IRC log of dig on 2009-06-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:03:07 [jsoltren]

jsoltren (n=jsoltren@18.226.1.201) has joined #dig

00:04:23 [jsoltren]

jsoltren has quit (Client Quit)

00:05:19 [jsoltren]

jsoltren (n=jsoltren@18.226.1.201) has joined #dig

01:37:45 [kennyluck]

kennyluck (n=kennyluc@47.104.244.43.ap.yournet.ne.jp) has joined #dig

01:38:47 [oshani]

hello kennyluck

01:39:01 [kennyluck]

just woke up...

01:39:02 [oshani]

do you want to commit your changes?

01:39:06 [oshani]

please do so

01:39:11 [kennyluck]

Yes

01:39:12 [oshani]

then we can go through it

01:39:21 [kennyluck]

Is that OK?

01:39:35 [kennyluck]

not going to cause conflict with the scenario part?

01:39:37 [oshani]

well, I've committed all my changes

01:39:50 [oshani]

so, the conflict would be on your side :)

01:39:58 [kennyluck]

Oh OK, so let me do a svn up first

01:40:07 [oshani]

back up your version first

01:40:16 [kennyluck]

By the way, do you have omni graffle?

01:40:21 [oshani]

nope

01:40:41 [kennyluck]

I produced a diagram with omni graffle but when I try to export into JPG it crashes.

01:40:46 [kennyluck]

sadly

01:40:50 [oshani]

oh no

01:41:22 [oshani]

well, did you try any other format? png?

01:42:06 [kennyluck]

They all crash, so I all take a screen shot.

01:42:20 [oshani]

okay

01:42:29 [kennyluck]

Hmm...actually pdf works...

01:42:37 [kennyluck]

Is pdf picture OK, I wonder

01:42:50 [kennyluck]

sounds weird

01:42:58 [oshani]

can you commit the pdf.. I'll see whether I can embed it

01:43:06 [kennyluck]

Sure

01:43:06 [oshani]

I know that eps format for images work

01:43:21 [kennyluck]

I can do this right now, before resolving the conflicts

01:43:35 [oshani]

BTW, I still think we ought to have a diagram for the proof ontology -- even if it's likely to change in the future

01:44:06 [kennyluck]

That's see whether we can make it

01:44:36 [kennyluck]

just tms:justification tms:And-justification etc, are just separate terms

01:44:39 [lkagal]

lkagal (n=lkagal@33.68.171.66.subscriber.vzavenue.net) has joined #dig

01:45:02 [kennyluck]

They don't have ontology structure so I can't really imagine how the diagram looks like

01:45:43 [oshani]

also, I believe some of the things you've written needs to be phrased in a bit more scholarly manner --- re "as pointed out by an attendant at the Cambridge Semantic Web Gathering \ref{slides" :)

01:46:09 [kennyluck]

Yes

01:47:03 [oshani]

kennyluck, ping me when you commit the pdf

01:48:58 [kennyluck]

committed images/Linked_Data_GC.pdf, oshani

01:54:54 [oshani]

kennyluck, the labels for the nodes seem to be overlapping

01:55:02 [oshani]

is that how you wanted it to be?

01:55:22 [kennyluck]

you when overlapping the circles?

01:55:36 [oshani]

yep

01:55:51 [kennyluck]

guess, It's a bit confusing, I can fix it

01:55:58 [oshani]

great

01:57:52 [oshani]

kennyluck, I can embed pdf -- so no worries there

01:57:55 [oshani]

:)

01:58:07 [kennyluck]

OK nice

01:58:45 [oshani]

so ping me back when you've commited the changes to the paper -- in the mean time, I am going to proof read

01:58:57 [kennyluck]

OK

02:11:34 [kennyluck]

I finally know how to run the latex commands on login.csail.mit.edu

02:11:54 [kennyluck]

So let me produce a pdf version...oshani

02:16:32 [oshani]

done?

02:16:35 [oshani]

kennyluck:

02:16:40 [kennyluck]

Hmm... some multiply defined lables, etc.

02:16:42 [kennyluck]

I can fix it

02:20:15 [kennyluck]

by the way, if you have any idea about how to draw the tms vocabulary diagram, go ahead.

