PCA Modelling, Methods and Technology, September 26th 2013

Time and place

26.09.2013, 2.30PM - 3.30PM (CEST)
GoToMeeting (how to connect - need login)
Next meeting: October 24th 2013, 2.30-3.30PM CEST


Håvard Ottestad (MoM)
Onno Paap
Geiza Hamazaki
Manoj Dharwadkar
Victor Agroskin
Keith Willshaw
Hans Teijgeler
Darius Kanga
Michael Wiedau


1. Approval of agenda


2. Approval of MoM from last meeting


3. Follow up on the updates to the RDL from the last meeting

RDL will update to align to the changed made to the old reference data system. See preliminary notice here: https://www.posccaesar.org/wiki/Rds/Update201309

4. Discussing the template review process

4.1. Selection of templates

There was a discussion and the templates that were selected were classification and description classification templates.

SELECTEDClassificationOfIndividualFor ApprovalCLASSIFICATIONA PossibleIndividual fulfils the criteria for membership of a (Part 2) ClassOfIndividualIN-CLSIF-01.xml
DescriptionOfIndividualDeprecatedDESCRIPTIONA PossibleIndividual is described with a string.IN-DESCR-01.xml
SELECTEDClassifiedDescriptionOfIndividualFor ApprovalDESCRIPTIONA PossibleIndividual is described according a given type of description.IN-DESCR-02.xml
DescriptionOfIndividualInLanguageDeprecatedDESCRIPTIONA PossibleIndividual is described with a string, expressed in a natural language.IN-DESCR-03.xml
SELECTEDClassifiedDescriptionOfIndividualInLanguageFor ApprovalDESCRIPTIONA PossibleIndividual is described with a string, expressed in a natural language, according a given type of description.IN-DESCR-04.xml
DescriptionOfIndividualWithSignDeprecatedDESCRIPTIONA PossibleIndividual is described with another PossibleIndividual that serves as a sign.IN-DESCR-05.xml
SELECTEDDescriptionOfIndividualWithClassifiedSignFor ApprovalDESCRIPTIONA PossibleIndividual is described with an individual that serves as a sign, according to a given Sign class (e.g. DIN 4844).IN-DESCR-06.xml

4.2. Requirements to the templates (proposal specification)

4.2.1. Technical

The first order logic needs to be checked. The logic expands in the expander. Fyi, the syntax should be prover9 so it might be possible to use https://www.cs.unm.edu/~mccune/prover9/ for the proofs.

The OWL structure needs to be discussed further. Onno will make a discussion page for this on 15926.org.

There was some discussion on further ways to specify the lifting of the templates. There are semantic web rule languages that could work. Not further work will be done for this review process.

4.2.2. Textual (ie. descriptions, examples, justifications)

Hans explains the "definition" fields in the template specs use placeholders for each role input.

There was discussion on justifications for the templates. This was not needed for the proposal.

The 15926.org template specification pages will be the basis for the textual requirements.

No further textual requirements were put forward.

4.3. Requirements to supporting documentation

Hans will write about the "definition" field and placeholders in the supporting documentation.

5. Execution of the review process

Onno will write an email with a list of the people who should contribute to the review process based on the list of members of the MMT.

Meeting adjourned - The remaining points will be discussed in the next meeting

5.1. Creating proposal

5.2. How to organise hearing?

5.2.1. Send email? Upload on webpage? Who should be notified?

5.3. How to collect feedback using ISO comment form?

6. Discussing the goal of the review process

6.1. Who will use the templates?

6.2. How will they become available?

6.3. Ownership and licensing

7. A.O.B.

Review process slide:

About PCA
Reference Data Services