Minutes of telecon 11th July 2002 from Jeremy Carroll on 2002-07-15 (www-webont-wg@w3.org from July 2002) (original) (raw)

Summary:

ACTIONS

ACTION jjc Make proposal for test case structure ACTION Hendler produce test for issue 4.2 ACTION ChrisW to propose resolution of 3.4 and 4.1 ACTION Patel-Schneider find example illustratin computational difficulties in having both datatypes and objects in integrated domain. ACTION connolly point to use case for having datatypes and obejct property in integrated domain ACTION: hayes review abstract syntax ACTION: connolly review abstract syntax ACTION: ter Horst review abstract syntax

Reminder of Continued Action:

ACTION (all): send to WebOnt mailing list a short description of the tools you have available or that you will use to help tools.

DECISIONS

RESOLVED: We will release the current documents, with OWL Lite, and have in the issue list that we will revisit 5.2.

RESOLVED: We close issue 4.2 accepting DAML solution with respect to the name cardinaility minCardinality maxCardinality

RESOLVED: Close 5.16 thus "- OWL Lite includes min/max cardinality restrictions of 0 and 1"

Log: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/11-webont-irc Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jul/0046.html

Detail:

ADMIN

1.1) Roll call

present: Jeremy Carroll Dan Connolly Nicholas Gibbins Pat Hayes Jeff Heflin Ziv Hellman Jim Hendler Ruediger Klein Massimo Marchiori Libby Miller Enrico Motta Leo Obrst Peter Patel-Schneider Marwan Sabbouh Guus Schreiber, Michael Smith, John Stanton Lynn Andrea Stein Herman ter Horst Lynne R. Thompson Christopher Welty

regrets: Borden Dale, Dean Eshelman, Finin Horrocks, McGuinness, de Roo, van Harmelen, Volz Wallace

1.2) Minutes June 27 telecon [[[ PROPOSED to accept the following as a true record:

Minutes by Jeremy Carroll http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jul/0003.html: Amendment: add Evan Wallace to regrets list http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jul/0035.html ]]] Chris Welty was present.

Minutes accepted with these corrections.

1.3) F2f meeting record [[ Draft meeting record: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jul/0038.html ]] Postponed.

1.4) Agenda amendments None.

1.5) Next meeting [[

18 July, per regular schedule.
scribe volunteer is solicited; ]] Agreed; no volunteer,

ACTION ITEM REVIEW

2.1) Telecon actions

Following are done:

ACTION - Connolly: to arrange direct CVS access for Carroll ACTION - Welty, Hayes, Hendler, Connolly to review updated requirements WD ACTION - Hendler; Summarize discussion about "Formal Spec" to mailing list ACTION - Heflin; e-mail list to indicate imminent publication of reqdoc

This action is continued:

ACTION - Heflin, Carroll, Borden, Volz to review XML Presentation Syntax document DONE by Volz

2,2) FTF actions

[For document-related actions, see agenda iten 4]

Following actions are done:

ACTION Mike Smith to edit walkthru, with help of Lynn Stein, Ora Lassila, Deb McGuinness. Guus Schreiber to help with examples. ACTION (Raphael) raise superissue to subsume equivalentTo

Following actions are continued:

ACTION DanC to raise an issue wrt rdfs:subclassof and owl:subclassoff

ACTION Connoly to get the OK'd for the OWL URI by the W3C webmaster/director;

ACTION Pat will attempt to take abstract syntax, and Peter's MT and the mapping into RDF and will write a model theory in the Connolly style (i.e. as an extension to RDF MT) and see if he can identify the exact issues. Target deadline: three weeks (July 25).

ACTION Guus will generate a structure in which the examples should appear by July 11. This will also include one example.

ACTION Evan Wallace and Larry Eshelman: contribute examples

ACTION Evan will writeup a description of a recent OMG meeting that concerned UML and OWL, and the process he is running at OMG, and will post that to the WG.

ACTION (Deb) write up an issue with respect to the unique names assumption requirement

ACTION Jim will work with Mike Dean to see if DAML Validator can become OWL validator

ACTION (all): send to WebOnt mailing list a short description of the tools you have available or that you will use to help tools.

ACTION (Raphael): will make a large ontology available to test readers.

ISSUES (20-30 min)

3.1) Issues 4.2, 5.2, 5.15, 5.16

[[[ Proposal to CLOSE these four issues, all concerned with OWL Lite:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jul/0045.html ]]] Hendler in chair for this issue.

Issue 5.2

Much discussion. Straw Poll: is there a named subset of OWL? For: 8 Against: 3 Abstain: 9

Connolly can't live with a named subset, because cost is high.

RESOLVED: We will release the current documents, with OWL Lite, and have in the issue list that we will revisit 5.2.

Issue 4.2

Discussion about f2f discussion. RESOLVED: We close issue 4.2 accepting DAML solution with respect to the name cardinaility minCardinality maxCardinality

ABSTENTIONS: Connolly and Stein

ACTION jjc Make proposal for test case structure ACTION Hendler produce test for issue 4.2

Issue 5.16

RESOLVED: Close 5.16 thus "- OWL Lite includes min/max cardinality restrictions of 0 and 1" ABSTENTIONS: Heflin

3.2) Issue 3.4 UnambiguousProperty and 4.1 "UniqueProp is bad name"

[[[ http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I3.4-UnambiguousProperty http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I4.1-UniqueProp-BadName

Main issue: appropriate names for UnambiguousProperty and UniqueProperty. Suggestions, assignment of issue owners. ]]] Discussion. Chris Welty to own issue. ACTION ChrisW to propose resolution of 3.4 and 4.1

3.3) Issues 5.3 & 5.10 (Patel-Schneidr, Connolly) [[[ http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I5.3-Semantic-Layering http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I5.10-DAML-OIL-semantics-is- too-weak

Discussion/questions about similarities/differences between the tow model theories

Model theory by PeterPS http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0082.html

Model theory by DanC http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0208.html ]]]

Some discussion limited to the topic of having datatypes and objects both in a single domain.

ACTION Patel-Schneider find example illustrating computational difficulties in having both datatypes and objects in integrated domain. ACTION connolly point to use case for having datatypes and obejct property in integrated domain

DOCUMENTS (editors, 15 min)

4.1) OWL Features synopsis

Skipped.

4,2) OWL 1.0 Reference description (Dean et al.)

Skipped.

4.3) OWL 1.0 Abstract syntax (Horrocks, Patel-Schneider)

Almost skipped. No substantive discussion. ACTION: hayes review abstract syntax ACTION: connolly review abstract syntax ACTION: ter Horst review abstract syntax

A.O.B (0-5 min)

None.

Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 12🔞37 UTC