked to ensure that all issues in the tracker were addressed is some fashion. There were several issues in the tracker around the best practice cook-book. Tim was actioned to look at these issues.
14:56:06 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/04/11-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/04/11-prov-irc ←
14:56:08 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:56:10 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV
Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
14:56:10 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes ←
14:56:10 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be PROV
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
14:56:11 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:56:11 <trackbot> Date: 11 April 2013
14:56:12 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes ←
14:56:18 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.04.11
14:56:28 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
14:56:56 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public ←
14:57:15 <Luc> Regrets: Ivan Herman, Tom De Nies, Sam Coppens
14:57:32 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started ←
14:57:33 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public ←
14:57:39 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:57:40 <Luc> Topic: Admin
Summary: Minutes of April 4 Telcon were approved
<pgroth> Summary: Minutes of April 4 Telcon were approved
14:57:48 <Zakim> +CraigTrim
Zakim IRC Bot: +CraigTrim ←
14:57:50 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPCaller] is me
Paul Groth: Zakim, [IPCaller] is me ←
14:57:50 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgroth; got it ←
14:59:09 <Zakim> +??P9
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9 ←
14:59:37 <Zakim> +??P13
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13 ←
14:59:45 <stain> Zakim, ??P9 is stain
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, ??P9 is stain ←
14:59:45 <Zakim> +stain; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +stain; got it ←
14:59:56 <stain> Zakim, ??P9 is also khalid
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, ??P9 is also khalid ←
14:59:57 <Zakim> +jcheney
Zakim IRC Bot: +jcheney ←
14:59:57 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P9 is also khalid', stain
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '??P9 is also khalid', stain ←
15:00:07 <smiles> ??P13 is smiles
Simon Miles: ??P13 is smiles ←
15:00:14 <smiles> zakim, ??P13 is smiles
Simon Miles: zakim, ??P13 is smiles ←
15:00:15 <Zakim> +smiles; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +smiles; got it ←
15:01:35 <stain> Zakim, stain is with khalid
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, stain is with khalid ←
15:01:35 <Zakim> sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named 'khalid'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named 'khalid' ←
15:02:06 <Luc> hi, scribe is required please
Luc Moreau: hi, scribe is required please ←
15:02:09 <stain> Zakim, stain is with Khalid Belhajjame
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, stain is with Khalid Belhajjame ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> I don't understand 'stain is with Khalid Belhajjame', stain
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'stain is with Khalid Belhajjame', stain ←
15:02:13 <Zakim> +Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc ←
15:02:20 <smiles> I can scribe today
Simon Miles: I can scribe today ←
15:02:24 <Luc> thanks simon
Luc Moreau: thanks simon ←
15:02:27 <Luc> scribe: smiles
(Scribe set to Simon Miles)
15:03:01 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
15:03:08 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P112 is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P112 is me ←
15:03:08 <Zakim> sorry, dgarijo, I do not recognize a party named '??P112'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, dgarijo, I do not recognize a party named '??P112' ←
15:03:13 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P12 is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P12 is me ←
15:03:13 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it ←
15:03:23 <Luc> Proposed: to approve the minutes of last week's teleconference
PROPOSED: to approve the minutes of last week's teleconference ←
15:03:33 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:03:34 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-04-04
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-04-04 ←
15:03:44 <stain> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
15:03:46 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:03:48 <smiles> +1
+1 ←
15:03:53 <hook> +1
15:04:09 <Luc> RESOLVED: the minutes of last week's teleconference
RESOLVED: the minutes of last week's teleconference ←
15:04:19 <Luc> topic: PR Voting
Summary: PR voting by W3C members closed. Votes were all positive except for 1 abstention.
<pgroth> Summary: PR voting by W3C members closed. Votes were all positive except for 1 abstention.
15:04:33 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aaaa ←
15:04:42 <smiles> Luc: For the last month, AC reps asked to express support or not on PROV specs
Luc Moreau: For the last month, AC reps asked to express support or not on PROV specs ←
15:04:59 <smiles> ... concluded on 9th, and all the votes are positive except an abstention
... concluded on 9th, and all the votes are positive except an abstention ←
15:05:21 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
15:05:26 <smiles> ... one voter made a few suggestions, but were not suitable or beyond the scope for the current stage of the process
... one voter made a few suggestions, but were not suitable or beyond the scope for the current stage of the process ←
15:05:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:05:44 <smiles> ... We will very shortly make the request to transfer to Recommendation
... We will very shortly make the request to transfer to Recommendation ←
15:05:55 <Zakim> +??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P28 ←
15:05:56 <Luc> topic: all publications
Summary: Editors were asked to update http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PublicationRequestApril30 with information for the final publication request.
<pgroth> Summary: Editors were asked to update http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PublicationRequestApril30 with information for the final publication request.
15:06:04 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PublicationRequestApril30
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PublicationRequestApril30 ←
15:06:30 <smiles> Luc: Have created a page on the Wiki, for editors to update when ready staged for publication
Luc Moreau: Have created a page on the Wiki, for editors to update when ready staged for publication ←
15:06:42 <Luc> topic: REC are staged
Summary: All recommendations are staged. The group was asked to perform a sanity check on the documents (typos, grammar, missing links, etc). James, Simon, Khalid, Dong, Satya agreed to perform the check.
