<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<tt>
<b>Chat transcript from room: ontoiop_20140924</b><br>
<b>2014-09-24 GMT-08:00</b><br>
<b>[07:43] </b><b>TerryLongstreth: </b>In a hotel room, working
on getting an audio connection...<br>
<b>[08:05] </b>anonymous morphed into ChristophLange<br>
<b>[08:06] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>Hi, I'm back to OntoIOp,
but unfortunately didn't have time to prepare anything, nor to
catch up with previous things. If there is anything related to
syntax or IRIs where my advice would have been helpful, I'm happy
to help though<br>
<b>[08:14] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Till presenting slightly
revised slides<br>
<b>[08:14] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>slide 12<br>
<b>[08:17] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>physical distribution of
OMS is entirely orthogonal to the distinction made here (focused
OMS, distributed OMS=OMS networks, OMS libraries). Actually, even
focused OMS can be physically distribtued, while distributed OMS
can be physically non-distributed.<br>
<b>[08:18] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>@TaraAthan: BTW in
parallel to this call I'm reviewing the minutes of the last one
(when I was on holiday). I'll be happy to resolve any LoLa-related
issues via the mailing list or personal email.<br>
<b>[08:19] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>The top-level definitions
in OMS libraries are similar to titlings in Common Logic
documents.<br>
<b>[08:19] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>I see that the terminology
has changed, so I/we may need to re-apply some of these changes in
LoLa<br>
<b>[08:19] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>We can do so via
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/ontohub/OOR_Ontohub_API/issues">https://github.com/ontohub/OOR_Ontohub_API/issues</a>. End of "LoLa
diversion" :-)<br>
<b>[08:20] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Common Logic documents
can mix titlings with other assertions.<br>
<b>[08:22] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>in many logics (indeed,
nearly all logics except Common Logic), titling maps and models
are kept seperate. Therefore, we do the same in DOL.<br>
<b>[08:25] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Tara: DOL should be able
to support Common Logic without nesting of titlings.<br>
<b>[08:27] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Since we do not have our
hand at the models (they could be models in any logic), we cannot
assume that models include titling maps.<br>
<b>[08:31] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Tara: it seems that only
Common Logic without titling and imports would be conformant to
DOL. The DOL library mechanism needs to be used for titling -
otherwise, DOL and CL are just incompatible.<br>
<b>[08:35] </b><b>TerryLongstreth: </b>The foregoing discussion
presupposes that Common Logic V2 will become the current draft
version, and that implicitly, that version of CL will be
incompatible with the current draft of OntoIop<br>
<b>[08:36] </b><b>TerryLongstreth: </b>So, do we need a
harmonization session?<br>
<b>[08:38] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Tara: it could be useful
that libraries have a (hierarchical) structure<br>
<b>[08:39] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>However, libraries define
OMS, and thereby assign them URIs. So you can reference the OMS by
their URIs, and do not need to include the library.<br>
<b>[08:41] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Tara: hierarchical
libraries could be useful for nested scoping and for searching.<br>
<b>[08:42] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>A useful addition to DOL
could be an include statement for libraries.<br>
<b>[08:43] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Tara: there could be the
need for annotating the include statement (e.g. with date, or
other metadata)<br>
<b>[08:45] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Sn include statement
would import the whole library. Note that still, the individual
OMS would be referenced by their URLs.<br>
<b>[08:45] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Also, prefix maps would
be imported.<br>
<b>[08:46] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>In a library, the
individual OMS should have URIs that are derived from the URI of
the library and a local name (relative URI) of the OMS.<br>
<b>[08:48] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>At least, OntoIOp adopts
this principle.<br>
<b>[08:49] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>DOL should not adopt this
principle (there may be libraries of OMS with very different
URIs).<br>
<b>[08:50] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>But DOL should make it
possible to adopt this principle, via relative IRIs, or CURIEs.<br>
<b>[08:51] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>If you define the emtpy
prefix to be the IRI of the library, then local names would just
be appended to that IRI, by the CURIE mechanism.<br>
<b>[08:52] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>This could be a default
behaviour.<br>
<b>[08:54] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>In RDF turtle syntax,
such CURIEs start with a colon, in OWL Manchester syntax, they
don't (and that is also the choice that we have made in DOL).<br>
<b>[08:59] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>A problem is that symbols
in an OMS always need to be referenced with oms_name/sym_name,