02:20:18 [kennyluck]

oshani

02:23:25 [oshani]

oh okay

02:25:43 [oshani]

well, kennyluck, we already have 18 pages! adding a new diagram will not help -- so, I don't think we should do it

02:25:55 [oshani]

so, is it okay if I start editing now?

02:26:20 [oshani]

I'll commit the pdf if you wanna see

02:26:24 [kennyluck]

What a sec, what's your adding?

02:26:51 [oshani]

just making edits - grammar style spelling etc

02:26:59 [oshani]

needs lot of work on that I think

02:27:09 [kennyluck]

OK, I am done now, finally resolve all the label warnings

02:29:48 [oshani]

so, what are you gonna do now?

02:30:08 [oshani]

do you also want to read from the top and note the mistakes?

02:33:53 [kennyluck]

Hmm, I want to rewrite the Conclusion part.

02:34:05 [oshani]

kennyluck, that sounds good

02:34:09 [oshani]

so, go ahead

02:34:10 [kennyluck]

There's also a @@refine symbol here.

02:34:15 [oshani]

yep..

02:34:28 [kennyluck]

Then I guess we can disscuss the overall structure later one

02:34:33 [kennyluck]

s/one/on/

02:34:49 [oshani]

good good

02:35:01 [oshani]

I'll be making changes from the top

02:35:15 [kennyluck]

OK

02:35:41 [kennyluck]

By the way, could you read the Garbage Collection parts part to see whether it makes sense

02:35:49 [oshani]

will do

02:35:56 [kennyluck]

in the future work section

02:37:43 [oshani]

I am gonna remove one of the proof images

02:37:50 [oshani]

to save space

02:38:30 [kennyluck]

Hmm...which one?

02:39:06 [kennyluck]

I would want to preserve all the pictures though.

02:39:09 [oshani]

fig 4:

02:39:40 [kennyluck]

I think the introduction is a bit long, I removed the first paragraph, which I wrote, FYI

02:40:15 [oshani]

oh okay

02:40:24 [oshani]

committed in?

02:40:36 [kennyluck]

No no, I have removed it

02:40:43 [kennyluck]

or commented out

02:41:00 [kennyluck]

Semantic Web is a Web of machine...

02:41:13 [oshani]

yep.. I see it

02:41:18 [kennyluck]

guess it's cliche for semantic web researchers :)

02:49:27 [jsoltren]

jsoltren has quit ("Leaving.")

03:06:48 [fturkmen]

fturkmen has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))

03:07:14 [fturkmen]

fturkmen (n=fturkmen@c-66-31-28-47.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) has joined #dig

03:11:03 [kennyluck]

oshani, I finished the conclusion. guess it's a bit vague

03:11:23 [oshani]

committed?

03:11:58 [kennyluck]

Not yet, I can do it now

03:14:35 [kennyluck]

oh you committed

03:15:52 [kennyluck]

oshani

03:16:04 [oshani]

okay.. thanks

03:18:34 [kennyluck]

I am going to split out the rule in the chained-proof section into 3 rules. Just a listing

03:36:15 [rho_]

rho_ (n=rho@chello213047112079.11.11.vie.surfer.at) has joined #dig

03:38:25 [kennyluck]

I modified a bit in the chained proofs section, what do I do?

03:38:26 [kennyluck]

oshani

03:38:40 [oshani]

commit it

03:38:53 [oshani]

I am still working on the Motivation

03:39:07 [kennyluck]

sorry about my poor English

03:39:29 [oshani]

well, my English isn't any better :)

03:39:43 [kennyluck]

It's obvious, anyway.

03:39:49 [kennyluck]

I mean,

03:39:59 [kennyluck]

My english is obviously worse.

03:44:48 [kennyluck]

oshani

03:45:03 [oshani]

okay

03:46:21 [kennyluck]

I'll read this from start

03:47:32 [kennyluck]

oshani, did you overwrite my change on the desired features section?

