07:43:32 RRSAgent has joined #ddwg 07:43:32 logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-irc 07:43:47 MEETING: workshop on DDR - Day 1 07:44:23 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/workshop2006/agenda.html 07:44:46 Hola Stephane 07:45:30 Present: mimasa, stephane, Dan, DavidS, Ronan, Andrea, Rafael, Jose, Cedric 07:46:26 Present Benett 07:46:47 mimasa has joined #ddwg 07:46:49 bmarks has joined #ddwg 07:46:50 rafa has joined #ddwg 07:47:15 [richard from Enough Software is present. doesn't have access to the web client, AFAIK] 07:47:21 Present pontus 07:47:24 rcasero has joined #ddwg 07:47:28 DaveS has joined #ddwg 07:47:51 Rotan has joined #ddwg 07:47:52 Present Richard (Enough) 07:48:02 DKA has joined #ddwg 07:48:04 nacho has joined #ddwg 07:48:44 ronan has joined #ddwg 07:48:50 cgi-irc has joined #ddwg 07:49:16 ScribeNick: DKA 07:49:28 Scribe: Dan 07:49:29 cedric has joined #ddwg 07:51:45 Rotan: Going to start the introductions. 07:51:48 [introductions] 07:51:50 rrsagent, make log member 07:52:00 rrsagent, make log public 07:52:09 rrsagent, make minutes 07:52:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-minutes.html sboyera 07:52:40 Rotan: Introduces self. 07:53:17 Rotan: our database which appears in a number of different formats is proprietary to us. We spend lots of time testing devices and accumulating information. 07:53:37 Rotan: That activity is a replication of effort between us and many others. 07:54:05 Rotan: More importantly, the mobile Web is not growing in the same way as the fixed Web. In the mobile space one piece of markup does not work on all devices. 07:54:42 Rotan: We believe that it should be possible for all people to create simple content for the mobile space. To that end we think there should be simple interfaces, etc... 07:55:04 edouard marques - FT 07:55:37 Eduard: We have a solution to adapt content which doesn't satisfy us completely. We are looking to set up a new solution that would solve the issues of the existing solution. We think this workshop will help. 07:57:41 We are working on device descriptions in OMA and W3C. Our interestes are to facilitate the development of mobile applications. We have a content adaptation product as an open source initiative. We recognize the need of device descriptions for content adaptation to take place. 07:57:51 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-irc#T07-57-41 07:58:03 We are interested that both OMA and W3C would be coordinated and that maintains compatibility between the two. 07:58:15 jose: project name : morpheo 07:58:24 Enrique Varela Couceiro 07:59:19 Bennett Marks 07:59:20 Enrique: I am from Zandan, R&D director. We need not only information about markup language but how response is handled by the device to understand why things work on some devices but not others. 07:59:59 Bennett: I'm from Nokia. I'm also the vice-chair of OMA BAC MAE and former chair of OMA UAProf. Nokia's interest in this: we are quite active in producing UAProf profiles for every device we ship. 08:00:27 Bennett: we understand that UAProf has its problems. We hope that combining the learning that's going on in OMA and W3C we can apply some creative thinking here. 08:00:54 Bennett: one of the issues we're interested in here is that whatever we come up with here be inclusive. 08:01:44 Bennett: Some heavy-weight solutions tend to favor the major players. We also have to think about the small guy. Light-weight solutions as well as heavy-weight solitions. We're looking to see that the whole marketplace is represented. 08:02:06 [Andrea Trassati] 08:02:52 Andrea: I am a consltant. I have been working in WAP development since 1999. I started working with early WAP phones and have worked for the last 7 years on multi-channel services, web, wap SMS. I also worked on content delivery. 08:03:32 Andrea: During these years I have seen a lot of need for the development of these mobile services. In 2002 I started work on an open source project to try to help to make it possible to identify a stable framework. 08:04:04 Andrea: In the early days everyone was doing their own service. Key problems were in device detection. You need to know what the device can do. 08:04:52 Andrea: I have worked in WURLF -- open source project running since 2002. We kept it simple by using XML. Integrated with Java, PHP, ruby perl python etc... 08:05:11 Andrea: We track about 400 capabilities. 