<pgroth> Summary: All recommendations are staged. The group was asked to perform a sanity check on the documents (typos, grammar, missing links, etc). James, Simon, Khalid, Dong, Satya agreed to perform the check.
15:06:53 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.731.aaaa ←
15:07:26 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:07:27 <smiles> Luc: The four Recommendations are staged, and we ask you to have a final look at one or more of them by the end of this week
Luc Moreau: The four Recommendations are staged, and we ask you to have a final look at one or more of them by the end of this week ←
15:07:39 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aabb ←
15:07:44 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:07:44 <jcheney> will look at prov-constraints
James Cheney: will look at prov-constraints ←
15:07:50 <smiles> I will check prov-dm
I will check prov-dm ←
15:07:59 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:08:05 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
15:08:06 <Dong> I will look PROV-N
Trung Huynh: I will look PROV-N ←
15:08:17 <khalidBelhajjame> I will look at PROV-N
Khalid Belhajjame: I will look at PROV-N ←
15:08:24 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:08:29 <stain> more like a sanity check
Stian Soiland-Reyes: more like a sanity check ←
15:08:30 <pgroth> spelling errors
Paul Groth: spelling errors ←
15:08:36 <smiles> Luc: Not asking for review, just typos, layout etc.
Luc Moreau: Not asking for review, just typos, layout etc. ←
15:08:47 <stain> q+
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←
15:08:58 <smiles> Luc: Anyone for PROV-O?
Luc Moreau: Anyone for PROV-O? ←
15:08:58 <satya> I can also review
Satya Sahoo: I can also review ←
15:09:23 <smiles> q?
q? ←
15:09:24 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:09:35 <smiles> Luc: Questions on the process at this stage?
Luc Moreau: Questions on the process at this stage? ←
15:10:01 <Luc> ack stain
Luc Moreau: ack stain ←
15:10:06 <smiles> stain: To read properly, some stylesheet problems, so use Firefox
Stian Soiland-Reyes: To read properly, some stylesheet problems, so use Firefox ←
15:10:09 <Luc> topic: prov-aq
Summary: Discussion of status of prov-aq. There were no blocking issues but changes were still being implemented and acknowledgments need to be provided. The group voted to release the document as a working group note.
<pgroth> Summary: Discussion of status of prov-aq. There were no blocking issues but changes were still being implemented and acknowledgments need to be provided. The group voted to release the document as a working group note.
15:10:39 <smiles> Luc: Any blocking issues? Changes implemented? Can close tracker issues?
Luc Moreau: Any blocking issues? Changes implemented? Can close tracker issues? ←
15:10:50 <Luc> graham?
Luc Moreau: graham? ←
15:11:13 <Luc> zakim, who is here?
Luc Moreau: zakim, who is here? ←
15:11:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, CraigTrim, stain, smiles, jcheney, Luc, dgarijo, Satya_Sahoo, ??P28, +1.818.731.aabb, [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see pgroth, CraigTrim, stain, smiles, jcheney, Luc, dgarijo, Satya_Sahoo, ??P28, +1.818.731.aabb, [IPcaller] ←
15:11:16 <Zakim> On IRC I see khalidBelhajjame, Dong, zednik, satya, hook, dgarijo, jcheney, smiles, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, TallTed, GK-ALT, stain, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see khalidBelhajjame, Dong, zednik, satya, hook, dgarijo, jcheney, smiles, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, TallTed, GK-ALT, stain, trackbot ←
15:11:34 <smiles> pgroth: No blocking issues, people generally happy with approach
Paul Groth: No blocking issues, people generally happy with approach ←
15:11:58 <pgroth> gk?
Paul Groth: gk? ←
15:12:00 <stain> I've read through GK's response to my PROV-AQ review, but not sent a proper reply acknowledging that it's OK (as the response was also quite long!). However the PROV-AQ document is now fine from my part.
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I've read through GK's response to my PROV-AQ review, but not sent a proper reply acknowledging that it's OK (as the response was also quite long!). However the PROV-AQ document is now fine from my part. ←
15:12:02 <smiles> pgroth: Don't know if all issues closed
Paul Groth: Don't know if all issues closed ←
15:12:34 <smiles> pgroth: I will do the staging, so will make sure issues are checked
Paul Groth: I will do the staging, so will make sure issues are checked ←
15:12:43 <GK> Sorry I'm late - just getting audio set up… I haven't revisited the issues yet
Graham Klyne: Sorry I'm late - just getting audio set up… I haven't revisited the issues yet ←
15:12:55 <smiles> Luc: Not a problem if not all issues addressed, but should have a record and close them
Luc Moreau: Not a problem if not all issues addressed, but should have a record and close them ←
15:13:18 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
15:13:25 <GK> zakim, ??p18 is me
Graham Klyne: zakim, ??p18 is me ←
15:13:25 <Zakim> +GK; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +GK; got it ←
15:13:27 <smiles> pgroth: I think we're ready to vote on PROV-AQ now
Paul Groth: I think we're ready to vote on PROV-AQ now ←
15:14:04 <stain> Zakim, stain is with khalidBelhajjame
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, stain is with khalidBelhajjame ←
15:14:04 <Zakim> sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named 'khalidBelhajjame'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named 'khalidBelhajjame' ←
15:14:51 <smiles> GK: Have not been back to check tracker issues, but believe all addressed; responded to all reviews received
Graham Klyne: Have not been back to check tracker issues, but believe all addressed; responded to all reviews received ←
15:15:16 <smiles> ... A couple did not lead to a change in the document; if the reviewers are OK, then we can vote
... A couple did not lead to a change in the document; if the reviewers are OK, then we can vote ←
15:15:25 <pgroth> that's a yes
Paul Groth: that's a yes ←
15:15:56 <smiles> Luc: As a reviewer, there is a point on which we will not agree, but that does not mean it is blocking
Luc Moreau: As a reviewer, there is a point on which we will not agree, but that does not mean it is blocking ←
15:17:47 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:18:32 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:18:51 <TallTed> TallTed has changed the topic to: Provenance WG -- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/ -- agenda http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.04.11
Ted Thibodeau: TallTed has changed the topic to: Provenance WG -- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/ -- agenda http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.04.11 ←
15:18:58 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:19:04 <smiles> pgroth: External reviewer commenting on constrained resource, was based on misunderstanding that PROV-AQ was the fundamental document
Paul Groth: External reviewer commenting on constrained resource, was based on misunderstanding that PROV-AQ was the fundamental document ←
15:19:10 <Luc> PROPOSED: to publish prov-aq as a Working Group note.