03:48:00 [oshani]

kennyluck, no I merged it with the motivation

03:48:21 [oshani]

check 2.3

03:48:49 [kennyluck]

I mean I changed the subsection such as the never ending crawler

03:49:15 [kennyluck]

don't know I don't see this any more, maybe I overwritten it myself. Let me check

03:49:26 [oshani]

well, I see it in my version -- section 2.3

03:49:54 [kennyluck]

Can you copy that here?

03:50:12 [oshani]

\subsection{Desired Features}\label{features}

03:50:13 [oshani]

We introduce the idea of formally describing a `Computing Service' or an `Agent' using rules grounded in Semantic Web technologies. This `Agent' has the following features:

03:50:13 [oshani]

03:50:13 [oshani]

\subsubsection{Never Ending Crawler}

03:50:13 [oshani]

There is no limit to the Linked Open Data cloud. Therefore, the required data pertaining to a given query could be somewhere out there. Therefore we have designed our crawler to look for the required data progressively. In other words, it would not stop when a particular data item has been found.

03:50:27 [kennyluck]

Yep, that's a different one

03:50:30 [kennyluck]

sigh...

03:50:35 [kennyluck]

I changed it

03:50:42 [oshani]

oh no..

03:50:50 [oshani]

when?

03:51:05 [kennyluck]

Let me figure out what happened. Don't worry.

03:58:30 [fturkmen]

fturkmen has left #dig

04:06:10 [kennyluck]

hmm...very old, I made weird mistakes it seems, I will commit again

04:06:14 [kennyluck]

odd

04:07:19 [kennyluck]

at least I have what I wrote in the terminal...

04:10:35 [kennyluck]

I see what's going on now, It seems there are two copy of the desired feature section...

04:11:08 [kennyluck]

did you notice that, oshani?

04:12:07 [oshani]

oh yeah

04:12:30 [kennyluck]

let me remove it

04:12:40 [oshani]

wait

04:12:49 [oshani]

shall I commit my changes first?

04:13:07 [kennyluck]

Sure

04:13:39 [oshani]

done .. go ahead

04:13:46 [kennyluck]

After that could you wait until I resolve this

04:13:53 [oshani]

okay

04:13:59 [oshani]

I will look at the conclusion

04:14:04 [oshani]

in the mean time

04:14:17 [kennyluck]

okay, thanks

04:24:02 [kennyluck]

oshani, I am very confused about this

04:24:10 [oshani]

kennyluck, you've got a reference to this "The third author imagined the Web to be an immortal brain where the machines work as if they are neurons"?

04:24:13 [oshani]

about what?

04:24:23 [kennyluck]

where should this "Desired Feature" go?

04:24:33 [oshani]

it should go under "Motivations"

04:24:36 [kennyluck]

oshani, you are the reference!

04:24:42 [kennyluck]

Oh, ok.

04:25:15 [oshani]

not sure if timbl would like the idea of referring to himself in the paper

04:25:31 [oshani]

timbl, any comments if you are listening?

04:25:48 [kennyluck]

Hmm...

04:26:25 [oshani]

instead we could say something like... "The vision of the Web.."

04:26:30 [oshani]

how's that sound?

04:27:26 [oshani]

kennyluck, and I am going to add a citation from the Scientific American article for that

04:27:39 [kennyluck]

But I am not the person to talk about the vision of the Web!

04:28:01 [kennyluck]

Is that where this vision is from?

04:28:40 [mhausenblas]

mhausenblas (n=mhausenb@wg1-nat.fwgal01.deri.ie) has joined #dig

04:30:10 [kennyluck]

Hmm...I am about to commit the change

04:38:05 [kennyluck]

Ah, I like your change in the first Part of 2.1, oshani

04:43:36 [Pipian]

Pipian has quit ()

04:47:48 [kennyluck]

we have 4 hours more or so, seems to be enough

04:47:56 [oshani]

:)

04:48:00 [oshani]

check conclusion

04:48:05 [oshani]

just committed it

04:48:44 [kennyluck]

Hmm, what do we do now?

04:48:47 [kennyluck]

oshani

04:48:48 [lkagal]

lkagal has quit ()

04:49:11 [oshani]

I am going through the rest of the motivation and cleaning it up

04:49:20 [oshani]

you pick something to do -- I dunno

04:49:28 [kennyluck]

Hah..

