4 <!ELEMENT minutes (about,participant*,presentation*,entry*)>
6 <!ELEMENT about (#PCDATA)>
8 <!ELEMENT entry (#PCDATA)>
10 author CDATA #IMPLIED>
12 <!ELEMENT presentation (slides*,description)>
13 <!ATTLIST presentation
14 media (blackboard|slides) #REQUIRED
16 author CDATA #REQUIRED>
18 <!ELEMENT description (#PCDATA|ul)*>
20 <!ELEMENT slides (#PCDATA)>
23 format (PowerPoint|PS|PDF|HTML) #REQUIRED>
25 <!ELEMENT participant (#PCDATA)>
32 <!ELEMENT li (#PCDATA|ul)*>
36 <about>the Kick-Off</about>
37 <participant site="bologna" file="asperti"/>
38 <participant site="bologna" file="sacerdoti"/>
39 <participant site="inria" file="herbelin"/>
40 <participant site="inria" file="rideau"/>
41 <participant site="inria" file="pottier"/>
42 <participant site="inria" file="werner"/>
43 <participant site="nijmegen" file="geuvers"/>
44 <participant site="nijmegen" file="wiedijk"/>
45 <participant site="dfki" file="moschner"/>
46 <participant site="trusted-logic" file="gimenez"/>
47 <participant site="aei" file="schutz"/>
48 <participant site="aei" file="wegner"/>
49 <participant site="aei" file="velden"/>
50 <participant site="aei" file="kelley"/>
51 <participant site="aei" file="weyher"/>
52 <participant site="aei" file="pollney"/>
53 <presentation site="bologna" author="asperti" media="blackboard">
55 A comparison of the aims and approaches of HELM and OpenMath.
58 <presentation site="inria" author="pottier" media="slides">
59 <slides file="kick-off/lemme2.ppt" format="PowerPoint"/>
61 Presentation of the work of Sophia-Antipolis: Project Lemme;
62 PCoq (an interface to the Coq system based on Aioli [for tree management],
63 PPML [a sort of stylesheet language] and Figue [rendering engine]).
66 <presentation site="inria" author="herbelin" media="slides">
67 <slides file="kick-off/MoWGLI-LogiCal.ps" format="PS"/>
69 Presentation of the work of Rocquencourt: Coq (proof assistant) and its
72 <li>Classification of theories:
74 <li>Actually based only on the affiliation of the author.</li>
75 <li>We should have classifications based on subject, theme, author, etc.</li>
80 <li>By pattern. Problem: the patterns (n < m+1) and (n <= m) are
81 differents but denote the same thing.</li>
82 <li>By isomorphisms. Problem: we can capture just a few of them.</li>
85 <li>Proof Rendering in Natural Language: still too many detailed.
86 Views at different levels of detail can probably help.
92 <presentation site="nijmegen" author="geuvers" media="slides">
93 <slides file="mowgligroup.html" format="HTML"/>
95 Presentation of the work of Nijmegen; why Nijmegen is interested in MOWGLI;
96 planned contributions to MOWGLI.
99 <presentation site="aei" author="wegner" media="blackboard">
101 Presentation of the projects in which he is envolved or that he is
102 coordinating; interest in metadata; problems related to having papers
103 in electronic form. His main contribution will be providing links to
107 <presentation site="aei" author="schutz" media="slides">
108 <slides file="kick-off/AIP_Intro.ppt" format="PowerPoint"/>
110 Presentation of the work done at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational
111 Physics; presentation of Living Reviews in Relativity and expectations
112 from MOWGLI (i.e. searching, rendering, interoperability). He points out
113 how Living Reviews in Relativity already provide a notion of versioning;
114 how hyperlinks are managed (often opening pop-ups). He finally presents
115 some data that show that on-line browsing of papers really happens.
118 <presentation site="trusted-logic" author="gimenez" media="blackboard">
120 Presentation of the work done at Trusted Logic. Brief introduction to
121 the Common Criteria Software: lot of documentation must be produced for
122 third (and fourth!) parties evaluation; formal evaluation is one goal
123 (not yet reached). The main problems Trusted Logic meets are:
125 <li>Presentation</li>
126 <li>Managing thousands of definitions/theorems and links between them</li>
127 <li>Evaluators needs: hiding/displaying information; different views on the
128 same proofs/definitions; metadata; backpointers (which lemmas are
129 used in a theorem)</li>
130 <li>Interoperability with other software tools</li>
131 <li>Proofs mantainance</li>
133 A final remark is that Trusted Logic is just interested in provability
134 (and proof-scripts) and not in proofs (i.e. lambda-terms or natural
135 language description of them).
138 <presentation site="dfki" author="moschner" media="slides">
139 <slides file="kick-off/KM2002GO.ps" format="PS">
140 about the "Usability of MBase for MOWGLI"
142 <slides file="kick-off/KM2002GO_mathweb.ps" format="PS"/>
144 Presentation of the work done at DFKI. Contributions to MOWGLI: OMDoc
145 (to encode mathematical documents) and/or MBase (to distribute mathematical
146 documents) and metadata.
149 <entry author="aei/wegner">
150 Whenever someone is going to make a talk, he must report this to him.
153 To reach an agreement on the consortium agreement, Trusted Logic will
154 send a completely filled-in, light version of the agreement to everybody.
155 If the agreement will not satisfy everybody up to minor modifications,
156 we will go for the heavy proposal.
158 <entry author="nijmegen/geuvers">
159 The members of the PCC are responsible to communicate the name of the
160 site responsible for every WP.
163 There will be two mailing lists. The first one (for everybody) is
164 the one already created. The second one will be an administrative
168 All the meetings have already been scheduled: the first one will be held
169 in Nijmegen from the 17th to the 19th of July. The others will be
170 in Bertinoro (just after MKM03), Sophia (October 2003), Saarbrucken
173 <entry author="trusted-logic/gimenez">
174 It will be simpler to have PCC meetings by phones.
176 <entry author="aei/wegner">
177 During the plenary meetings, sub-meetings will be organized to discuss
180 <entry author="bologna/asperti">
181 Every Package Leader must submit a contribution to the deliverable 0.a.
183 <entry author="aei/wegner">
184 It is better to use a task-force of external experts to comment on
187 <entry author="aei/wegner">
188 The set of requirements must be ordered by importance (useful if some of
189 them are not fulfilled).
192 A long discussion on the topic of deliverable 1.c showed that there is
193 some mismatch in the vocabulary of the participants.
195 <entry author="bologna/asperti">
196 The choice between MathML and OpenMath is quite difficult, because
197 there are really no strong pro and cons in favor or against any of them.
199 <entry author="aei/schutz">
200 Maybe not having browsers supporting MathML is not a huge problem.