PROPOSED: to publish prov-aq as a Working Group note. ←
15:19:17 <smiles> +1
+1 ←
15:19:18 <stain> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
15:19:22 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:19:25 <zednik> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
15:19:26 <khalidBelhajjame> +1 (University of Manchester)
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 (University of Manchester) ←
15:19:29 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
15:19:31 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:19:32 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:19:34 <hook> +1
15:19:34 <GK> +1 (I would say that wouldn't I :) )
Graham Klyne: +1 (I would say that wouldn't I :) ) ←
15:19:37 <pgroth> +1
Paul Groth: +1 ←
15:19:42 <Luc> +1
Luc Moreau: +1 ←
15:19:59 <Luc> RESOLVED: to publish prov-aq as a Working Group note.
RESOLVED: to publish prov-aq as a Working Group note. ←
15:20:13 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:20:16 <smiles> Luc: Congratulations to the editors
Luc Moreau: Congratulations to the editors ←
15:20:28 <GK> @Paul - I should hand over to you in the next week.
Graham Klyne: @Paul - I should hand over to you in the next week. ←
15:20:51 <smiles> Luc: Editors, remember the timetable: everything ready by 23 April when request will be made; I will make sanity check on 22nd
Luc Moreau: Editors, remember the timetable: everything ready by 23 April when request will be made; I will make sanity check on 22nd ←
15:20:52 <pgroth> @GK cool, I'll stage and can close issues if need be
Paul Groth: @GK cool, I'll stage and can close issues if need be ←
15:20:55 <pgroth> yes
Paul Groth: yes ←
15:20:56 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:20:58 <GK> Ack. Thanks
Graham Klyne: Ack. Thanks ←
15:21:08 <Luc> topic: prov-primer
Summary: Noted that the primer was already voted to be published as a working group note at the last telco.
<pgroth> Summary: Noted that the primer was already voted to be published as a working group note at the last telco.
15:21:20 <Zakim> -??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P28 ←
15:21:24 <smiles> Luc: We voted to publish primer last week
Luc Moreau: We voted to publish primer last week ←
15:22:11 <pgroth> super echo
Paul Groth: super echo ←
15:22:46 <Luc> topic: PROV-LINKS
Summary: For PROV-Links, Luc addressed all the suggestions and responded to reviewers. The group voted to publish PROV-Links as a working group note.
<pgroth> Summary: For PROV-Links, Luc addressed all the suggestions and responded to reviewers. The group voted to publish PROV-Links as a working group note.
15:23:07 <Zakim> +??P49
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P49 ←
15:23:18 <smiles> Luc: Addressed all suggestions made by reviewers to PROV-Links, responded to reviewers
Luc Moreau: Addressed all suggestions made by reviewers to PROV-Links, responded to reviewers ←
15:23:27 <smiles> ... Are the reviewers happy to proceed to vote?
... Are the reviewers happy to proceed to vote? ←
15:23:28 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:23:30 <Dong> Zakim, ??P49 is me
Trung Huynh: Zakim, ??P49 is me ←
15:23:30 <Zakim> +Dong; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Dong; got it ←
15:23:35 <smiles> As a reviewer, I am happy
As a reviewer, I am happy ←
15:23:45 <khalidBelhajjame> yes I am happy
Khalid Belhajjame: yes I am happy ←
15:23:45 <GK> FWIW, on PROV-AQ, all issues but 2 are marked "pending review", which means I think they are addressed. n The other two issues are not on the document itself, but require updates to the accompanying ontology document and link relation registrations.HTML
Graham Klyne: FWIW, on PROV-AQ, all issues but 2 are marked "pending review", which means I think they are addressed. n The other two issues are not on the document itself, but require updates to the accompanying ontology document and link relation registrations.HTML ←
15:23:52 <GK> +1
Graham Klyne: +1 ←
15:24:01 <Luc> PROPOSED: to publish prov-links as a Working Group note
PROPOSED: to publish prov-links as a Working Group note ←
15:24:05 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
15:24:06 <smiles> +1
+1 ←
15:24:08 <GK> +1
Graham Klyne: +1 ←
15:24:11 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
15:24:12 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:24:13 <stain> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
15:24:22 <satya> +!
