16:51:41 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/05-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/05-owl-irc ←
16:52:05 <IanH> IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.08.05/Agenda
Ian Horrocks: IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.08.05/Agenda ←
16:52:15 <alanr> alanr has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.08.05/Agenda
Alan Ruttenberg: alanr has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.08.05/Agenda ←
16:52:18 <IanH> Zakim, this will be owlwg
Ian Horrocks: Zakim, this will be owlwg ←
16:52:18 <Zakim> ok, IanH; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, IanH; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes ←
16:52:30 <IanH> RRSAgent, make records public
Ian Horrocks: RRSAgent, make records public ←
16:57:25 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
16:57:25 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has not yet started, alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has not yet started, alanr ←
16:57:26 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
16:57:40 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started ←
16:57:48 <Zakim> + +8686527aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +8686527aaaa ←
16:58:06 <IanH> Zakim, aaaa is IanH
Ian Horrocks: Zakim, aaaa is IanH ←
16:58:06 <Zakim> +IanH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH; got it ←
16:58:13 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
16:58:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH ←
16:58:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
16:58:31 <IanH> ScribeNick: bcuencagrau
(Scribe set to Bernardo Cuenca Grau)
16:58:39 <Zakim> +Jonathan_Rees
Zakim IRC Bot: +Jonathan_Rees ←
16:58:41 <Zakim> +bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: +bglimm ←
16:58:49 <bmotik> Zakim, blimm is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, blimm is me ←
16:58:49 <Zakim> sorry, bmotik, I do not recognize a party named 'blimm'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bmotik, I do not recognize a party named 'blimm' ←
16:58:50 <IanH> Bernardo, you are scribing?
Ian Horrocks: Bernardo, you are scribing? ←
16:58:57 <alanr> zakim, Jonathan_Rees is alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, Jonathan_Rees is alanr ←
16:58:57 <Zakim> +alanr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +alanr; got it ←
16:58:57 <bmotik> Zakim, bglimm is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, bglimm is me ←
16:58:58 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
16:59:03 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
16:59:03 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
16:59:31 <Zakim> + +3539149aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +3539149aabb ←
16:59:42 <zimmer> Zakim, +3539149aabb is me
Antoine Zimmermann: Zakim, +3539149aabb is me ←
16:59:42 <Zakim> +zimmer; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +zimmer; got it ←
16:59:57 <Zakim> +bmotik.a
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik.a ←
17:00:00 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:00:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bmotik.a
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bmotik.a ←
17:00:02 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
17:00:05 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:00:06 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, bmotik.a is bcuencagrau
Zakim, bmotik.a is bcuencagrau ←
17:00:06 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
17:00:15 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Zakim, mute me ←
17:00:16 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:00:16 <JeffP> [I am on IRC only]
Jeff Pan: [I am on IRC only] ←
17:00:31 <Zakim> +??P22
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P22 ←
17:00:38 <bijan> zakim, ??p22 is me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, ??p22 is me ←
17:00:38 <Zakim> +bijan; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bijan; got it ←
17:01:05 <Zakim> +??P19
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P19 ←
17:01:12 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aacc ←
17:01:24 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:01:24 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, ??P19, +1.518.276.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, ??P19, +1.518.276.aacc ←
17:01:26 <Zakim> On IRC I see schneid, MarkusK_, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see schneid, MarkusK_, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
17:01:30 <alanr> are we expecting peter today?
Alan Ruttenberg: are we expecting peter today? ←
17:01:41 <IanH> I hope Peter will join.
Ian Horrocks: I hope Peter will join. ←
17:01:50 <alanr> give him a minute or two
Alan Ruttenberg: give him a minute or two ←
17:01:55 <IanH> Although I do know that he is travelling.
Ian Horrocks: Although I do know that he is travelling. ←
17:02:03 <alanr> has anyone been in touch with Zhe recently?
Alan Ruttenberg: has anyone been in touch with Zhe recently? ←
17:02:20 <IanH> Zhe has been submitting test results very recently.
Ian Horrocks: Zhe has been submitting test results very recently. ←
17:02:28 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:02:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, ??P19, +1.518.276.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, ??P19, +1.518.276.aacc ←
17:02:30 <Zakim> On IRC I see pfps, schneid, MarkusK_, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see pfps, schneid, MarkusK_, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
17:02:34 <IanH> I don't know if he will join the teleconf though.
Ian Horrocks: I don't know if he will join the teleconf though. ←
17:02:35 <bcuencagrau> Yes, i am scribing
Yes, i am scribing ←
17:02:45 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:02:51 <bcuencagrau> Ian, I am scribing
Ian, I am scribing ←
17:02:51 <alanr> couple of unidentified callers - please identify yourselves
Alan Ruttenberg: couple of unidentified callers - please identify yourselves ←
17:02:57 <mschneid> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
17:02:57 <Zakim> +schneid; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +schneid; got it ←
17:03:01 <mschneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:03:01 <Zakim> mschneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid should now be muted ←
17:03:13 <IanH> Someone is calling from area code 518?
Ian Horrocks: Someone is calling from area code 518? ←
17:03:17 <baojie> baojie
17:03:27 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:03:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, ??P19 (muted), +1.518.276.aacc, mschneid (muted)
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, ??P19 (muted), +1.518.276.aacc, mschneid (muted) ←
17:03:29 <Zakim> On IRC I see Zhe, baojie, pfps, schneid, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Zhe, baojie, pfps, schneid, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
17:03:32 <Zhe> what is the zakim ID?
Zhe Wu: what is the zakim ID? ←
17:03:36 <baojie> Zakim, aacc is baojie
Jie Bao: Zakim, aacc is baojie ←
17:03:36 <Zakim> +baojie; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie; got it ←
17:03:41 <pfps> I have no idea which number I'm dialling from, and DTMF may not work for me
Peter Patel-Schneider: I have no idea which number I'm dialling from, and DTMF may not work for me ←
17:03:42 <Zakim> + +1.914.356.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.914.356.aadd ←
17:04:03 <IanH> Zakim access code is 69594#
Ian Horrocks: Zakim access code is 69594# ←
17:04:15 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.603.897.aaee ←
17:04:18 <pfps> zakim, ??p19 is me
Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, ??p19 is me ←
17:04:18 <Zakim> +pfps; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pfps; got it ←
17:04:29 <Zhe> zakim, +1.603.897.aaee is me
Zhe Wu: zakim, +1.603.897.aaee is me ←
17:04:29 <Zakim> +Zhe; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe; got it ←
17:04:32 <Zhe> thanks Ian!
17:04:47 <baojie> Zakim, mute me
17:04:47 <Zakim> baojie should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: baojie should now be muted ←
17:04:52 <alanr> zakim, aadd is achille
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, aadd is achille ←
17:04:52 <Zakim> +achille; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +achille; got it ←
17:04:59 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:04:59 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, pfps (muted), baojie (muted), mschneid (muted), achille, Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, pfps (muted), baojie (muted), mschneid (muted), achille, Zhe ←
17:05:02 <Zakim> On IRC I see Zhe, baojie, pfps, schneid, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Zhe, baojie, pfps, schneid, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
17:05:21 <bcuencagrau> Roll call
Roll call ←
17:05:26 <bcuencagrau> Agenda amendments?
Agenda amendments? ←
17:05:52 <bcuencagrau> Previous minutes
Previous minutes ←
17:05:54 <alanr> PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (15 July)
PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (15 July) ←
17:06:19 <Zhe> Markus, thanks for all the help with test cases
Zhe Wu: Markus, thanks for all the help with test cases ←
17:06:34 <IanH> They look OK to me
Ian Horrocks: They look OK to me ←
17:06:35 <bcuencagrau> pfps: minutes look ok, but not completely there
Peter Patel-Schneider: minutes look ok, but not completely there ←
17:06:35 <JeffP> indeed; thanks Markus
Jeff Pan: indeed; thanks Markus ←
17:06:47 <IanH> They look OK to me
Ian Horrocks: They look OK to me ←
17:06:50 <bcuencagrau> alanr: anyone else looked at them?