08:05:16 WURFL 08:05:34 s/WURLF/WURFL/ 08:06:03 Andrea: Core team is myself and Luca Passani but we have a global community providing information. 08:06:43 Andrea: We have a site on sourceforge -- 100 downloads per day of the XML file. 08:07:22 Andrea: We have been active in DDWG and we would be happy to see the wg to continue working. We would like to see more contributors. We want to have more users, and a bigger ecosystem. We want to keep covering the needs of our users. 08:07:28 Ronan Cremin 08:07:41 Ronan: I am from dotMobi 08:07:53 Ronan: We are not a technology company but we are supportive of ddwg 08:08:15 Ronan: Our stance on the repository is we would like to leverage existing information as much as possible. 08:08:22 Stephan Boyera 08:08:50 [Stephan or Stephane?] 08:09:15 Stephane 08:09:16 Stephne: W3C is here to develop the Web to its full potential. 08:10:34 Flash networks. We are interested in the acceleration of content across mobile networks. We have our own repository. We would like to see as repository exist that contains as much information as possible. Having a trusted repository is crucial for us. 08:10:55 Mimasa: I am also working for W3C, based on Japan. I am a heavy mobile user myself. 08:11:41 Bertrand Schmitt 08:11:42 Luca: I'm Luca Passani. I work for openwave. I find myself in the unusal position of dealing with W3C because helped create WURFL. W3C came to us so here I am. 08:12:51 Bertrand: We have our own database with over 1000 devices and detailed information. Our position considering the workshop. We believe that the repository should have additional information from what would be required for content rendering, such as MMS, streaming, ringtones, DRM, etc... Because this is part of the full user experience. 08:13:50 Bertrand: We believe that you need a trust authority to certify information. We think the wifi alliance is a good model. We need a central authority. Maybe W3C. Maybe dotMobi. 08:14:01 Ignacio Marín 08:15:46 mimasa has joined #ddwg 08:15:51 Nacho: I am from CTIC. We are part of the Mobile Web Initiative, also participating in the MWBP. 08:15:56 Rafael Casero 08:16:59 Rafael: We have developed services including our own device repository. We think a device repository will improve the user experience for the mobile Web. 08:17:15 Cedric Kiss 08:17:27 Cedric: I'm also from W3C. I've been involved since January this year in W3C. I will be working on next charter for DDWG. 08:17:32 Martin Jones 08:17:41 Martin: I'm from Volantis. [presents from slides] 08:19:31 Martin: I've been in the company from the beginning which was in 2000. The objective was bringing the Web to mobile devices. We have about 150 employees. We're active in W3C. We're keen on promoting anything that will help the market in terms of the Mobile Web. A free device repository could be seen as a threat to us but we also see a big upside to growing the mobile web as a market. Also there is lots of duplication of effort right now. 08:20:56 Martin: Our software adapts services for tens of millions of end users. We have a proprietary database with over 3000 devices. We track over 500 attributes per device. Some information is uniqe volantis information that couldn't be expressed in a standardized way but have of it could be. 08:22:20 Martin: Issues with DD sources: primary sources from device manufacturers and browser vendors are often missing, invalid, inaccurate, incomplete, inconsistent and/or inadequate. 08:22:54 Martin: There is a need for an authoriative source of device information. 08:23:01 asamim has joined #ddwg 08:23:40 Martin: having a standard dd helps us but also helps the market grow. 08:24:02 Martin: [presents slide on thoughts on the proposed DDR] 08:25:01 Martin: Key issues: scoping, authority, extensibility, trust. Device manufacturers should be the main but not the exclusive source of DDR content. 08:25:16 [David Sanders] 08:26:49 cedric has joined #ddwg 08:26:49 David: I work in OMA and 3GPP and have been working in the device descriptions working group. We have many operating companies. Each of these have different repositories which duplicate effort. I want to think about open source standards. How do we make a mind-shift? Trustworthiness of information is a key issue we need to think about. 