Satya Sahoo: +! ←
15:24:24 <hook> +1
15:24:26 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:24:27 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:24:38 <zednik> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
15:24:48 <Luc> +1
Luc Moreau: +1 ←
15:24:58 <Luc> RESOLVED: to publish prov-links as a Working Group note
RESOLVED: to publish prov-links as a Working Group note ←
15:25:19 <Zakim> -Dong
Zakim IRC Bot: -Dong ←
15:25:20 <Luc> topic: prov-implementations
Summary: The group voted to publish prov-implemenations as a working group note
<pgroth> Summary: The group voted to publish prov-implemenations as a working group note
15:25:37 <smiles> Luc: Agreed no further review of this document
Luc Moreau: Agreed no further review of this document ←
15:25:41 <Zakim> +??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P28 ←
15:25:59 <smiles> pgroth: Yes, the document is complete and ready for a vote
Paul Groth: Yes, the document is complete and ready for a vote ←
15:26:02 <smiles> Dong: I staged it
Trung Huynh: I staged it ←
15:26:14 <Luc> PROPOSED: to publish prov-implementations as a Working Group note
PROPOSED: to publish prov-implementations as a Working Group note ←
15:26:19 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:26:19 <Dong> Sorry, got disconnected
Trung Huynh: Sorry, got disconnected ←
15:26:20 <smiles> +1
+1 ←
15:26:21 <pgroth> +1
Paul Groth: +1 ←
15:26:21 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:26:23 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:26:23 <GK> +1
Graham Klyne: +1 ←
15:26:23 <zednik> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
15:26:24 <stain> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
15:26:28 <hook> +!
15:26:30 <Luc> +1
Luc Moreau: +1 ←
15:26:35 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
15:26:56 <stain> hook?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: hook? ←
15:26:57 <Luc> RESOLVED: to publish prov-implementations as a Working Group note
RESOLVED: to publish prov-implementations as a Working Group note ←
15:27:17 <smiles> Luc: Congratulations to editors, with 66 implementations
Luc Moreau: Congratulations to editors, with 66 implementations ←
15:27:22 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:27:31 <Luc> Topic: prov-dc
Summary: Discussion about the blocking issues from Stian on prov-dc. In particular, a discussion was had about whether dct:isVersionOf is equivalent to prov:wasRevisionOf. Stian was asked to provide examples of the case where this is not the case. In addition, there was a discussion about whether dct:references should be a sub-property of Influence. The argument was made that this is not following our recommended practice of not using influence. On the other hand, there was an argument that being a sub-property of derivation was too much ontological commitment. Stian agreed not to block on leaving dct:references as a sub-property of prov:wasDerivedFrom.
<pgroth> Summary: Discussion about the blocking issues from Stian on prov-dc. In particular, a discussion was had about whether dct:isVersionOf is equivalent to prov:wasRevisionOf. Stian was asked to provide examples of the case where this is not the case. In addition, there was a discussion about whether dct:references should be a sub-property of Influence. The argument was made that this is not following our recommended practice of not using influence. On the other hand, there was an argument that being a sub-property of derivation was too much ontological commitment. Stian agreed not to block on leaving dct:references as a sub-property of prov:wasDerivedFrom.
15:28:03 <smiles> dgarijo: With a new review, we have two blocking issues
Daniel Garijo: With a new review, we have two blocking issues ←
15:28:25 <stain> q+
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←
15:28:31 <smiles> ... will have to look at detail of rationale and discuss offline with Stian
... will have to look at detail of rationale and discuss offline with Stian ←
15:28:40 <smiles> Luc: Need to converge as soon as we can
Luc Moreau: Need to converge as soon as we can ←
15:29:15 <pgroth> stian have isVersionOf and references
Paul Groth: stian have isVersionOf and references ←
15:29:33 <smiles> stain: Main issue was about isVersionOf, said to be equivalent to wasRevisionOf, but in use is more like superproperty of wasRevisionOf
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Main issue was about isVersionOf, said to be equivalent to wasRevisionOf, but in use is more like superproperty of wasRevisionOf ←
15:30:32 <smiles> dgarijo: We decided to make equivalent because could not find any contradicting example
Daniel Garijo: We decided to make equivalent because could not find any contradicting example ←
15:31:03 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:31:16 <smiles> ... If have an example, can change back to as suggested
... If have an example, can change back to as suggested ←
15:31:49 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:32:21 <Luc> ack st
Luc Moreau: ack st ←
15:32:46 <smiles> pgroth: Can somebody express the proposal?
Paul Groth: Can somebody express the proposal? ←
15:32:52 <dgarijo> the proposal is prov wasRevisionOf is a SUB property of is VersionOf
Daniel Garijo: the proposal is prov wasRevisionOf is a SUB property of is VersionOf ←
15:32:53 <khalidBelhajjame> proposal of Stian is: wasRevisionOf is a subproperty of isVersionOf
Khalid Belhajjame: proposal of Stian is: wasRevisionOf is a subproperty of isVersionOf ←
15:33:06 <dgarijo> which is the way we had it before.
Daniel Garijo: which is the way we had it before. ←
15:33:08 <smiles> stain: wasRevisionOf is subproperty of isVersionOf
Stian Soiland-Reyes: wasRevisionOf is subproperty of isVersionOf ←
15:33:14 <pgroth> can we use the namespace?