Alan Ruttenberg: anyone else looked at them? ←
17:06:59 <alanr> PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (15 July)
PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (15 July) ←
17:07:03 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
17:07:03 <pfps> +1
17:07:05 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:07:10 <Zhe> +1
17:07:10 <MarkusK_> my Skype fails :-( I cannot yet calll in
Markus Krötzsch: my Skype fails :-( I cannot yet calll in ←
17:07:28 <alanr> RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (15 July)
RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (15 July) ←
17:07:49 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Action items
Alan Ruttenberg: Action items ←
17:08:06 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Action 344
17:08:17 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:08:21 <pfps> I'm very comfortable with the current state of the documents
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm very comfortable with the current state of the documents ←
17:08:30 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Anyone wants to say something?
Alan Ruttenberg: Anyone wants to say something? ←
17:08:34 <alanr> ack ??P19
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ??P19 ←
17:08:41 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:08:41 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, pfps, baojie (muted), mschneid (muted), achille, Zhe, Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, alanr, bmotik (muted), zimmer, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bijan, pfps, baojie (muted), mschneid (muted), achille, Zhe, Evan_Wallace ←
17:08:42 <bijan> seems ok to me
Bijan Parsia: seems ok to me ←
17:08:45 <Zakim> On IRC I see Rinke, MarkusK_, Zhe, baojie, pfps, schneid, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Rinke, MarkusK_, Zhe, baojie, pfps, schneid, JeffP, bijan, zimmer, bcuencagrau, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ewallace, alanr, sandro, trackbot ←
17:09:02 <bcuencagrau> alanr: let's consider it done
Alan Ruttenberg: let's consider it done ←
17:09:07 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Action 347
17:09:17 <IanH> Done
Ian Horrocks: Done ←
17:09:27 <pfps> Done, done, done
Peter Patel-Schneider: Done, done, done ←
17:09:43 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
17:09:48 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
17:09:52 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Action 345
17:10:15 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
17:10:19 <Rinke> zakim, ??P18 is me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, ??P18 is me ←
17:10:19 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
17:10:21 <bcuencagrau> alanr: still primer and overview to do
Alan Ruttenberg: still primer and overview to do ←
17:10:23 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me ←
17:10:23 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
17:10:54 <bcuencagrau> bijan: structural specification, primer and overview are the important docs for this action
Bijan Parsia: structural specification, primer and overview are the important docs for this action ←
17:11:26 <bcuencagrau> bijan: accessibility is hard for technical documents
Bijan Parsia: accessibility is hard for technical documents ←
17:11:49 <bcuencagrau> bijan: the documents seem pretty good in general
Bijan Parsia: the documents seem pretty good in general ←
17:12:04 <IanH> AMIA Symposium is here: http://symposium2009.amia.org/
Ian Horrocks: AMIA Symposium is here: http://symposium2009.amia.org/ ←
17:12:17 <IanH> Doesn't mention Panel yet as it has only just been accepted.
Ian Horrocks: Doesn't mention Panel yet as it has only just been accepted. ←
17:12:42 <IanH> Panel is on "Medical Vocabularies, Knowledge Representation and the
Ian Horrocks: Panel is on "Medical Vocabularies, Knowledge Representation and the ←
17:12:42 <IanH> Semantic Web – Best of Breed or a Recipe for Failure?"
Ian Horrocks: Semantic Web – Best of Breed or a Recipe for Failure?" ←
17:13:06 <bcuencagrau> alanr: should we ask someone like Robert for feedback?
Alan Ruttenberg: should we ask someone like Robert for feedback? ←
17:13:22 <bcuencagrau> bijan: My feedback is based on what I did, but didn't ask Robert
Bijan Parsia: My feedback is based on what I did, but didn't ask Robert ←
17:14:19 <bcuencagrau> bijan: It takes a while to do each of the documents
Bijan Parsia: It takes a while to do each of the documents ←
17:14:58 <Zakim> +??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←
17:15:00 <bcuencagrau> bijan: Examples need to be translated into Manchester syntax
Bijan Parsia: Examples need to be translated into Manchester syntax ←
17:15:17 <bcuencagrau> alanr: what needs to be done before PR?
Alan Ruttenberg: what needs to be done before PR? ←
17:15:29 <bcuencagrau> bijan: nothing needs to be done before PR
Bijan Parsia: nothing needs to be done before PR ←
17:15:52 <bcuencagrau> bijan: nobody would do a more thorough accessibility audit than what I did
Bijan Parsia: nobody would do a more thorough accessibility audit than what I did ←
17:15:58 <bcuencagrau> bijan: so we are fine
Bijan Parsia: so we are fine ←
17:16:19 <IanH> Thanks Bijan!
Ian Horrocks: Thanks Bijan! ←
17:16:28 <bcuencagrau> sandro: thanks to Bijan for doing this
Sandro Hawke: thanks to Bijan for doing this ←
17:16:58 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Ian, can you talk about the panel?
Alan Ruttenberg: Ian, can you talk about the panel? ←
17:17:23 <bcuencagrau> IanH: Christine is one of the panelist, but does not have the funding to go
Ian Horrocks: Christine is one of the panelist, but does not have the funding to go ←
17:17:36 <bcuencagrau> alanr: there is an FMA meeting
Alan Ruttenberg: there is an FMA meeting ←
17:18:07 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Issues
Alan Ruttenberg: Issues ←
17:18:15 <bcuencagrau> alanr; OWL dot OWL
alanr; OWL dot OWL ←
17:18:15 <mschneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:18:19 <mschneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:18:19 <Zakim> mschneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid should no longer be muted ←
17:19:02 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: I have a chapter in the RDF Semantics about axiomatic triples
Michael Schneider: I have a chapter in the RDF Semantics about axiomatic triples ←
17:19:28 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: I wanted the OWL dot OWL document to be a conformant document
Michael Schneider: I wanted the OWL dot OWL document to be a conformant document ←
17:19:28 <mschneid> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Owl2DotOwlDevel
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Owl2DotOwlDevel ←
17:20:35 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: I added comments with suggestion to change certain blocks
Michael Schneider: I added comments with suggestion to change certain blocks ←
17:20:54 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: So that we can have an extension of the old OWL dot OWL
Michael Schneider: So that we can have an extension of the old OWL dot OWL ←
17:21:26 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: I tried to mimick the structure of the old OWL dot OWL
Michael Schneider: I tried to mimick the structure of the old OWL dot OWL ←
17:21:32 <mschneid> "#?"
Michael Schneider: "#?" ←
17:22:20 <bcuencagrau> alanr: did you get feedback from Holger?
Alan Ruttenberg: did you get feedback from Holger? ←
17:22:28 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: he did pose a few questions
Michael Schneider: he did pose a few questions ←
17:22:40 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:22:45 <alanr> ack schneid
Alan Ruttenberg: ack schneid ←
17:23:05 <Zakim> -MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK_ ←
17:23:16 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: he made a few suggestions
Michael Schneider: he made a few suggestions ←
17:23:43 <Zakim> +??P7
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P7 ←
17:24:12 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: The document is not OWl DL, but it is closer to it
Michael Schneider: The document is not OWl DL, but it is closer to it ←
17:24:25 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:24:57 <bcuencagrau> alanr: how is the status of the new version?
Alan Ruttenberg: how is the status of the new version? ←
17:25:00 <IanH> It looks fine to me
Ian Horrocks: It looks fine to me ←
17:25:13 <bijan> As long as it has big ass disclaimers then I don't care what's in it
Bijan Parsia: As long as it has big ass disclaimers then I don't care what's in it ←
17:25:20 <pfps> +1
17:25:47 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Are people happy with the document?
Alan Ruttenberg: Are people happy with the document? ←
17:26:05 <mschneid> note: the set of QUESTIONS are pretty outdated now
Michael Schneider: note: the set of QUESTIONS are pretty outdated now ←
17:26:27 <bcuencagrau> alanr: is the status of OWl dot OWL a blocker to PR?