08:27:02 David: I'd like to see a lot more participation in the DDWG as well. 08:28:17 Dan has repsonsibility of mobile internet initiatives in Vodafone and also chairs the BPWG in MWI 08:29:04 BPWG needs DD info to support best practices statements. 08:30:14 This may also include information from OMA, e.g. base MIME types 08:30:38 Richard Nkrumah 08:31:08 Richard: I am from a small software provider in Germany. Our product is a framework for developing applicaitons. 08:32:46 Richard: We have clients, widgets which can be styled with CSS. All of this is controlled by preprocessing. We are a big fan of open source technology. All of this is based on a device database of our own. We track information like what bugs the device have, etc... 08:33:44 Richard: Our next step is to create an interactive device database so users can upload their own descriptions of devices manually or through midlets. Device descriptions can be reviewed and customers can download stable versions of these capabilities. 08:34:02 Richard: offline access is important as well. 08:34:50 Pontus Carlsson 08:35:42 Pontus: Drutt does a lot of device testing to maintain its repository. There is a lot of duplication here. We need this information to be available in a public DDR in a trustable and extensible way. We have been a member of DDWG from beginning and we hope to contribute to the next charter. 08:35:44 Chris Abbott 08:36:18 Chris: I am from Mobile Phone Wizards. We just launched a publicly available device repository based on Web Services. We're an example of a small company you're trying to make the Mobile Web accessibile to. 08:37:28 Luca_Passani has joined #ddwg 08:37:43 Chris: I have a content site that sells mobile content. In many cases you need to become an expert in order to deal with device descriptions. Everyone knows that UAProf does not go far enough. Even with some solutions such as wurlf you still need to know lots about the devices. We created a repository which can be queried using a web service. 08:38:00 Chris: Our repository can be used for free. 08:38:02 hi everyone. Sorry I was late. How do I add myself to the speaker queue? q+? 08:38:05 q+ 08:38:27 there is no queue mngt 08:38:29 let me add it 08:38:34 Zakim has joined #ddwg 08:38:36 (There's no speaker queue until we have concluded introductions) 08:38:42 q 08:38:45 q+ 08:39:03 any idea why my plus got dropped ? 08:39:04 Chris: Accept header seems to be ignored because it's not accurate because many smart phones tend to hide their capabilities. 08:39:13 08:39:39 Chris: We've tackled a lot of the problems that are up for discussion and came up with solution so we'd like to throw that into the pot. 08:39:50 Chris: Why isn't Microsoft here? 08:40:38 Chris: There are lot of Microsof users that have been left out of the loop -- we want to bring those people in as well. 08:41:16 Chris: Necessity of trust in the data is proportional to the size of your client. A lot of programmers don't care if it's "verified" or just "mostly accurate". 08:41:44 Chris: Most programmers would only use 5 maybe 10 fields out of hundreds available. 08:42:18 Chris: As long as the information is mostly accurate then they can support most of the customers. 08:43:07 Chris: For example, MP3 support. We have mp3 in our repository but not "how" these are supported. 08:43:16 Level of Trust in terms of available device information is a key discussion point for the workshop. 08:43:20 Chris: But our cusomers mostly do not need this additional information. 08:43:49 Chris: Our system is real-time as well. 08:43:49 Njål Hansen Wilberg 08:43:57 ?? 08:44:40 test 08:45:18 HHW: Want increased focus on device detection 08:45:20 mimasa has joined #ddwg 08:45:25 s/HHW/NHW/ 08:45:26 DKA has joined #ddwg 08:47:13 q+ 08:47:31 ack luca 08:48:25 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-irc#T08-47-31 08:48:45 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa 08:49:09 Luca: I wanted to make it clear what Openwave's postion is wrt WURLF. WURLF is not a replacement of UAProf. WURFL builds on UAProf. 08:49:55 Luca: Some companies might start with WURFL but then move to a commercial system. 08:50:13 q bmarks 08:50:16 Luca: If we specify the API to the DDR. 08:50:20 q+ bmarks 08:50:44 Luca: One last point about trust. 08:51:48 Luca: The reason why WURFL is here is that we can bring the developer community to what we create as long as WURFL is part of it. But we cannot conflict with the open source nature of WURFL. 