05:07:54 [oshani]

kennyluck, I am gonna remove the smart ppl example -- don't feel good abt it

05:08:07 [kennyluck]

why not?

05:08:36 [kennyluck]

the attendants of the meetup like this example, though.

05:09:14 [kennyluck]

Just want to describe the issues around grading and stuff.

05:09:40 [kennyluck]

So we consider a customizable grading user interface to be important

05:10:59 [kennyluck]

And it is just described with words...

05:11:34 [oshani]

oh okay -- so I'll leave it there, since you are so persistent :)

05:12:01 [kennyluck]

Just want to describe what does it mean to be "valuing information"

05:12:09 [kennyluck]

value itself is contravertial

05:13:19 [kennyluck]

FYI, I believe if this is all open, we can tag the employer who selects only "smart people" as bad person.

05:13:37 [kennyluck]

I personally think so.

05:13:56 [kennyluck]

I hate companies, in fact.

05:14:30 [oshani]

:)

05:14:51 [oshani]

kenny the socialist :P

05:14:58 [kennyluck]

Yes,

05:15:15 [kennyluck]

I believe school ranking, grade, all this stuff to be stupid

05:15:25 [kennyluck]

So I made this example.

05:19:47 [oshani]

hey kennyluck, if you are idling now -- can you make a list of things "source code and demos" to submit as additional stuff?

05:19:58 [oshani]

for example link to the passive agent?

05:20:10 [oshani]

commit it as a text file please

05:20:29 [kennyluck]

Hmm...I am actually looking at the feaures part now

05:20:36 [kennyluck]

conflict again, it seesm

05:20:54 [oshani]

uh-oh

05:22:51 [kennyluck]

oh, good news oshani, the source has nothing wrong

05:22:59 [kennyluck]

It seems that the pdf is outdated though

05:23:12 [oshani]

okay

05:29:15 [kennyluck]

No...I don't understand what's going on now

05:29:53 [oshani]

if you haven't made any changes, I suggest you delete and get an svn up

05:32:00 [kennyluck]

I am very confused about the feature part now..

05:32:11 [kennyluck]

Do you have two feature part in your version?

05:32:24 [kennyluck]

oshani

05:32:42 [oshani]

nope -- just one

05:32:46 [oshani]

under motivation

05:33:04 [kennyluck]

hmm...let me check again

05:36:01 [kennyluck]

You moved so much part

05:36:22 [oshani]

??

05:37:12 [kennyluck]

for example you move motivation to 4.5 and so on...

05:37:24 [oshani]

ah yes, the rule...

05:37:42 [oshani]

I thought it would be nice to have it referred from one place

05:37:49 [oshani]

instead of several places

05:38:02 [kennyluck]

Hmm...ok

05:38:21 [kennyluck]

Other big changes you did?

05:38:22 [oshani]

and that makes the motivation section a bit more consistent as well

05:38:36 [oshani]

since we don't write rules for the others

05:38:54 [oshani]

well, I am making some changes to the features -- mostly language and style

05:39:49 [kennyluck]

Why did you remove this line "The other use case would occur when there are contradictory information. For example, if a person is both a good person and a bad person. The user can naively compare the proof counts."?

05:40:09 [kennyluck]

Sorry I guess I should do a update now, maybe the reason is written in the source

05:41:49 [oshani]

kennyluck, I wanted to move away from labelling people as good and bad

05:41:58 [oshani]

does not seem that ethical

05:42:17 [oshani]

perhaps we can take something like a "Youtube" video rating?

05:42:30 [oshani]

some ppl will say it's good and some would say it's bad

05:42:37 [oshani]

and the relative count will hold

05:42:42 [oshani]

sounds good?

05:43:03 [kennyluck]

Sure, any thing that can be described both as good or bad

05:48:31 [kennyluck]

How does will it take for finalization grammar and style issues, oshani? There are two other issues I want to discuss with you.

05:49:06 [oshani]

go ahead.. I'm listening

05:50:15 [kennyluck]

First of all, I feel like we should move the User Interface forward of give pointers at the end of the introduction to the user interface part.