Alan Ruttenberg: is the status of OWl dot OWL a blocker to PR? ←
17:26:28 <bijan> It's unnecesary
Bijan Parsia: It's unnecesary ←
17:26:30 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
17:26:39 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
17:26:41 <mschneid> I believe owl.owl has nothing to do with PR transistion
Michael Schneider: I believe owl.owl has nothing to do with PR transistion ←
17:26:47 <bcuencagrau> bijan: I don't see why could it be a blocker. It is not in the charter
Bijan Parsia: I don't see why could it be a blocker. It is not in the charter ←
17:26:50 <mschneid> NO!
Michael Schneider: NO! ←
17:27:01 <bcuencagrau> sandro: the previous OWL dot OWL was a part of the spec
Sandro Hawke: the previous OWL dot OWL was a part of the spec ←
17:27:06 <ewallace> It was in OWL Reference
Evan Wallace: It was in OWL Reference ←
17:27:07 <bcuencagrau> bijan: not clear to me
Bijan Parsia: not clear to me ←
17:27:22 <bcuencagrau> sandro: it was a response to a CR comment
Sandro Hawke: it was a response to a CR comment ←
17:27:30 <mschneid> ow.owl was part of the OWL References document, but was informative
Michael Schneider: ow.owl was part of the OWL References document, but was informative ←
17:27:34 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:27:41 <bcuencagrau> bijan: it is not part of a doc that is going to PR
Bijan Parsia: it is not part of a doc that is going to PR ←
17:27:57 <bcuencagrau> sandro: We could add it as a nonnormative appendix
Sandro Hawke: We could add it as a nonnormative appendix ←
17:27:58 <mschneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:28:00 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:28:11 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:28:13 <bijan> whcih document is it in
Bijan Parsia: whcih document is it in ←
17:28:32 <bcuencagrau> IanH: Ivan thought that it is not a blocker
Ian Horrocks: Ivan thought that it is not a blocker ←
17:28:35 <bijan> reference
Bijan Parsia: reference ←
17:28:40 <alanr> ack schneid
Alan Ruttenberg: ack schneid ←
17:28:40 <bcuencagrau> IanH: so did other people
Ian Horrocks: so did other people ←
17:28:44 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#AppendixList
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#AppendixList ←
17:28:51 <bijan> maybe?
Bijan Parsia: maybe? ←
17:29:00 <alanr> q+ to offer comment on desired tweak
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to offer comment on desired tweak ←
17:29:01 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#appB Appendix B. RDF Schema of OWL
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#appB Appendix B. RDF Schema of OWL ←
17:29:03 <mschneid> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/RDF-Based_Semantics#A_Set_of_Axiomatic_Triples
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/RDF-Based_Semantics#A_Set_of_Axiomatic_Triples ←
17:29:23 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#appB
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#appB ←
17:29:23 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: We have the RDF semantics were we could have the OWL dot OWL file
Michael Schneider: We have the RDF semantics were we could have the OWL dot OWL file ←
17:29:28 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:29:51 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: this is the best we can do
Michael Schneider: this is the best we can do ←
17:30:08 <pfps> q+
17:30:15 <alanr> ACK ALANR
Alan Ruttenberg: ACK ALANR ←
17:30:15 <Zakim> alanr, you wanted to offer comment on desired tweak
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr, you wanted to offer comment on desired tweak ←
17:30:20 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:30:36 <mschneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:30:37 <Zakim> mschneid was not muted, schneid
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid was not muted, schneid ←
17:30:37 <ewallace> I don't understand Alan's proposal.
Evan Wallace: I don't understand Alan's proposal. ←
17:30:47 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, unmute me
Zakim, unmute me ←
17:30:47 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should no longer be muted ←
17:31:04 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Zakim, mute me ←
17:31:04 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:31:29 <alanr> suggesting adding seeAlso links to our specifications as being useful to help people find documentation
Alan Ruttenberg: suggesting adding seeAlso links to our specifications as being useful to help people find documentation ←
17:31:33 <pfps> I don't see any purpose to add seeAlso links, and I worry what happens if they are wrong.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't see any purpose to add seeAlso links, and I worry what happens if they are wrong. ←
17:31:38 <mschneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:31:43 <alanr> ack schneid
Alan Ruttenberg: ack schneid ←
17:31:45 <mschneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:31:45 <Zakim> mschneid was not muted, schneid
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid was not muted, schneid ←
17:32:00 <bijan> I would prefer in the comment s/This file should not, in general, be imported into OWL ontologies./This file SHOULD NOT be imported into OWL ontologies./ (SHOULD NOT in the RFC 2119 sense)
Bijan Parsia: I would prefer in the comment s/This file should not, in general, be imported into OWL ontologies./This file SHOULD NOT be imported into OWL ontologies./ (SHOULD NOT in the RFC 2119 sense) ←
17:32:11 <mschneid> http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# ←
17:32:47 <pfps> I am also against the addition of isDefinedBy triples - they are not in the current owl.owl file
Peter Patel-Schneider: I am also against the addition of isDefinedBy triples - they are not in the current owl.owl file ←
17:33:12 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
17:33:15 <bcuencagrau> alanr: the question is whether the OWLdotOWL doc is an annex to one of ou docs
Alan Ruttenberg: the question is whether the OWLdotOWL doc is an annex to one of ou docs ←
17:33:32 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
17:33:33 <mschneid> yes, I don't see a need for making owl2.owl into a document or a part of an existing document
Michael Schneider: yes, I don't see a need for making owl2.owl into a document or a part of an existing document ←
17:33:33 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Michael has a different proposal and mentioned the RDF based semantics doc
Alan Ruttenberg: Michael has a different proposal and mentioned the RDF based semantics doc ←
17:33:58 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
17:34:03 <alanr> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
17:34:38 <bcuencagrau> sandro: Michael you want to put triples in the RDF Semantics so that one could extract the OWLdotOWL file
Sandro Hawke: Michael you want to put triples in the RDF Semantics so that one could extract the OWLdotOWL file ←
17:35:14 <bcuencagrau> sandro: I am happy with michael's solution
Sandro Hawke: I am happy with michael's solution ←
17:35:42 <bcuencagrau> alanr: we will respond to Holger according to Michael's suggestion
Alan Ruttenberg: we will respond to Holger according to Michael's suggestion ←
17:35:45 <bijan> That works for me
Bijan Parsia: That works for me ←
17:35:46 <sandro> sandro: I'm happy with Michael solution, where the owl.owl file is constructed from the axiomatic triples in rdf-based semantics, plus some TBD nonessential stuff like the ontology header, and seeAlso stuff.
Sandro Hawke: I'm happy with Michael solution, where the owl.owl file is constructed from the axiomatic triples in rdf-based semantics, plus some TBD nonessential stuff like the ontology header, and seeAlso stuff. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:35:50 <IanH> Works for me too.
Ian Horrocks: Works for me too. ←
17:36:01 <pfps> no seeAlso
Peter Patel-Schneider: no seeAlso ←
17:36:04 <bijan> Please see my friendly amendment to the rdfs:comment in owl.owl above
Bijan Parsia: Please see my friendly amendment to the rdfs:comment in owl.owl above ←
17:36:33 <Rinke> I support Bijan's amendment to the rdfs:comment
Rinke Hoekstra: I support Bijan's amendment to the rdfs:comment ←
17:36:48 <mschneid> q
17:36:50 <mschneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:36:55 <alanr> ack schneid
Alan Ruttenberg: ack schneid ←
17:37:08 <sandro> PROPOSED: The owl.owl file (the owl namespace document) will be constructed by turning the RDF-Based Semantics axiomatic triples table into RDF/XML and possible adding some other stuff (like seeAlso and ontology header). We'll decide later about that "other stuff".