Paul Groth: can we use the namespace? ←
15:33:16 <pgroth> in the proposal
Paul Groth: in the proposal ←
15:33:52 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:33:58 <smiles> stain: Will look for examples, and decide on whether they exist
Stian Soiland-Reyes: Will look for examples, and decide on whether they exist ←
15:34:00 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:34:16 <dgarijo> I did not find tem, unfortunately.
Daniel Garijo: I did not find tem, unfortunately. ←
15:34:20 <dgarijo> *them
Daniel Garijo: *them ←
15:34:35 <smiles> Luc: Stian suggested making references subproperty of influences
Luc Moreau: Stian suggested making references subproperty of influences ←
15:34:55 <smiles> dgarijo: replaces rather than references
Daniel Garijo: replaces rather than references ←
15:35:24 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#concept-influence
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#concept-influence ←
15:35:32 <Luc> Influence ◊ is the capacity of an entity, activity, or agent to have an effect on the character, development, or behavior of another by means of usage, start, end, generation, invalidation, communication, derivation, attribution, association, or delegation.
Luc Moreau: Influence ◊ is the capacity of an entity, activity, or agent to have an effect on the character, development, or behavior of another by means of usage, start, end, generation, invalidation, communication, derivation, attribution, association, or delegation. ←
15:35:49 <Luc> It is recommended to adopt these more specific relations when writing provenance descriptions. It is anticipated that the Influence relation may be useful to express queries over provenance information.
Luc Moreau: It is recommended to adopt these more specific relations when writing provenance descriptions. It is anticipated that the Influence relation may be useful to express queries over provenance information. ←
15:36:05 <smiles> Luc: Previously discussed another relation subproperty of wasInfluencedBy, but the way we defined influence is based on specific relations and recommend we adopt those specific relations
Luc Moreau: Previously discussed another relation subproperty of wasInfluencedBy, but the way we defined influence is based on specific relations and recommend we adopt those specific relations ←
15:36:09 <stain> q+ that dct:references is such a more specific relation
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ that dct:references is such a more specific relation ←
15:36:21 <smiles> ... Would seem strange to go against our recommendations in PROV-DC
... Would seem strange to go against our recommendations in PROV-DC ←
15:36:30 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:36:35 <stain> q+
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←
15:36:43 <Luc> ack l
Luc Moreau: ack l ←
15:36:47 <smiles> ... If replaces is not a derivation, we should say it is not modelled in PROV
... If replaces is not a derivation, we should say it is not modelled in PROV ←
15:37:15 <smiles> stain: My view is that replaces is an influence but may not be a derivation
Stian Soiland-Reyes: My view is that replaces is an influence but may not be a derivation ←
15:37:19 <stain> http://pav-ontology.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/pav.html#http://purl.org/pav/sourceAccessedAt
Stian Soiland-Reyes: http://pav-ontology.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/pav.html#http://purl.org/pav/sourceAccessedAt ←
15:37:39 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:37:48 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:37:57 <Luc> ack st
Luc Moreau: ack st ←
15:38:39 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:38:41 <smiles> pgroth: Our recommendation says that you use specific relations in provenance descriptions, not in defining new relations, so maybe does not go against
Paul Groth: Our recommendation says that you use specific relations in provenance descriptions, not in defining new relations, so maybe does not go against ←
15:39:07 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:39:11 <Luc> pg
Luc Moreau: pg ←
15:39:14 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:39:14 <smiles> ... However, it does then suggest people should, when creating mappings, create subproperties of influences
... However, it does then suggest people should, when creating mappings, create subproperties of influences ←
15:39:39 <pgroth> it's none
Paul Groth: it's none ←
15:39:55 <smiles> Luc: Influence definition lists specific relation it could be, so which one is replaces?
Luc Moreau: Influence definition lists specific relation it could be, so which one is replaces? ←
15:39:58 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:40:12 <dgarijo> +q
Daniel Garijo: +q ←
15:40:40 <smiles> pgroth: It is clear that replaces is not a subproperty of any of those specific relations
Paul Groth: It is clear that replaces is not a subproperty of any of those specific relations ←
15:40:56 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:41:03 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:41:08 <Zakim> -??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P28 ←
15:41:09 <pgroth> fair enough then
Paul Groth: fair enough then ←
15:41:11 <pgroth> :-)
Paul Groth: :-) ←
15:41:32 <pgroth> we're talking about references
Paul Groth: we're talking about references ←
15:41:43 <pgroth> no it's the other way around
Paul Groth: no it's the other way around ←
15:41:48 <pgroth> we are only talking references
Paul Groth: we are only talking references ←
15:42:27 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:42:50 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
15:43:15 <GK> (As a general principle, I think specs should choose weaker ontological commitment when there is any dispute or uncertainty)
Graham Klyne: (As a general principle, I think specs should choose weaker ontological commitment when there is any dispute or uncertainty) ←
15:43:32 <pgroth> q+ but this would be really wierd
Paul Groth: q+ but this would be really wierd ←
15:43:41 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:43:47 <smiles> Luc: Should not shoehorn things into PROV if there is no consensus
Luc Moreau: Should not shoehorn things into PROV if there is no consensus ←
15:43:54 <stain> this would be a weakening of wasDerivedBy if any kind of existence and mention means a derivation
Stian Soiland-Reyes: this would be a weakening of wasDerivedBy if any kind of existence and mention means a derivation ←
15:44:31 <Luc> ack dg
Luc Moreau: ack dg ←
15:44:58 <smiles> dgarijo: If we agree with references is subproperty of wasDerivedFrom then there is consensus
Daniel Garijo: If we agree with references is subproperty of wasDerivedFrom then there is consensus ←
15:45:15 <smiles> pgroth: Would be weird not to have a mapping of references in PROV-DC
Paul Groth: Would be weird not to have a mapping of references in PROV-DC ←
15:45:26 <smiles> stain: I disagree but willing to not block on it
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I disagree but willing to not block on it ←
15:45:35 <dgarijo> - dct:references is a subproperty of wasDerivedFrom. Thus it is already a wasInfluencedBy.