05:50:42 [kennyluck]

This paper contains too many bullshits (I know, most of them are produced by me)

05:51:23 [kennyluck]

Since you don't like "The paper is lenghy"... what for about "For the impatient readers..."

05:53:54 [kennyluck]

and gives a pointer to the user interface section and the slides

05:54:07 [kennyluck]

or we just move the user interface part forward?

06:13:35 [oshani]

kennyluck, I think we can give the slides as additional information

06:13:47 [oshani]

-1 for moving the UI forward

06:13:57 [kennyluck]

I am creating the txt file

06:14:14 [kennyluck]

Or is it possible to submit URIs?

06:14:23 [oshani]

yes we can

06:14:27 [oshani]

I think

06:15:45 [kennyluck]

I am thinking about something like "The impatient reader is encouraged to glance over the slides [18] or to take a look at the User Interface section 4.5"

06:16:30 [kennyluck]

By the way, I am making a zip release of the code

06:24:11 [oshani]

Okay, that's good

06:24:29 [oshani]

well, I'll include that as a foot note.. sounds good?

06:24:52 [oshani]

kennyluck:

06:25:18 [kennyluck]

Hmm.. I would prefer inline text though

06:25:32 [kennyluck]

Really thinks the motivation is kind of boring

06:25:51 [oshani]

well, that's how scholarly works are :)

06:26:13 [oshani]

you have to go thru the boring stuff to get to the fun bits

06:26:16 [kennyluck]

I think "For impatient reader" is humble enough

06:26:33 [kennyluck]

hmm... I don't know.

06:26:47 [oshani]

I don't like the idea of putting that inline, because it looks as if it's a GOTO

06:26:51 [kennyluck]

If I am the reader I would like be that patient to read all these stuff

06:26:57 [oshani]

IMHO, the text should logically follow

06:27:11 [kennyluck]

hmm, alright

06:27:27 [oshani]

aha.. note that our readers will be very different from us -- the boring academic types ;)

06:28:41 [kennyluck]

not david hyuhn, I believe

06:29:03 [kennyluck]

All the Semantic Web people are young

06:33:11 [tkang]

tkang has quit ()

06:35:40 [oshani]

kennyluck, there are some spelling mistakes in the slides, you might wanna correct them?

06:35:48 [oshani]

run a spell-checker?

06:36:02 [kennyluck]

Hmm.. after I've done this extra.txt

06:36:21 [kennyluck]

Also the paper is also in a urgent status. I think

06:36:26 [kennyluck]

How's it going, oshani?

06:36:50 [oshani]

now in the design and impl

07:04:46 [kennyluck]

oshani...

07:04:47 [kennyluck]

7 Conclusion

07:04:47 [kennyluck]

This includes the protocols and several workarounds to circumvent some tech-

07:04:48 [kennyluck]

nical difficulties. All these decisions are far from being standardized. Therefore,

07:04:48 [kennyluck]

they are sub ject to change, but we expect later versions of the current imple-

07:04:48 [kennyluck]

mentation to be backwards compatible.

07:04:53 [kennyluck]

What is this?

07:05:37 [oshani]

Ah, well, I moved that from the Design to the Conclusion -- because we should caution the readers in the conclusion

07:06:07 [oshani]

will fix it with a good flow

07:06:10 [oshani]

gimme a min

07:10:15 [kennyluck]

Ah, good writing on the valuing information part

07:35:50 [kennyluck]

oshani, I noticed that you have finished Sec 4, what are you doing now?

07:36:09 [oshani]

just finished sec 6

07:41:20 [kennyluck]

Some bugs I found

07:42:21 [kennyluck]

1. in 4.2 the latter SPARQL Update lacks braces for the INSERT clause

07:45:09 [kennyluck]

2. the sentence "A client can create a

07:45:09 [kennyluck]

new document by posting an INSERT to a server which implements this update

07:45:10 [kennyluck]

protocol." in 4.2 is kind of confusing

07:48:47 [kennyluck]

3. "This chain of deduction is implemented with the following simplified N3 rule:" in the section "Chained Proof"

07:49:14 [kennyluck]

should be "The last rule of this chain is implemented..."