PROPOSED: The owl.owl file (the owl namespace document) will be constructed by turning the RDF-Based Semantics axiomatic triples table into RDF/XML and possible adding some other stuff (like seeAlso and ontology header). We'll decide later about that "other stuff". ←
17:37:13 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: there is still the question of which triples exactly to use
Michael Schneider: there is still the question of which triples exactly to use ←
17:37:59 <IanH> I prefer the simpler one that is aligned with RDF-based semantics.
Ian Horrocks: I prefer the simpler one that is aligned with RDF-based semantics. ←
17:38:03 <sandro> PROPOSED: The owl.owl file (the owl namespace document) will be constructed by turning the RDF-Based Semantics axiomatic triples table into RDF/XML and possibly adding some other stuff (like seeAlso and ontology header). We'll decide later (after PR) about that "other stuff".
PROPOSED: The owl.owl file (the owl namespace document) will be constructed by turning the RDF-Based Semantics axiomatic triples table into RDF/XML and possibly adding some other stuff (like seeAlso and ontology header). We'll decide later (after PR) about that "other stuff". ←
17:38:39 <mschneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:38:39 <Zakim> mschneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid should now be muted ←
17:38:54 <bcuencagrau> alanr: let's vote
Alan Ruttenberg: let's vote ←
17:39:09 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:39:11 <mschneid> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
17:39:14 <pfps> +0
17:39:17 <zimmer> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
17:39:20 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
17:39:25 <Zhe> :)
17:39:26 <sandro> achille: +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:39:28 <JeffP> +0
17:39:30 <Zhe> +1
17:39:31 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:39:31 <bijan> +0
Bijan Parsia: +0 ←
17:39:33 <MarkusK_> +0
Markus Krötzsch: +0 ←
17:39:33 <baojie> +1
17:39:37 <Rinke> +0
Rinke Hoekstra: +0 ←
17:39:39 <bmotik> +0 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: +0 (Oxford) ←
17:39:49 <bcuencagrau> alanr: resolved
Alan Ruttenberg: resolved ←
17:40:00 <sandro> RESOLVED: The owl.owl file (the owl namespace document) will be constructed by turning the RDF-Based Semantics axiomatic triples table into RDF/XML and possibly adding some other stuff (like seeAlso and ontology header). We'll decide later (after PR) about that "other stuff".
RESOLVED: The owl.owl file (the owl namespace document) will be constructed by turning the RDF-Based Semantics axiomatic triples table into RDF/XML and possibly adding some other stuff (like seeAlso and ontology header). We'll decide later (after PR) about that "other stuff". ←
17:40:20 <mschneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:40:25 <mschneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:40:25 <Zakim> mschneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid should no longer be muted ←
17:40:28 <alanr> ack schneid
Alan Ruttenberg: ack schneid ←
17:40:47 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: in the old OWldotOWL there was a lot of references to the OWL vocabulary
Michael Schneider: in the old OWldotOWL there was a lot of references to the OWL vocabulary ←
17:40:51 <ewallace> I am in favor of Michael's current direction for this.
Evan Wallace: I am in favor of Michael's current direction for this. ←
17:41:01 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: there was OWL:Class and not rdfs:Class
Michael Schneider: there was OWL:Class and not rdfs:Class ←
17:41:17 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: there was a tendency to use the OWL namespace
Michael Schneider: there was a tendency to use the OWL namespace ←
17:41:19 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:41:26 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:41:39 <mschneid> orignally, but now not anymore
Michael Schneider: orignally, but now not anymore ←
17:41:41 <bijan> My principle: The only think *I* want is the disclaimer. Beyond the disclaimer I think whatever makes Holger minimally happy should be included and I'd prefer nothing else :)
Bijan Parsia: My principle: The only think *I* want is the disclaimer. Beyond the disclaimer I think whatever makes Holger minimally happy should be included and I'd prefer nothing else :) ←
17:41:44 <mschneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:41:46 <ewallace> That is not what I heard Michael to say.
Evan Wallace: That is not what I heard Michael to say. ←
17:41:51 <bijan> And I'd like it to be easiest for us
Bijan Parsia: And I'd like it to be easiest for us ←
17:41:54 <pfps> +1 to bijan
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to bijan ←
17:42:01 <alanr> ack schneid
Alan Ruttenberg: ack schneid ←
17:42:02 <bcuencagrau> IanH: we dedided to use the axiomatic triples?
Ian Horrocks: we dedided to use the axiomatic triples? ←
17:42:39 <sandro> I understood that decision to be based on SOME axiomatic triples, but perhaps not the current ones.
Sandro Hawke: I understood that decision to be based on SOME axiomatic triples, but perhaps not the current ones. ←
17:42:56 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: I could make some changes in the RDF based semantics
Michael Schneider: I could make some changes in the RDF based semantics ←
17:43:00 <ewallace> Agree with Sandro.
Evan Wallace: Agree with Sandro. ←
17:43:44 <bcuencagrau> alanr: there seems to be a risk in your last proposal. The safe way is to use the rdfs: namespace
Alan Ruttenberg: there seems to be a risk in your last proposal. The safe way is to use the rdfs: namespace ←
17:44:05 <bcuencagrau> alanr; why does Holger think it would be helpful?
alanr; why does Holger think it would be helpful? ←
17:44:24 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: because the basic idea was to start from OWldotOWL and extend it
Michael Schneider: because the basic idea was to start from OWldotOWL and extend it ←
17:44:53 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Strawpoll
Alan Ruttenberg: Strawpoll ←
17:45:08 <alanr> STRAW POLL: 1 = Prefer RDFS style, 2= Prefer more OWLish style
Alan Ruttenberg: STRAW POLL: 1 = Prefer RDFS style, 2= Prefer more OWLish style ←
17:45:11 <sandro> 2
Sandro Hawke: 2 ←
17:45:15 <bmotik> 2
Boris Motik: 2 ←
17:45:18 <ewallace> 2
Evan Wallace: 2 ←
17:45:19 <zimmer> 0
17:45:20 <MarkusK_> 2
Markus Krötzsch: 2 ←
17:45:21 <baojie> 0
17:45:25 <pfps> 3 = prefer what is the in the current owl.owl
Peter Patel-Schneider: 3 = prefer what is the in the current owl.owl ←
17:45:26 <mschneid> 2
17:45:34 <alanr> achille votes 1
Alan Ruttenberg: achille votes 1 ←
17:45:37 <bijan> I don't know the difference
Bijan Parsia: I don't know the difference ←
17:45:45 <JeffP> 0
17:45:46 <Zhe> 1
17:45:55 <alanr> 1
Alan Ruttenberg: 1 ←
17:45:58 <Rinke> 0
Rinke Hoekstra: 0 ←
17:45:58 <IanH> 1
Ian Horrocks: 1 ←
17:46:21 <bcuencagrau> alanr: even tie
Alan Ruttenberg: even tie ←
17:46:25 <IanH> but I don't care that much!
Ian Horrocks: but I don't care that much! ←
17:46:31 <ewallace> Can we get to Bijan's concern?
Evan Wallace: Can we get to Bijan's concern? ←
17:46:39 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:46:46 <mschneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:46:46 <Zakim> mschneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid should now be muted ←
17:47:05 <bcuencagrau> Bijan: only two systems use OWLdotOWL: TopBraid and SWI Prolog
Bijan Parsia: only two systems use OWLdotOWL: TopBraid and SWI Prolog ←
17:47:21 <mschneid> Holger wants clearly 2
Michael Schneider: Holger wants clearly 2 ←
17:47:25 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Holger wants 2
Alan Ruttenberg: Holger wants 2 ←
17:47:29 <pfps> q+
17:47:41 <bcuencagrau> bijan: why not, i don't see a big difference
Bijan Parsia: why not, i don't see a big difference ←
17:48:17 <bijan> This is why I don't understand 1 vs. 2
Bijan Parsia: This is why I don't understand 1 vs. 2 ←
17:48:25 <bcuencagrau> ewallace: Holger wants it the way it was in OWL 1
Evan Wallace: Holger wants it the way it was in OWL 1 ←
17:48:28 <mschneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:48:28 <Zakim> mschneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid should no longer be muted ←
17:48:46 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: the RDFS style is what you can see in my proposal.