08:52:13 ack dave 08:52:17 Rotan: The issue is you need to know what the trust is. 08:52:56 Dave: Two observations: We tried hard in the DD group not to focus on any particular implementations. We skipped around the trust debate. We are not saying that trusted data is a requirement. 08:53:32 ack bm 08:53:34 Dave: 2. we haven't got Microsoft and we haven't got a lot of terminal vendors here. We haven't got content developers or tool vendors. Whatever we do in the next 2 days we have to remember that these guys aren't here. 08:55:01 We need to consider Trust but we didn't discuss in detail 08:55:24 Bennett: 3 observations: In my mind there is a spectrum of models. Scope needs to be determined. Scope of UAProf is "user agent". If we are to say we are scoping ourselves to browser and browser type issues, that would drive us down a different route than "everything a device is capable of." 08:55:31 q to talk on scope 08:55:38 q 08:55:46 plus key is not working. 08:55:56 q+ to talk on scope 08:56:00 q- 08:56:09 q+ Dan, to talk on scope 08:56:14 same problem here 08:56:24 q+ to talk about WURFL's original scope and current scope 08:56:41 qplus 08:57:00 q+ 08:57:01 Bennett: one of the things that made UAProf both forward looking and difficult was reliance on RDF. There is a huge smantic prooblem in bringing together the data in wurfl and the propritary databases. How do you deal with the semantics. 08:57:02 q+ sboyera 08:57:11 thanks ! 08:57:41 Rotan: The issues of semantics have been raised. 08:58:03 q 08:58:06 q? 08:58:10 ack dan 08:58:10 Dan, you wanted to talk on scope 09:02:11 Stephane: for dynamic properities there are technical issues to solve. We were missing a unified repository. We all agree that dynamic properties are very important. But the first step is having a homoginized and standards-based repository for the static data. 09:02:14 q- 09:02:40 ack andrea 09:02:41 Andrea, you wanted to talk about WURFL's original scope and current scope 09:02:50 Rotan: Issues we need to debate: What is the scope, what do we do with namespacing and dynmic properties. 09:03:57 Andrea: WURFL originally started with the scope of browsing but since 2002 the scope has become wider. We have more and more cabilities to track. Most of the participants said that the repository should be extensible. The point is that the repository should be extensible. 09:04:58 q+DKA 09:05:31 Jose: We think that this could be a good opportunity to set up a general framework for device descriptions. In the W3C scope the capabilities to be defined would initially have to do with browsing but could be expanded. 09:06:28 Bennett: the architectural decisions you will make based on that scope are different. 09:06:32 ack luca 09:07:35 Luca: For us as WURFL it's OK both ways. We can focus on the mobile Web or more. My point is about the semantics. I started from the other way -- I want something simple. Screen width 174. 09:08:03 Luca: UAProf and WURFL are at different levels. 09:08:33 ack dan 09:08:41 (Coffee next!) 09:09:08 Dan: want this group to focus on the issues of browsing. 09:09:31 Dan: Scope helps us make architectural decisions. 09:10:08 [break] 09:10:30 Dan: Exensibility is also key. 09:11:14 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 09:28:40 Scribe: steph 09:28:48 ScribeNick:sboyera 09:29:00 Topic: PResentation from FT 09:29:14 edouard Marques 09:31:23 (Copies of presentation files will be circulated after presentations) 09:31:58 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-irc#T09-31-23 09:32:50 Chair: Rotan 09:33:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 09:36:06 q on slide 6 09:36:31 q+ sboy, on slide 6 09:36:52 q+ sboyera, on slide 6 09:36:55 q+ 09:37:03 On slide 6 is the proposal to do validation and verification? 09:39:14 q+ 09:39:43 i was first ! 09:39:56 q? 09:40:13 q+ jose 09:40:21 ack dan 09:41:12 mimasa has joined #ddwg 09:42:42 steph: don't understand left side of slide 6, validation and verif can be done per repository, but don't understand validation from a set of repositories ? 09:42:48 ack dka 09:43:27 Edouard : yes, the important part is validation, it may be hard to construct a profile from multiple rep. and check that 09:43:39 rotan: difference between verification and validation 09:43:59 luca: thank you, don't know why but thank you 09:44:14 don't understand the right side 09:44:37 3 different api for 3 repositories ? 