07:52:20 [kennyluck]

are you OK, oshani?

07:54:14 [oshani]

yeah yeah.. gimme a sec

07:54:49 [oshani]

why is that sentence confusing?

07:56:32 [kennyluck]

because in the following example, no new document is created.

07:56:50 [kennyluck]

So the "For example" there looks strange..

07:57:08 [oshani]

ah okay

07:57:10 [kennyluck]

I would prefer to delete the sentence

07:58:01 [kennyluck]

You must be very tired... 4 am

08:00:16 [kennyluck]

4 (Sec 2.3 - Support Generalized Rules) should it be "can be used to give" not "can be used give"?

08:05:10 [oshani]

kennyluck, I think I am done -- included your changes 1-4

08:05:34 [oshani]

now printing off to read...

08:05:42 [kennyluck]

hold on

08:05:49 [oshani]

okay

08:05:58 [kennyluck]

how about the footnode linking to the user interface section?

08:06:19 [oshani]

but wouldn't that be too late?

08:06:45 [oshani]

kennyluck:

08:06:55 [kennyluck]

too late?

08:07:10 [oshani]

I thought you wanted the reader to look at the slides before reading the rest of the paper

08:07:46 [kennyluck]

e a look at the User Interface section 4.5"

08:07:46 [kennyluck]

[15:16] kennyluck: By the way, I am making a zip release of the code

08:07:47 [kennyluck]

[15:24] oshani: Okay, that's good

08:07:47 [kennyluck]

[15:24] oshani: well, I'll include that as a foot note.. sounds good?

08:07:54 [kennyluck]

Yep, so why would be too late?

08:08:00 [kennyluck]

s/why/what

08:08:33 [kennyluck]

oshani,

08:08:36 [oshani]

are you checking the latest version?

08:08:49 [oshani]

because I included the footnote in the intro

08:09:00 [oshani]

and linked to the slides and the UI section

08:09:04 [kennyluck]

ohh, maybe I didn't notice that

08:09:37 [kennyluck]

is that on p3, oshani

08:09:39 [kennyluck]

page 3

08:10:12 [oshani]

no page 2

08:11:01 [kennyluck]

weird, I see nothing in the pdf

08:11:06 [christel]

[Global Notice] Hi all, I'm going to restart services -- you'll be without NickServ, ChanServ, MemoServ etc for a few moments! Sorry for the inconvenience and thank you for using freenode.

08:11:09 [kennyluck]

I guess I should create a new pdf

08:11:26 [oshani]

no, it's in the pdf

08:12:23 [kennyluck]

now I see it, maybe cached.

08:12:29 [kennyluck]

hmm other minor bugs

08:12:50 [kennyluck]

<N3

08:12:51 [kennyluck]

URI> format:content-type “text/n3’,

08:12:55 [kennyluck]

Section 3.1

08:13:06 [kennyluck]

the last should be a double quote.

08:13:19 [kennyluck]

If you don't care. Then that's fine

08:13:20 [oshani]

ah.. okat

08:13:34 [oshani]

no, please do report errors like that

08:14:09 [oshani]

"Communication via SPARQL Update to my URI is welcome and recommended." :D

08:14:16 [kennyluck]

two other issues

08:14:21 [kennyluck]

yep,

08:14:31 [kennyluck]

1. should we give a pointer to this text file?

08:15:09 [oshani]

Don't think it's required, because I'll submit it as an additional file

08:15:25 [kennyluck]

Hmm, for normal reader, not the reviewer..

08:15:41 [kennyluck]

don't know, the URI for it is http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2009/Papers/ISWC/lod-computations/README

08:15:52 [kennyluck]

oshani

08:15:56 [oshani]

oky

08:17:55 [kennyluck]

So the really last big thing

08:18:37 [oshani]

what?

08:18:51 [kennyluck]

As this is my first paper and maybe it's even the last one. I would really want to put the Acknowledgements in.

08:18:59 [kennyluck]

What do you think? Any workaround?

08:19:19 [oshani]

:) -- yeah but you cannot ack timbl as he's one of the authors

08:19:36 [oshani]

how come this is your first paper??