Michael Schneider: the RDFS style is what you can see in my proposal. ←
17:49:21 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: the use of the RDFS namespace is preferred when there is a choice
Michael Schneider: the use of the RDFS namespace is preferred when there is a choice ←
17:50:01 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: in the OWL style, we would use the owl namespace
Michael Schneider: in the OWL style, we would use the owl namespace ←
17:50:21 <pfps> q+
17:51:32 <bcuencagrau> pfps: The difference is what is transitive property a subclass of?
Peter Patel-Schneider: The difference is what is transitive property a subclass of? ←
17:51:43 <bijan> Oooo
Bijan Parsia: Oooo ←
17:51:53 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: in the old proposal is rdf:property: in the new one it is
Michael Schneider: in the old proposal is rdf:property: in the new one it is ←
17:51:58 <Rinke> Then I'm voting 2 as well
Rinke Hoekstra: Then I'm voting 2 as well ←
17:51:58 <bijan> I'm for 2 as well
Bijan Parsia: I'm for 2 as well ←
17:52:00 <IanH> I'll change my vote and go for 2
Ian Horrocks: I'll change my vote and go for 2 ←
17:52:07 <IanH> I wan't the least change possible
Ian Horrocks: I wan't the least change possible ←
17:52:13 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: a subproperty of Objectproperty
Michael Schneider: a subproperty of Objectproperty ←
17:52:19 <pfps> :-)
Peter Patel-Schneider: :-) ←
17:52:50 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: the consequence is that one needs to change the proposal and also the document
Michael Schneider: the consequence is that one needs to change the proposal and also the document ←
17:52:57 <bijan> Is that a normative change in the rdf semantics?
Bijan Parsia: Is that a normative change in the rdf semantics? ←
17:53:17 <pfps> I believe that for the RDFS-based semantics the change to the triples does not change any entailments (as ObjectProperty and Property are the same there).
Peter Patel-Schneider: I believe that for the RDFS-based semantics the change to the triples does not change any entailments (as ObjectProperty and Property are the same there). ←
17:53:28 <bijan> Right
Bijan Parsia: Right ←
17:53:29 <bijan> Cool
Bijan Parsia: Cool ←
17:53:31 <bijan> Good enoughf or me
Bijan Parsia: Good enoughf or me ←
17:54:08 <pfps> I also seem to remember some fairly heated discussion in WebOnt on this, before settling on the owl.owl file.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I also seem to remember some fairly heated discussion in WebOnt on this, before settling on the owl.owl file. ←
17:54:22 <mschneid> PROPOSED: the proposal for owl.owl in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Owl2DotOwlDevel will be changed according to all the comments starting with "#?"; the RDF-Based Semantics, Section 6.4 will be adjusted in exactly the same way
PROPOSED: the proposal for owl.owl in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Owl2DotOwlDevel will be changed according to all the comments starting with "#?"; the RDF-Based Semantics, Section 6.4 will be adjusted in exactly the same way ←
17:54:36 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
17:54:36 <pfps> +1
17:54:38 <bmotik> +1 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxford) ←
17:54:40 <mschneid> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
17:54:41 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
17:54:41 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:54:42 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:54:43 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
17:54:45 <baojie> +1
17:54:48 <Zhe> +1
17:54:54 <JeffP> +1
17:55:09 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:55:28 <alanr> achille votes 0
Alan Ruttenberg: achille votes 0 ←
17:55:35 <zimmer> +0
Antoine Zimmermann: +0 ←
17:56:00 <IanH> RESOLVED: the proposal for owl.owl in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Owl2DotOwlDevel will be changed according to all the comments starting with "#?"; the RDF-Based Semantics, Section 6.4 will be adjusted in exactly the same way
RESOLVED: the proposal for owl.owl in http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Owl2DotOwlDevel will be changed according to all the comments starting with "#?"; the RDF-Based Semantics, Section 6.4 will be adjusted in exactly the same way ←
17:56:49 <pfps> I'm against this - the stuff is in the current owl.owl
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm against this - the stuff is in the current owl.owl ←
17:57:46 <alanr> PROPOSED: Remove assertions related to rdfs:annotation properties that were previously in owl.owl
PROPOSED: Remove assertions related to rdfs:annotation properties that were previously in owl.owl ←
17:58:56 <mschneid> PROPOSED: Remove treatment of terms rdfs:comment, rdfs:isDefinedBy, rdfs:seeAlso, rdfs:label from owl.owl; they have been in owl.owl in the original version
PROPOSED: Remove treatment of terms rdfs:comment, rdfs:isDefinedBy, rdfs:seeAlso, rdfs:label from owl.owl; they have been in owl.owl in the original version ←
17:59:15 <bmotik> 0 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: 0 (Oxford) ←
17:59:16 <zimmer> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
17:59:17 <Zhe> 0
17:59:17 <baojie> 0
17:59:18 <sandro> +0
Sandro Hawke: +0 ←
17:59:21 <MarkusK_> +0
Markus Krötzsch: +0 ←
17:59:21 <Rinke> 0
Rinke Hoekstra: 0 ←
17:59:21 <pfps> -1 ALU, I'm against changes to owl.owl
Peter Patel-Schneider: -1 ALU, I'm against changes to owl.owl ←
17:59:22 <JeffP> 0
17:59:31 <mschneid> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
17:59:32 <ewallace> 0
Evan Wallace: 0 ←
17:59:33 <bijan> +themajoritythatleadstofastresolution
Bijan Parsia: +themajoritythatleadstofastresolution ←
17:59:34 <alanr> achille votes + 1
Alan Ruttenberg: achille votes + 1 ←
18:00:05 <pfps> I'm not laying down in the road on *anything* to do with owl.owl
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm not laying down in the road on *anything* to do with owl.owl ←
18:00:16 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Are you going to formally object?
Alan Ruttenberg: Are you going to formally object? ←
18:00:56 <IanH> RESOLVED: Remove treatment of terms rdfs:comment, rdfs:isDefinedBy, rdfs:seeAlso, rdfs:label from owl.owl; they have been in owl.owl in the original version
RESOLVED: Remove treatment of terms rdfs:comment, rdfs:isDefinedBy, rdfs:seeAlso, rdfs:label from owl.owl; they have been in owl.owl in the original version ←
18:01:21 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: i will write to Holger so that he can comment on it
Michael Schneider: i will write to Holger so that he can comment on it ←
18:02:11 <alanr> Action sandro to copy text from RIF mime type application
Alan Ruttenberg: Action sandro to copy text from RIF mime type application ←
18:02:12 <trackbot> Created ACTION-349 - Copy text from RIF mime type application [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-08-12].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-349 - Copy text from RIF mime type application [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-08-12]. ←
18:02:41 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:02:55 <pfps> q-
18:03:58 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: most rules in the OWL 2 RL spec are very simple, except for a table
Michael Schneider: most rules in the OWL 2 RL spec are very simple, except for a table ←
18:04:10 <mschneid> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profiles#dt-type1
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profiles#dt-type1 ←
18:04:12 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: the table on datatypes and literals
Michael Schneider: the table on datatypes and literals ←
18:04:39 <pfps> I thought that this was extensively discussed when the rules were put together, and the stance was (as Ian has said) that the rules say what needs to be inferred, but not necessarily how the inferences are to be performed. This seems like an eminently suitable solution, and change is neither warranted nor desired nor useful.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I thought that this was extensively discussed when the rules were put together, and the stance was (as Ian has said) that the rules say what needs to be inferred, but not necessarily how the inferences are to be performed. This seems like an eminently suitable solution, and change is neither warranted nor desired nor useful. ←
18:04:59 <IanH> It was extensively discussed already.
Ian Horrocks: It was extensively discussed already. ←
18:05:05 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:05:20 <IanH> What Peter says is exactly the case.