Daniel Garijo: - dct:references is a subproperty of wasDerivedFrom. Thus it is already a wasInfluencedBy. ←
15:45:45 <smiles> pgroth: I am fine with that
Paul Groth: I am fine with that ←
15:45:46 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
15:46:20 <smiles> Luc: Not in a position to vote this week, as other issue still to be resolved
Luc Moreau: Not in a position to vote this week, as other issue still to be resolved ←
15:46:34 <GK> ("A related resource that is referenced, cited, or otherwise pointed to by the described resource." http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-references)
Graham Klyne: ("A related resource that is referenced, cited, or otherwise pointed to by the described resource." http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-references) ←
15:46:37 <smiles> dgarijo: Already implemented changes by Tom and Paul
Daniel Garijo: Already implemented changes by Tom and Paul ←
15:46:48 <zednik> q-
Stephan Zednik: q- ←
15:47:00 <smiles> ... response not yet acknowledged
... response not yet acknowledged ←
15:47:01 <GK> (This term is intended to be used with non-literal values as defined in the DCMI Abstract Model (http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/). As of December 2007, the DCMI Usage Board is seeking a way to express this intention with a formal range declaration. Ibid.)
Graham Klyne: (This term is intended to be used with non-literal values as defined in the DCMI Abstract Model (http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/). As of December 2007, the DCMI Usage Board is seeking a way to express this intention with a formal range declaration. Ibid.) ←
15:47:18 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:47:29 <pgroth> q_
Paul Groth: q_ ←
15:47:30 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:47:43 <Luc> topic: prov-dictionary
Summary: a vote on prov-dictionary wad delayed until next week.
<pgroth> Summary: a vote on prov-dictionary wad delayed until next week.
15:48:04 <GK> (non-literal value
Graham Klyne: (non-literal value ←
15:48:04 <GK> A value which is a physical, digital or conceptual entity.)
Graham Klyne: A value which is a physical, digital or conceptual entity.) ←
15:48:19 <smiles> Luc: Tom suggested to vote next week
Luc Moreau: Tom suggested to vote next week ←
15:48:34 <smiles> ... and leave technical dicsussion on the document to next week too
... and leave technical dicsussion on the document to next week too ←
15:48:40 <Luc> topic: prov-sem
Summary: The group voted to publish PROV-SEM as a working group note.
<pgroth> Summary: The group voted to publish PROV-SEM as a working group note.
15:49:02 <dgarijo> @GK: Then you agree ordon't agree with isVersionOf being a superproperty of WasRevisionOf?
Daniel Garijo: @GK: Then you agree ordon't agree with isVersionOf being a superproperty of WasRevisionOf? ←
15:49:23 <smiles> jcheney: Reviews are in, no blocking issues, people happy with closing tracked issues
James Cheney: Reviews are in, no blocking issues, people happy with closing tracked issues ←
15:49:42 <smiles> ... Most of changes implemented, but with a couple of questions, need errata paragraph from Luc
... Most of changes implemented, but with a couple of questions, need errata paragraph from Luc ←
15:50:18 <GK> @Dgarijo: Er, I'm not sure about that.
Graham Klyne: @Dgarijo: Er, I'm not sure about that. ←
15:50:24 <khalidBelhajjame> I am happy with the document
Khalid Belhajjame: I am happy with the document ←
15:50:24 <smiles> Luc: Ready for a vote?
Luc Moreau: Ready for a vote? ←
15:50:27 <khalidBelhajjame> yes
Khalid Belhajjame: yes ←
15:50:30 <smiles> I am happy with the document too
I am happy with the document too ←
15:50:39 <satya> yes
Satya Sahoo: yes ←
15:50:48 <smiles> Luc: I was also happy
Luc Moreau: I was also happy ←
15:51:10 <Luc> PROPOSED: to publish prov-sem as a Working Group note
PROPOSED: to publish prov-sem as a Working Group note ←
15:51:16 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
15:51:17 <stain> +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 ←
15:51:17 <smiles> +1
+1 ←
15:51:19 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:51:19 <Dong> +1
Trung Huynh: +1 ←
15:51:22 <GK> @dgarijo (I was just digging out DC material about dct references.)
Graham Klyne: @dgarijo (I was just digging out DC material about dct references.) ←
15:51:23 <zednik> +1
Stephan Zednik: +1 ←
15:51:23 <Luc> +1
Luc Moreau: +1 ←
15:51:25 <hook> +!