because their IRI also includes the OMS name.<br>
<b>[09:00] </b><b>TerryLongstreth: </b>I have to leave. Got
another meeting. Will try to spend some time with Ch. 9.<br>
<b>[09:00] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>If we do not want this,
we would have to adopt MMT IRIs, which allow for referencing
symbol in their ontologies, and ontologies in their libraries.<br>
<b>[09:01] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>CURIEs (part of RDFa 1.1):
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies">http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies</a><br>
<b>[09:01] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>OWL Manchester example:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-manchester-syntax/#Quick_Reference">http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-manchester-syntax/#Quick_Reference</a><br>
<b>[09:02] </b><b>TaraAthan: </b>We should carefully distinguish
between empty prefix (e.g. :abc) and no prefix (e.g. abc)<br>
<b>[09:03] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>MMT: </tt><tt><tt><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://svn.kwarc.info/repos/MMT/doc/html/index.html">https://svn.kwarc.info/repos/MMT/doc/html/index.html</a></tt>
paper about MMT:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890540113000631">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890540113000631</a>
or (open-access but a bit outdated) <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.0548">http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.0548</a><br>
<b>[09:03] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>CURIE calls :sym "default
prefix", and sym "no prefix"<br>
<b>[09:09] </b><b>TaraAthan: </b><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/">http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/</a>
says that it is possible to define a default prefix (through
@vocab) to be applied to "undefined names", which I believe are no
prefix names.<br>
<b>[09:15] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>We suggest to let the
no-prefix default to a context-sensitive expansion mechanism,
which always prepends the library IRI (in the context of a
structured OMS where named OMS a referenced) resp. the current OMS
IRI (in the context of a basic OMS).<br>
<b>[09:18] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>what would be the
prepended IRIs exactly?<br>
<b>[09:19] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>in MMT, they use
library_name?OMS_name?symbol_name<br>
<b>[09:19] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>we cannot use
library_name#OMS_name#symbol_name<br>
<b>[09:20] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>because only one # can be
used for the fragment (in this case, the fragment would be
OMS_name#symbol_name)<br>
<b>[09:21] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>the main problem with the
fragment (#) is that one needs to download the whole library,
which can be inefficient<br>
<b>[09:22] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>one option would be
library_name/OMS_name?sym=symbol_name<br>
<b>[09:24] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>the problem is that this
only works for newly created DOL ontologies, not for existing
ontologies<br>
<b>[09:24] </b><b>ChristophLange: </b>curl -sH 'Accept:
application/rdf+xml' -L '<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person">http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person</a>' (you
see the problem: although you have selected only one symbol, the
whole document is downloaded)<br>
<b>[09:24] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Existing ontologies use
library_name/OMS_name#symbol_name or
library_name/OMS_name/symbol_name<br>
<b>[09:26] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>or better:
OMS_name#symbol_name or OMS_name/symbol_name<br>
<b>[09:26] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>in MMT:
OMS_name?symbol_name<br>
<b>[09:27] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>we do not want to
encourage URNs, because we want to encourage a linked-data style,
which is incomatible with URNs<br>
<b>[09:28] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>that said, we do not want
to forbid URNs<br>
<b>[09:33] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>we suggest that the user
can specify the separator, and it defaults to #<br>
<b>[09:34] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>more precisely, we need a
library-OMS separator (defaulting to /) and an OMS-symbol
separator (defaulting to #).<br>
<b>[09:36] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>Tara: it is quite common
that an the IRI of an OWL ontology ends with a #<br>
<b>[09:37] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>in this case, the user
could let the second separator be the empty string<br>
<b>[09:39] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>this means that
separators can be arbitrary strings<br>
<b>[09:41] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>the problem with # is
that the http server only gets the OMS IRI, while the http client
has to interpret the #<br>
<b>[09:45] </b><b>TillMossakowski: </b>so we suggest to let both
separators default to / (even if this causes certain ambiguitites,
because / is now 1. a separator between folders in the library
IRI, 2. a separator between library IRI and OMS name, and 3. a
separator between OMS name and symbol name. However, this can be
disambiguated dynamically)<br>
<b>[09:46] </b>List of attendees: ChristophLange, TaraAthan,
TerryLongstreth, TillMossakowski<br>
</tt>
</body>
</html>