Ian Horrocks: What Peter says is exactly the case. ←
18:05:36 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: this causes difficulties for implementors of forward chaining rule engines
Michael Schneider: this causes difficulties for implementors of forward chaining rule engines ←
18:05:42 <IanH> This is just re-visiting stuff that was extensively discussed already.
Ian Horrocks: This is just re-visiting stuff that was extensively discussed already. ←
18:05:50 <bijan> No new information
Bijan Parsia: No new information ←
18:05:58 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: I have a proposal to improve the rules
Michael Schneider: I have a proposal to improve the rules ←
18:06:04 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:06:04 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
18:06:07 <alanr> ack bmotik
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bmotik ←
18:06:31 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: this is late in the game. Moreover, these rules are not meant to be directly implementable
Boris Motik: this is late in the game. Moreover, these rules are not meant to be directly implementable ←
18:06:49 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: but there are technical reasons why we shouldn't change these rules
Boris Motik: but there are technical reasons why we shouldn't change these rules ←
18:07:11 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: it does not suffice to look at the original graph
Boris Motik: it does not suffice to look at the original graph ←
18:07:21 <bijan> This was discussed before
Bijan Parsia: This was discussed before ←
18:07:23 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: there could be technical problems with the change
Boris Motik: there could be technical problems with the change ←
18:07:33 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:07:33 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
18:07:37 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: Implementors have to think about how to implement these rules
Boris Motik: Implementors have to think about how to implement these rules ←
18:08:27 <bcuencagrau> alanr: let's ove on
Alan Ruttenberg: let's ove on ←
18:08:53 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Let us discuss the two at risk features
Alan Ruttenberg: Let us discuss the two at risk features ←
18:09:18 <bijan> But no objection
Bijan Parsia: But no objection ←
18:09:27 <alanr> PROPOSED: implementation support for rdf:XMLLiteral support has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk
PROPOSED: implementation support for rdf:XMLLiteral support has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk ←
18:09:38 <pfps> +0 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +0 ALU ←
18:09:40 <bcuencagrau> alanr: Most people were favorable to have XML literal
Alan Ruttenberg: Most people were favorable to have XML literal ←
18:09:47 <baojie> 0
18:09:47 <ewallace> +0
Evan Wallace: +0 ←
18:09:49 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
18:09:49 <Zhe> +0
18:09:55 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
18:09:58 <bijan> +1 Manchester
Bijan Parsia: +1 Manchester ←
18:10:00 <Rinke> +1 Amsterdam
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 Amsterdam ←
18:10:01 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
18:10:02 <mschneid> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
18:10:03 <zimmer> +-
Antoine Zimmermann: +- ←
18:10:06 <zimmer> +0
Antoine Zimmermann: +0 ←
18:11:01 <IanH> HermiT does pass the relevant test(s)
Ian Horrocks: HermiT does pass the relevant test(s) ←
18:11:04 <bmotik> HermiT implements rdf:XMLLiteral
Boris Motik: HermiT implements rdf:XMLLiteral ←
18:11:13 <IanH> We do have tests for it.
Ian Horrocks: We do have tests for it. ←
18:11:14 <bmotik> We do
Boris Motik: We do ←
18:11:30 <MarkusK_> test results: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_results
Markus Krötzsch: test results: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_results ←
18:11:44 <JeffP> +1 aAberdeen
18:12:08 <Rinke> �(I know SWI Prolog uses rdf:XMLLiteral)
Rinke Hoekstra: �(I know SWI Prolog uses rdf:XMLLiteral) ←
18:12:39 <bcuencagrau> sandro: the implementation in Aberdeen does not support XMliteral
Sandro Hawke: the implementation in Aberdeen does not support XMliteral ←
18:12:48 <alanr> achille votes +1
Alan Ruttenberg: achille votes +1 ←
18:13:19 <IanH> RESOLVED: implementation support for rdf:XMLLiteral support has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk
RESOLVED: implementation support for rdf:XMLLiteral support has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk ←
18:13:23 <bijan> Pellet just reported supportin both xmlliteral nd owl;rational
Bijan Parsia: Pellet just reported supportin both xmlliteral nd owl;rational ←
18:13:28 <bijan> See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Aug/0005.html
Bijan Parsia: See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Aug/0005.html ←
18:13:29 <bcuencagrau> The second feature at rist is owl:rational
The second feature at rist is owl:rational ←
18:13:40 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
18:13:40 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/08/05-owl-irc#T18-13-40
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2009/08/05-owl-irc#T18-13-40 ←
18:13:48 <pfps> q+
18:13:57 <bijan> Manchester would object to its removal
Bijan Parsia: Manchester would object to its removal ←
18:14:09 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
18:14:13 <bijan> Given that no implementor found a problem...I'd say the at risk has been met
Bijan Parsia: Given that no implementor found a problem...I'd say the at risk has been met ←
18:14:20 <Rinke> I think the key point is that it has been shown to be implementable
Rinke Hoekstra: I think the key point is that it has been shown to be implementable ←
18:14:45 <bcuencagrau> pfps: i thought that the meaning of "at risk" is to determine whether the feature is implementable
Peter Patel-Schneider: i thought that the meaning of "at risk" is to determine whether the feature is implementable ←
18:14:51 <bmotik> I've removed the at-risk note in the Syntax document.
Boris Motik: I've removed the at-risk note in the Syntax document. ←
18:14:54 <bcuencagrau> pfps: not whether people want to implement it
Peter Patel-Schneider: not whether people want to implement it ←
18:15:00 <bmotik> for rdf:XMLLiteral
Boris Motik: for rdf:XMLLiteral ←
18:15:12 <bijan> I think we're in clear
Bijan Parsia: I think we're in clear ←
18:15:12 <MarkusK_> HermiT currently is the only DL reasoner succeeding in the owl:rational tests
Markus Krötzsch: HermiT currently is the only DL reasoner succeeding in the owl:rational tests ←
18:15:13 <bcuencagrau> sandro: we don't want people to say "we don't implement it because it is too hard"
Sandro Hawke: we don't want people to say "we don't implement it because it is too hard" ←
18:15:30 <bcuencagrau> sandro: but this doesn't seem to be the case
Sandro Hawke: but this doesn't seem to be the case ←
18:15:37 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:15:38 <sandro> s/we don't want people to say/I don't see anyone saying/
Sandro Hawke: s/we don't want people to say/I don't see anyone saying/ ←
18:15:45 <alanr> ack bmotik
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bmotik ←
18:15:49 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:15:49 <Zakim> bmotik was not muted, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik was not muted, bmotik ←
18:16:04 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:16:04 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
18:16:07 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: the implemetation of owl:rational in HermiT was easy
Boris Motik: the implemetation of owl:rational in HermiT was easy ←
18:16:09 <alanr> PROPOSED: implementation support for owl:rational has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk
PROPOSED: implementation support for owl:rational has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk ←
18:16:13 <pfps> +1
18:16:13 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
18:16:21 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
18:16:22 <baojie> 0
18:16:30 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
18:16:37 <Rinke> +1 Amsterdam
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 Amsterdam ←
18:16:41 <JeffP> 0
18:16:42 <zimmer> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
18:16:43 <Zhe> 0
18:16:52 <pfps> Is owl:rational in the smaller profiles?
Peter Patel-Schneider: Is owl:rational in the smaller profiles? ←
18:16:54 <mschneid> note, RL does not support owl:rational
Michael Schneider: note, RL does not support owl:rational ←
18:16:56 <MarkusK_> Pellet did not report test results for owl:rational yet
Markus Krötzsch: Pellet did not report test results for owl:rational yet ←
18:17:01 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
18:17:03 <mschneid> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
18:17:33 <bcuencagrau> alanr: no objection
Alan Ruttenberg: no objection ←
18:17:34 <sandro> +1 (given it's not in RL)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (given it's not in RL) ←
18:17:38 <bcuencagrau> alanr: resolved
Alan Ruttenberg: resolved ←
18:17:42 <alanr> achille votes +1
Alan Ruttenberg: achille votes +1 ←
18:17:42 <sandro> achille: +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:17:49 <IanH> RESOLVED: implementation support for owl:rational has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk
RESOLVED: implementation support for owl:rational has been adequately demonstrated and the feature is no longer considered at-risk ←
18:18:11 <bcuencagrau> alanr; move to PR
alanr; move to PR ←
18:18:11 <bmotik> And I've now removed the at-risk note for owl:rational.