15:51:27 <hook> +1
15:51:31 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:51:32 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:51:43 <Luc> RESOLVED: to publish prov-sem as a Working Group note
RESOLVED: to publish prov-sem as a Working Group note ←
15:51:44 <pgroth> +1
Paul Groth: +1 ←
15:51:45 <GK> (Haven't had time to review, but expect it's fine)
Graham Klyne: (Haven't had time to review, but expect it's fine) ←
15:52:05 <smiles> Luc: Congratulations to James
Luc Moreau: Congratulations to James ←
15:52:07 <pgroth> @jcheney - really good job
Paul Groth: @jcheney - really good job ←
15:52:37 <smiles> jcheney: Can check everyone that should be in acknowledgement and contributor lists is there?
James Cheney: Can check everyone that should be in acknowledgement and contributor lists is there? ←
15:52:39 <Luc> topic: prov-xml
Summary: Changes are still being processed. It was decided to delay the vote until next week.
<pgroth> Summary: Changes are still being processed. It was decided to delay the vote until next week.
15:53:04 <dgarijo> @GK: Ok! My main problem is that both DC and PROV don't characterize thw features of a "revision". Since I didn't find examples of use that could contradict one being subclass of another, I just put it as an equivalent class
Daniel Garijo: @GK: Ok! My main problem is that both DC and PROV don't characterize thw features of a "revision". Since I didn't find examples of use that could contradict one being subclass of another, I just put it as an equivalent class ←
15:53:18 <smiles> zednik: Two reviews in, none are blocking but lots of small changes that will be made by Tuesday
Stephan Zednik: Two reviews in, none are blocking but lots of small changes that will be made by Tuesday ←
15:53:26 <dgarijo> I mean, equivalent property.
Daniel Garijo: I mean, equivalent property. ←
15:53:34 <smiles> ... a couple of larger issues may take a little longer, but straightfowards
... a couple of larger issues may take a little longer, but straightfowards ←
15:53:49 <pgroth> henry
Paul Groth: henry ←
15:54:16 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:54:26 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:54:26 <smiles> jcheney: Henry from Edinburgh said he would look at PROV-XML but has not been able to yet, may not in time for us
James Cheney: Henry from Edinburgh said he would look at PROV-XML but has not been able to yet, may not in time for us ←
15:54:42 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:54:47 <smiles> Luc: Vote next week after changes
Luc Moreau: Vote next week after changes ←
15:55:09 <smiles> pgroth: Want to discuss inclusion of XSD in the appendix
Paul Groth: Want to discuss inclusion of XSD in the appendix ←
15:55:14 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:55:19 <pgroth> cool
Paul Groth: cool ←
15:55:22 <smiles> zednik: Will add an issue to the tracker
Stephan Zednik: Will add an issue to the tracker ←
15:55:33 <Luc> topic: prov-overview
Summary: Paul asked for a quick review of prov-overview. James and Daniel agreed to have a look.
<pgroth> Summary: Paul asked for a quick review of prov-overview. James and Daniel agreed to have a look.
15:55:46 <smiles> Luc: Now ready for review
Luc Moreau: Now ready for review ←
15:56:06 <smiles> pgroth: Some people looked at it, and made minor changes
Paul Groth: Some people looked at it, and made minor changes ←
15:56:26 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:56:36 <smiles> Luc: Volunteers to read PROV-Overview?
Luc Moreau: Volunteers to read PROV-Overview? ←
15:56:50 <jcheney> ok
James Cheney: ok ←
15:56:53 <dgarijo> I can review it
Daniel Garijo: I can review it ←
15:57:02 <GK> @dgarijo ah, I see. If it's not clear what they mean, I'd personally probably avoid creating the ontological commitment. The concern is that if they turn out to be incompatible, you can end up with unsatisfiable (or not satisfiable in any expected sense of their meaning) expressions. OTOH, with ontological under commitment, then you may have ambiguity but that can be fixed later by adding more constraining statement later.
Graham Klyne: @dgarijo ah, I see. If it's not clear what they mean, I'd personally probably avoid creating the ontological commitment. The concern is that if they turn out to be incompatible, you can end up with unsatisfiable (or not satisfiable in any expected sense of their meaning) expressions. OTOH, with ontological under commitment, then you may have ambiguity but that can be fixed later by adding more constraining statement later. ←
15:57:19 <smiles> Luc: James and Daniel will review PROV-Overview
Luc Moreau: James and Daniel will review PROV-Overview ←
15:57:37 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:57:47 <Luc> topic: provenance of documents
Summary: editors should check whether the provenance produced by Luc is correct for their documents.
<pgroth> Summary: editors should check whether the provenance produced by Luc is correct for their documents.
15:57:48 <smiles> Luc: Please let us know of blocking issues ahead of call, so that Paul can address before we vote
Luc Moreau: Please let us know of blocking issues ahead of call, so that Paul can address before we vote ←
15:57:58 <Luc> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/provenance/test/prov-family.svg
Luc Moreau: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/provenance/test/prov-family.svg ←
15:58:11 <Luc> https://github.com/lucmoreau/ProvToolbox/blob/newschema/prov-n/src/test/resources/prov/prov-family.provn
Luc Moreau: https://github.com/lucmoreau/ProvToolbox/blob/newschema/prov-n/src/test/resources/prov/prov-family.provn ←
15:58:32 <smiles> Luc: Created provenance of prov documents above
Luc Moreau: Created provenance of prov documents above ←
15:58:58 <smiles> ... Would like various editors check for their own documents that dates, authors, etc are correct
... Would like various editors check for their own documents that dates, authors, etc are correct ←
15:59:31 <dgarijo> @GK: By looking just at the definitions I would say that we should have it as Stian proposed (which is the way we had it originally). But the lack of counter examples made me have it the way it's now. That is why I have to review Stian's examples b_)
Daniel Garijo: @GK: By looking just at the definitions I would say that we should have it as Stian proposed (which is the way we had it originally). But the lack of counter examples made me have it the way it's now. That is why I have to review Stian's examples b_) ←
15:59:34 <smiles> Luc: May also want to check attributed correctly for other documents
Luc Moreau: May also want to check attributed correctly for other documents ←
15:59:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:59:53 <stain> so you want emails for corrections?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: so you want emails for corrections? ←
15:59:55 <Luc> topic: Closing issues in tracker
Summary: The editors were asked to ensure that all issues in the tracker were addressed is some fashion. There were several issues in the tracker around the best practice cook-book. Tim was actioned to look at these issues.