09:44:42 dont we need just one 09:44:47 ? 09:46:01 q 09:46:06 q+ Njal 09:46:18 q bmarks 09:46:22 edouard : yes there is a bracket, one api 09:46:39 luca: automatic test ? 09:46:52 q bmarks 09:46:59 q+ bmarks 09:47:13 edouard: verifycation of format of the data 09:47:18 q? 09:47:22 ack luca 09:47:31 edouard: validation and not verification 09:47:35 ack daves 09:47:43 dave: verification is important 09:47:59 edouard: open question on how to do verif. 09:48:27 dave: how to we achieve semantics in each rep. 09:48:28 ? 09:48:41 and what are you new solutions ? 09:49:08 ft is developping a new solution or want to fix existing solutions ? 09:49:23 edouard: new solutions and not new technologies 09:49:34 FT wants standardised semantics with reliable information 09:50:34 q? 09:51:05 bennet: that's why in hte charter it said "device desc. evolution" 09:51:07 BM: Want to build on existing material. Now message saying we would throw stuff away. 09:51:22 s/now/no/ 09:51:45 rotan: super repository relying on existing rep. 09:52:00 ack jose 09:52:03 edouard: tricky part to unify existing solutions, but this is the objectives 09:53:39 steph: what is new is the hat, unification of exisiting repos. 09:54:40 edouard: dynamic properties, personnal setup,... should be managed by the op. and not public 09:55:07 q? 09:55:54 Edouard: much more advanced now in mobile info than in fixed info. 09:56:04 ack njal 09:56:07 edouard: i think the framework may benefit not only to mobile 09:56:25 Njal: what is a device ? what is the definition ? 09:57:28 otan: defined in the charter of the group 09:57:35 s/otan/Rotan/ 09:58:17 q+ 09:58:19 edouard: our position is to extend this definition 09:58:48 rotan: we are all working under an umbrella 09:58:53 the mwi umbrella 09:59:23 ack bmarks 09:59:54 Bennett: slide 6: interesting dynamic in the market : no DB used directly 09:59:59 q+ 10:00:09 what are requirements ? 10:00:30 none data used on real-time basis 10:00:37 processed before 10:00:45 that's why update is that hard 10:00:56 the info is not updated on real-time 10:01:16 Luca: wurfl is used that way 10:01:38 bennett: important point 10:01:45 about real time 10:02:15 need a business model behing the update 10:02:39 s/behing/behind/ 10:03:27 jose: the api is independent of the rep. 10:03:29 [developers download the XML and store it locally and then access data in real-time] 10:03:48 yes it is what i thought and thus bennett point is right 10:03:49 [some even have automatic checking and downloading of the XML] 10:03:59 q? 10:04:26 ack nacho 10:04:27 Topic: debate 10:04:41 Nacho: static vs dynamic 10:04:56 static things here today, would be dynamic tomorrow 10:05:15 we should consider that 10:05:23 q 10:06:40 rotan: if the property is static or dynamic, the query can be the same 10:06:52 then there is eventing 10:07:07 Bennett: you are missing a point : where the info is coming from 10:07:32 dynamic properties known only the device 10:07:46 from architectural point, the device have to be included 10:07:56 [DPE spec] 10:08:07 dpe ? 10:08:19 [device profile evolution, OMA spec] 10:08:26 q? 10:08:29 q? 10:08:49 q\ 10:08:57 q+ edouard 10:09:55 q\ bmarks 10:10:00 q+ bmarks 10:11:16 rotan: scoping is very important 10:11:25 luca: think that nacho point is valid 10:11:26 ack luca 10:11:41 we need to clarify 10:13:35 jose: nightmare if different api for dynamic and static 10:14:02 q+ to say that the dynamic profile should not be a problem for the DDR "consumer", but the DDR should take care of it transparently 10:14:38 +1 to what andrea will say 10:15:00 q to say that it is so easy to consider the device as another source of device info 10:15:16 q+ sboyera to say that it is so easy to consider the device as another source of device info 10:15:17 [but taking into account that it will transparently will have to deal with it] 10:16:10 Bennett: addind a dimension : multiple browsers 10:16:26 q+ 10:16:30 we should take into the picture 10:16:44 Rotan2 has joined #ddwg 10:16:47 we are ignoring the separation between UA and device 10:18:51 Chris: we solved this problem : different profiles, different instances of the same device 10:21:11 q? 10:21:13 q? 10:21:36 ack sboyera 10:21:36 sboyera, you wanted to say that it is so easy to consider the device as another source of device info 10:23:07 ack bmarks 10:23:16 rotan: the UA string discussion should take place, use or not... 10:23:33 Bennett: 3 dimensional space: dynamic properties, browsers and device 10:23:39 What is our scope with this space of multiple info sources? 