Boris Motik: And I've now removed the at-risk note for owl:rational. ←
18:18:28 <pfps> Ah yes, the documents need to be changed.
Peter Patel-Schneider: Ah yes, the documents need to be changed. ←
18:18:30 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
18:18:31 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
18:18:32 <bcuencagrau> alanr: we should discuss which are the pros and cons
Alan Ruttenberg: we should discuss which are the pros and cons ←
18:18:36 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
18:18:41 <bcuencagrau> bijan: we are ready for PR
Bijan Parsia: we are ready for PR ←
18:19:12 <bcuencagrau> bijan: we have plenty of support
Bijan Parsia: we have plenty of support ←
18:19:27 <bcuencagrau> bijan: we have two objections
Bijan Parsia: we have two objections ←
18:20:03 <alanr> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
18:20:09 <bcuencagrau> bijan: I would be surprised if the ACC insists on them
Bijan Parsia: I would be surprised if the ACC insists on them ←
18:20:20 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:20:46 <bcuencagrau> sandro: I am a bit uncorfortable with the status of the implementation exit criteria
Sandro Hawke: I am a bit uncorfortable with the status of the implementation exit criteria ←
18:21:09 <bcuencagrau> sandro: we need to OWL Full implentations
Sandro Hawke: we need to OWL Full implentations ←
18:21:12 <pfps> There are still some i's to cross and t's to dot before taking things to PR, but I think that we are in a good shape.
Peter Patel-Schneider: There are still some i's to cross and t's to dot before taking things to PR, but I think that we are in a good shape. ←
18:21:21 <bcuencagrau> sandro: nobody is claiming to have and OWL 2 Full implementation
Sandro Hawke: nobody is claiming to have and OWL 2 Full implementation ←
18:21:32 <alanr> q+ alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ alanr ←
18:21:36 <bcuencagrau> sandro: the Jena people may say that they do have one
Sandro Hawke: the Jena people may say that they do have one ←
18:21:46 <bcuencagrau> Bijan: Pellet does do some OWL Full
Bijan Parsia: Pellet does do some OWL Full ←
18:22:03 <pfps> +1 to Sandro's concern - but Jena was a Full implementation, so I think that it is just a matter of labelling
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to Sandro's concern - but Jena was a Full implementation, so I think that it is just a matter of labelling ←
18:22:04 <bcuencagrau> Bijan: there is some of the RDF-based semantics
Bijan Parsia: there is some of the RDF-based semantics ←
18:22:13 <JeffP> The RL reasoners do some OWL Full too
Jeff Pan: The RL reasoners do some OWL Full too ←
18:22:22 <bcuencagrau> sandro: I am ok if someone says that has an OWl Full implementation
Sandro Hawke: I am ok if someone says that has an OWl Full implementation ←
18:22:24 <MarkusK_> +1 the RL reasoners are all doing OWL Full already
Markus Krötzsch: +1 the RL reasoners are all doing OWL Full already ←
18:22:37 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:22:52 <MarkusK_> OWL Full test status: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_results#OWL_2_Full_Test_Cases
Markus Krötzsch: OWL Full test status: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_results#OWL_2_Full_Test_Cases ←
18:23:15 <IanH> We had some of that kind of stuff in LC comments.
Ian Horrocks: We had some of that kind of stuff in LC comments. ←
18:23:25 <alanr> ack alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: ack alanr ←
18:23:59 <bcuencagrau> alanr: we are in very good shape. An issue is that GRDLL has not been published yet
Alan Ruttenberg: we are in very good shape. An issue is that GRDLL has not been published yet ←
18:23:59 <sandro> q+ to answer about GRDDL
Sandro Hawke: q+ to answer about GRDDL ←
18:24:25 <bcuencagrau> alanr: some tests did not passed the "two reasoners" approval
Alan Ruttenberg: some tests did not passed the "two reasoners" approval ←
18:24:35 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:24:37 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:24:37 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:24:39 <alanr> ack bmotik
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bmotik ←
18:24:40 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
18:24:58 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: what does it mean to have an OWl Full implementation?
Boris Motik: what does it mean to have an OWl Full implementation? ←
18:25:22 <bcuencagrau> bmotik: in principle, RL implementations do count as OWl Full implementation
Boris Motik: in principle, RL implementations do count as OWl Full implementation ←
18:25:32 <MarkusK_> +1 to Boris: RL tools implement OWL Full
Markus Krötzsch: +1 to Boris: RL tools implement OWL Full ←
18:25:49 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:25:49 <bcuencagrau> sandro: the question is whether the provider of the system wants to claim that they have an OWL 2 Full implementation
Sandro Hawke: the question is whether the provider of the system wants to claim that they have an OWL 2 Full implementation ←
18:26:23 <bcuencagrau> Zhe: Oracle is close to have RL, and it is an OWl Full implementation
Zhe Wu: Oracle is close to have RL, and it is an OWl Full implementation ←
18:26:31 <JeffP> I see no problem
18:26:37 <bcuencagrau> Zhe: I am willing to go on the record and claim it
Zhe Wu: I am willing to go on the record and claim it ←
18:26:42 <alanr> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
18:26:42 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to answer about GRDDL
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to answer about GRDDL ←
18:27:02 <bcuencagrau> sandro: the GRRDL issue. It was harder than what I thought. my mistake
Sandro Hawke: the GRRDL issue. It was harder than what I thought. my mistake ←
18:27:06 <bmotik> But Ivan is likely to follow suit, won't he? So could we have a vote on transition to PR soon?
Boris Motik: But Ivan is likely to follow suit, won't he? So could we have a vote on transition to PR soon? ←
18:27:14 <bcuencagrau> sandro: it is in good shape, but does not have annotations
Sandro Hawke: it is in good shape, but does not have annotations ←
18:27:16 <bmotik> isn't he -- sorry
Boris Motik: isn't he -- sorry ←
18:27:45 <IanH> q-
Ian Horrocks: q- ←
18:27:55 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
18:28:03 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
18:28:07 <bcuencagrau> sandro: I can spend some time on it once back from vacation
Sandro Hawke: I can spend some time on it once back from vacation ←
18:28:20 <bcuencagrau> Bijan: we do not need the final version of the GRDLL before PR
Bijan Parsia: we do not need the final version of the GRDLL before PR ←
18:28:31 <IanH> It's at least a proof of concept.
Ian Horrocks: It's at least a proof of concept. ←
18:28:51 <sandro> sandro: a 0.1 release, or something.
Sandro Hawke: a 0.1 release, or something. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:28:59 <pfps> GRDDL is probably at 0.5 release
Peter Patel-Schneider: GRDDL is probably at 0.5 release ←
18:28:59 <bcuencagrau> alanr: should we vote now?
Alan Ruttenberg: should we vote now? ←
18:29:03 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:29:11 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
18:29:13 <bmotik> I'd like to vote now. People will be on vacation, so this will just go on.
Boris Motik: I'd like to vote now. People will be on vacation, so this will just go on. ←
18:29:25 <bcuencagrau> I agree with Boris
I agree with Boris ←
18:29:31 <Zhe> I will be on vacation on Aug 17th week
Zhe Wu: I will be on vacation on Aug 17th week ←
18:29:40 <bmotik> No problem to stay 10 minutes
Boris Motik: No problem to stay 10 minutes ←
18:30:00 <bcuencagrau> achille: we are ready so we should move forward
Achille Fokoue: we are ready so we should move forward ←
18:30:20 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
18:30:23 <JeffP> should vote before holiday
Jeff Pan: should vote before holiday ←
18:30:23 <Zakim> -achille
Zakim IRC Bot: -achille ←
18:30:27 <alanr> ack ianh
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ianh ←
18:30:34 <bijan> Are there any objections? or serious qualms?