<pgroth> Summary: The editors were asked to ensure that all issues in the tracker were addressed is some fashion. There were several issues in the tracker around the best practice cook-book. Tim was actioned to look at these issues.
15:59:59 <pgroth> bad noise
Paul Groth: bad noise ←
16:00:13 <pgroth> zakim, who is noisy?
Paul Groth: zakim, who is noisy? ←
16:00:24 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (31%), stain (5%)
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (31%), stain (5%) ←
16:00:32 <stain> sorry. Old phone!
Stian Soiland-Reyes: sorry. Old phone! ←
16:01:05 <smiles> pgroth: Dereferencing namespace issue: we already do so, but Tim will update
Paul Groth: Dereferencing namespace issue: we already do so, but Tim will update ←
16:01:34 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/7
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/7 ←
16:01:53 <stain> serioously, now my mobile is off!
Stian Soiland-Reyes: serioously, now my mobile is off! ←
16:01:54 <smiles> Luc: Best practice cookbook issues, are they still relevant?
Luc Moreau: Best practice cookbook issues, are they still relevant? ←
16:02:01 <stain> zakim, mute stain
Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim, mute stain ←
16:02:01 <Zakim> stain should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: stain should now be muted ←
16:02:18 <dgarijo> where is the best practice cookbook document? I think we removed it
Daniel Garijo: where is the best practice cookbook document? I think we removed it ←
16:02:36 <smiles> pgroth: Need to ask Tim, as these are all things not to go in ontology but separate explanations
Paul Groth: Need to ask Tim, as these are all things not to go in ontology but separate explanations ←
16:02:50 <dgarijo> +q
Daniel Garijo: +q ←
16:02:51 <Luc> action tlebo to look into issues he raised http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/7
Luc Moreau: action tlebo to look into issues he raised http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/7 ←
16:02:51 <trackbot> Created ACTION-171 - Look into issues he raised http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/7 [on Timothy Lebo - due 2013-04-18].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-171 - Look into issues he raised http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/7 [on Timothy Lebo - due 2013-04-18]. ←
16:02:58 <smiles> pgroth: Should either put in FAQ or close them
Paul Groth: Should either put in FAQ or close them ←
16:03:04 <GK> @paul re ISSUE-222, did you consider a data: URI?
Graham Klyne: @paul re ISSUE-222, did you consider a data: URI? ←
16:03:12 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:03:15 <stain> dgarijo: not maintained :( https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html
Daniel Garijo: not maintained :( https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ] ←
16:03:22 <dgarijo> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html
Daniel Garijo: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html ←
16:03:44 <smiles> dgarijo: The issues relate to document (above) started but not continued, so do not apply any more
Daniel Garijo: The issues relate to document (above) started but not continued, so do not apply any more ←
16:03:59 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:04:05 <Luc> ack dga
Luc Moreau: ack dga ←
16:04:08 <khalidBelhajjame> bye
Khalid Belhajjame: bye ←
16:04:08 <Zakim> -dgarijo
Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo ←
16:04:09 <Dong> bye all
Trung Huynh: bye all ←
16:04:09 <stain> bye
Stian Soiland-Reyes: bye ←
16:04:10 <Zakim> -jcheney
Zakim IRC Bot: -jcheney ←
16:04:11 <dgarijo> -q
Daniel Garijo: -q ←
16:04:11 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo ←
16:04:15 <GK> Bye
Graham Klyne: Bye ←
16:04:17 <Zakim> -stain
Zakim IRC Bot: -stain ←
16:04:18 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.731.aabb ←
16:04:19 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
16:04:20 <Zakim> -Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←
16:04:23 <Zakim> -pgroth
Zakim IRC Bot: -pgroth ←
16:04:24 <Zakim> -GK
Zakim IRC Bot: -GK ←
16:05:13 <Zakim> -??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P2 ←
16:06:05 <Zakim> -CraigTrim
Zakim IRC Bot: -CraigTrim ←
16:09:49 <Zakim> -smiles
Zakim IRC Bot: -smiles ←
16:09:49 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended ←
16:09:49 <Zakim> Attendees were CraigTrim, pgroth, stain, jcheney, smiles, Luc, dgarijo, +1.818.731.aaaa, Satya_Sahoo, +1.818.731.aabb, [IPcaller], GK, Dong
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were CraigTrim, pgroth, stain, jcheney, smiles, Luc, dgarijo, +1.818.731.aaaa, Satya_Sahoo, +1.818.731.aabb, [IPcaller], GK, Dong ←
Formatted by CommonScribe