08:20:01 [kennyluck]

Hmm... at least I pay a lot of attention to it

08:20:17 [kennyluck]

The one I work with shou, I didn't even read the paper.

08:20:39 [kennyluck]

For the tabulator paper, I was noticed that a paper was produced after it is in some archive

08:21:11 [oshani]

:)

08:21:16 [kennyluck]

I don't know. Just think I should do this at least once.

08:27:12 [kennyluck]

oshani, where did you put the README?

08:27:20 [kennyluck]

Or you decide not to do so?

08:27:29 [oshani]

just before the Related Work

08:27:41 [oshani]

looking for the right words to describe it

08:29:48 [oshani]

kennyluck, okay committed check again

08:29:49 [kennyluck]

Sorry, one more small thing, can you somehow write a footnote in the firstpage saying "The paper is given the URI http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2009/Papers/ISWC/lod-computations/paper . We might produce an HTML version of this paper in near future. "

08:30:20 [oshani]

um, that's not related kennyluck

08:30:29 [kennyluck]

related?

08:30:34 [oshani]

why would someone reading the paper wanna know that?

08:30:57 [kennyluck]

because the HTML version might contain more information

08:31:19 [kennyluck]

Anyway, I document with a URI is updatable.

08:31:39 [kennyluck]

That is, we can keep editing it.

08:31:42 [kennyluck]

s/I/a/

08:31:59 [oshani]

you are impossible :P

08:32:09 [oshani]

okay.. gonna make this change

08:32:20 [kennyluck]

meaning?

08:32:21 [oshani]

but this is the last one of the kind okay? :)

08:32:29 [kennyluck]

Am I asking too much?

08:32:32 [oshani]

I really want to submit this and go home

08:32:40 [kennyluck]

Oh, sorry.

08:32:46 [kennyluck]

Yes, should be the last one.

08:35:17 [oshani]

it seems that I cannot put URIs to the title

08:35:27 [oshani]

got any suggestions?

08:35:42 [oshani]

I can link it from the README thing

08:35:57 [kennyluck]

footnote?

08:36:05 [oshani]

yeah

08:36:20 [oshani]

s/URI/footnote above

08:36:38 [kennyluck]

What about a random place in the first page

08:36:44 [kennyluck]

such as Section 1

08:36:56 [oshani]

nope titles won't work

08:36:59 [oshani]

already tried

08:37:10 [kennyluck]

Oh, then never mind

08:37:17 [kennyluck]

nono...

08:37:27 [kennyluck]

I mean please link it from the README

08:37:33 [kennyluck]

oshani

08:37:36 [oshani]

okay

08:37:44 [kennyluck]

Thanks!

08:37:52 [oshani]

\footnote{The URI of this paper is \url{http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2009/Papers/ISWC/lod-computations/paper}. Feel free to link to this in the LOD!}

08:38:15 [kennyluck]

yay

08:38:17 [oshani]

didn't mention that we don't have a =n HTML version yet

08:38:26 [oshani]

since you are gonna do it soon ;)

08:38:31 [kennyluck]

no problem, I think

08:38:45 [kennyluck]

Yep, hopefully. Got a presentation tomorrow

08:39:08 [kennyluck]

I think we can submit the paper,

08:39:18 [kennyluck]

Let's forget about reviewing it

08:39:24 [kennyluck]

I guess It's good enough

08:51:17 [kennyluck]

oshani, are you there?

08:51:37 [oshani]

yep.. just submitted, but looking through it once again

08:51:48 [kennyluck]

cool, oshani.

09:08:07 [never2far]

never2far (n=ionut@93.115.112.34) has joined #dig

09:08:17 [never2far]

never2far has left #dig

09:16:39 [kennyluck]

tell me when you are all done, oshani.

09:32:15 [kennyluck]

Anyway, I have to thank you very much, oshani.

09:32:44 [kennyluck]

byebye

09:39:53 [kennyluck]

kennyluck has quit ()

11:10:03 [jsoltren]

jsoltren (n=jsoltren@18.226.1.201) has joined #dig

11:54:36 [RalphS]

RalphS (n=swick@30-7-227.wireless.csail.mit.edu) has joined #dig