10:23:46 s/with/within/ 10:23:48 and we should scope in each dimension where we go 10:23:55 ack ed 10:24:21 cf. cf. Client-Specific Web Services by Using User Agent Attributes: http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-agent-attributes-971230 10:24:37 Ed: wants to consider highly dynamic vs occassionally dynamic properties. 10:24:45 edouard: dyn. properties : static properties which never change, semi-dynamic properties like installing a new UA, and highly-dynamic properties 10:25:04 s/cf cf/cf/ 10:25:40 ed: very difficult for highly dynamic 10:26:07 ed: for the snd type, operator getting the notice should be able to update the profile 10:26:09 ack andrea 10:26:09 Andrea, you wanted to say that the dynamic profile should not be a problem for the DDR "consumer", but the DDR should take care of it transparently 10:26:22 andrea: browser == a piece of software 10:26:53 q? 10:27:07 lots of things can be installed. we should separate the physical aspect of the device and the software capabilities 10:28:24 ack luca 10:29:10 luca: i think we should draw the line to not consider the dynamic part 10:29:42 q+ 10:29:43 api yes, if we want to waste our time we should go in the dyn. properties 10:30:09 q+ Bertrand 10:30:48 bennett: i was not saying where should be the line, just defining the bound 10:31:03 we have to understand the whole sace to make the reasonalbe decision 10:32:09 andrea: the api should be simple, and the ddr should be able to find out the informatoin (comm with the device and so on) 10:32:44 q? 10:33:03 andrea: we should focus on 10 or 20 properties and not go further and let the market do that 10:33:06 ack dave 10:33:36 andrea: i'm thinking of 2 api : for developpers and for the ddr access 10:34:52 dave: we have the api : query-response but not the other 10:35:03 rotan: we will review the req. doc later 10:35:23 q? 10:35:28 ack bert 10:35:51 bertand: we have 2 api, for developer api, and middleware api 10:36:05 2 very different set of stuff 10:36:06 q? 10:36:38 bertrand: we are forgetting to speak about the objectives at the end f the WS 10:37:13 clear decision needeed: source of data, verification, public basic ddr 10:37:25 ... 10:37:28 we will have to take actions at te end 10:38:24 rotan: yes the aim to have a roadmap for the group (charter) 10:38:59 richard: important point: vocabulary. 10:39:10 vocabulary means structure, whaich structure for the ddr ? 10:39:19 q+ 10:40:15 q? 10:41:23 ack luca 10:41:31 luca: i understand the point 10:42:11 but i don't see any exit 10:42:49 but i think we should start with something practical 10:43:21 [end of debate] 10:43:36 Topic: round up : agenda for this afternoon 10:43:48 http://www.w3.org/TR/dd-landscape/ 10:43:56 rotan: review of the dd-landscape 10:45:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-minutes.html mimasa 10:49:34 q+ 10:50:07 bennett: missing in landscape: state that metadata need to be injected at different points in the delivery chain 10:50:17 missing one dimension 10:53:01 daves: different actors in the chain come at diffrent time ? 10:53:14 bennett: yes, that's the missing part 10:53:44 rotan: yes, please write it down 10:53:46 ack luca 10:54:00 ACTION: bennett to review DD-landscape and send his comments 10:54:23 luca: you are adding too much dimension 10:54:45 a new dimension makes things far more complicated 10:55:16 iaki has joined #ddwg 10:55:23 cgi-irc has joined #ddwg 10:57:24 bennett: defining the problem is a key action, where we cut the line 10:57:45 is another problem, but cutting the line without considering the problem in a whole is a problem 10:57:56 and the landscape should take all the dimensions 10:58:09 rotan: agreed 10:59:17 q? 10:59:23 bennett: lots coming from barcelona WS 10:59:29 (Lunch next) 10:59:42 the goal was to understand who is pyaing the cost and who is taking advantage 10:59:55 to avoid mismatch 11:00:17 hard to convince for indirect benefits and direct costs 11:00:25 at nokia 11:00:56 [food] 11:01:45 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-minutes.html asamim 11:51:05 cgi-irc has joined #ddwg 11:52:19 Martin has joined #ddwg 12:03:26 See http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ddwg-irc#T11-52-19 12:07:38