Bijan Parsia: Are there any objections? or serious qualms? ←
18:30:35 <sandro> achille votes +1 on moving to PR, before dropping off call.
Sandro Hawke: achille votes +1 on moving to PR, before dropping off call. ←
18:30:41 <pfps> I'm happy to vote to move forward and have the chairs do the things that are necessary.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm happy to vote to move forward and have the chairs do the things that are necessary. ←
18:31:01 <bcuencagrau> IanH: we are in a good position to vote. We have good attendance
Ian Horrocks: we are in a good position to vote. We have good attendance ←
18:31:10 <bcuencagrau> IanH: and it is not clear when we could vote
Ian Horrocks: and it is not clear when we could vote ←
18:31:36 <MarkusK_> +1 to Ian: let us vote now
Markus Krötzsch: +1 to Ian: let us vote now ←
18:31:49 <mschneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
18:32:02 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
18:32:29 <alanr> ack schneid
Alan Ruttenberg: ack schneid ←
18:32:33 <mschneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:32:33 <Zakim> mschneid was not muted, schneid
Zakim IRC Bot: mschneid was not muted, schneid ←
18:32:37 <bcuencagrau> sandro: I am not sure what the vote would mean if the docs can change
Sandro Hawke: I am not sure what the vote would mean if the docs can change ←
18:32:43 <pfps> We may have to have an affirmation of "really done", but let's say "done" now.
Peter Patel-Schneider: We may have to have an affirmation of "really done", but let's say "done" now. ←
18:32:48 <bmotik> Well then, let's just vote -- it can't hurt, can it?
Boris Motik: Well then, let's just vote -- it can't hurt, can it? ←
18:32:58 <MarkusK_> +1 to bmotik
Markus Krötzsch: +1 to bmotik ←
18:33:00 <bmotik> It seems like everyone would vote positively anyway/
Boris Motik: It seems like everyone would vote positively anyway/ ←
18:33:01 <alanr> we have to be clear on what we are voting on , boris
Alan Ruttenberg: we have to be clear on what we are voting on , boris ←
18:33:22 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: there is a small part of a proof in the RDF semantics that I haven't finished
Michael Schneider: there is a small part of a proof in the RDF semantics that I haven't finished ←
18:33:26 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:33:37 <bcuencagrau> mschneid: it is non-normative anyway, but I know what to do
Michael Schneider: it is non-normative anyway, but I know what to do ←
18:33:40 <mschneid> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/RDF-Based_Semantics#Proof_for_the_Correspondence_Theorem
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/RDF-Based_Semantics#Proof_for_the_Correspondence_Theorem ←
18:33:44 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
18:34:02 <IanH> We did exactly the same thing for moving to CR.
Ian Horrocks: We did exactly the same thing for moving to CR. ←
18:34:25 <bcuencagrau> bijan: we say that we are ready to move to PR and let the chairs check the changes
Bijan Parsia: we say that we are ready to move to PR and let the chairs check the changes ←
18:34:25 <pfps> +1 to Bijan
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to Bijan ←
18:34:35 <sandro> PROPOSED: All of our Rec-Track documents are ready for Proposed Recommendation (given satisfactory completion of edits discussed so far, approved by chairs).
PROPOSED: All of our Rec-Track documents are ready for Proposed Recommendation (given satisfactory completion of edits discussed so far, approved by chairs). ←
18:35:13 <mschneid> I guess we vote by institution?
Michael Schneider: I guess we vote by institution? ←
18:35:19 <MarkusK_> informative documents were included in the announced vote in the minutes
Markus Krötzsch: informative documents were included in the announced vote in the minutes ←
18:35:28 <MarkusK_> s /minutes/agenda/
Markus Krötzsch: s /minutes/agenda/ ←
18:36:11 <mschneid> RDF-Based Semantics has a list of all changes
Michael Schneider: RDF-Based Semantics has a list of all changes ←
18:36:32 <sandro> PROPOSED: All of our Rec-Track documents are ready for Proposed Recommendation (given satisfactory completion of edits discussed so far, and admin stuff like changes, subject to approval by chairs).
PROPOSED: All of our Rec-Track documents are ready for Proposed Recommendation (given satisfactory completion of edits discussed so far, and admin stuff like changes, subject to approval by chairs). ←
18:36:36 <pfps> +1 ALU
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 ALU ←
18:36:41 <JeffP> +1 Aberdeen
18:36:42 <bmotik> +1 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxford) ←
18:36:42 <MarkusK_> +1 FZI
Markus Krötzsch: +1 FZI ←
18:36:44 <baojie> +1 RPI
18:36:45 <Zhe> +1 ORACLE
18:36:46 <ewallace> +1 NIST
Evan Wallace: +1 NIST ←
18:36:47 <bijan> +1 Manchester
Bijan Parsia: +1 Manchester ←
18:36:48 <sandro> +1 W3C
Sandro Hawke: +1 W3C ←
18:36:49 <Rinke> +1 Amsterdam
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 Amsterdam ←
18:37:02 <zimmer> +1 DERI
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 DERI ←
18:37:11 <sandro> achille: +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:37:33 <alanr> +1 (Science Commons)
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 (Science Commons) ←
18:37:34 <sandro> RESOLVED: All of our Rec-Track documents are ready for Proposed Recommendation (given satisfactory completion of edits discussed so far, and admin stuff like changes, subject to approval by chairs).
RESOLVED: All of our Rec-Track documents are ready for Proposed Recommendation (given satisfactory completion of edits discussed so far, and admin stuff like changes, subject to approval by chairs). ←
18:37:46 <bcuencagrau> cool
cool ←
18:37:48 <IanH> AWESOME!!!
Ian Horrocks: AWESOME!!! ←
18:37:53 <Zhe> :)
18:37:55 <Rinke> cool, bye
Rinke Hoekstra: cool, bye ←
18:37:56 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
18:37:56 <IanH> Thanks all
Ian Horrocks: Thanks all ←
18:37:57 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
18:37:59 <bijan> OWL 3 anyone?
Bijan Parsia: OWL 3 anyone? ←
18:37:59 <Zakim> -alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: -alanr ←
18:38:01 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
18:38:01 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
18:38:03 <Zakim> -baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie ←
18:38:03 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
18:38:03 <JeffP> thanks, bye :)
18:38:04 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
18:38:04 <Zakim> -bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: -bijan ←
18:38:06 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
18:38:10 <sandro> ha ha ha bijan
Sandro Hawke: ha ha ha bijan ←
18:38:13 <bijan> ;)
Bijan Parsia: ;) ←
18:38:16 <Zakim> -MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK_ ←
18:38:21 <Zakim> -mschneid
Zakim IRC Bot: -mschneid ←
18:38:26 <Zakim> -zimmer
Zakim IRC Bot: -zimmer ←
18:38:48 <Zakim> -pfps
Zakim IRC Bot: -pfps ←
18:38:49 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended ←
18:38:50 <Zakim> Attendees were +8686527aaaa, IanH, alanr, bmotik, zimmer, Sandro, bcuencagrau, bijan, +1.518.276.aacc, mschneid, baojie, +1.914.356.aadd, pfps, Zhe, achille, Evan_Wallace, Rinke,
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were +8686527aaaa, IanH, alanr, bmotik, zimmer, Sandro, bcuencagrau, bijan, +1.518.276.aacc, mschneid, baojie, +1.914.356.aadd, pfps, Zhe, achille, Evan_Wallace, Rinke, ←
18:38:52 <Zakim> ... MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: ... MarkusK_ ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2009-08-05 18:55:14 UTC by 'unknown', comments: 'fix nick errors'