14:27:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:27:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/05/08-rif-irc
14:27:08 <ChrisW> zakim, this will be rif
14:27:08 <Zakim> ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 33 minutes
14:28:28 <ChrisW> Meeting: RIF Telecon 8 May, Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007May/0011.html
14:28:55 <ChrisW> Meeting: RIF Telecon 1 May 2007
14:29:16 <ChrisW> ChrisW has changed the topic to: RIF Telecon 1 May, Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007May/0011.html
14:29:32 <ChrisW> Chair: Christian de Sainte-Marie
14:29:44 <ChrisW> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007May/0011.html
14:29:58 <ChrisW> zakim, clear agenda
14:29:58 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:30:04 <ChrisW> agenda+ Admin
14:30:11 <ChrisW> agenda+ F2F6
14:30:17 <ChrisW> agenda+ Liason
14:30:38 <ChrisW> agenda+ Core: Issue 31
14:30:44 <ChrisW> agenda+ Core: Metadata
14:30:52 <ChrisW> agenda+ UCR
14:30:58 <ChrisW> agenda+ RIFRAF
14:31:02 <ChrisW> agenda+ AOB
14:31:16 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
14:31:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/08-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
14:38:32 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make logs public
14:44:15 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif
14:53:26 <DavidHirtle> DavidHirtle has joined #rif
14:54:55 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
14:55:01 <Zakim> +Sandro
14:55:31 <patranja> patranja has joined #rif
14:57:15 <sandro> sandro has changed the topic to: RIF Telecon 8 May  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007May/0011
14:57:22 <Zakim> +[IBM]
14:58:19 <sandro> can you hear me at all now?
14:58:25 <ChrisW> zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
14:58:25 <Zakim> +ChrisW; got it
14:58:42 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the call?
14:58:42 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, ChrisW
14:58:44 <Harold> Harold has joined #rif
14:59:25 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
14:59:41 <mdean> mdean has joined #rif
14:59:44 <Harold> Zakim [NRCC] is me.
15:00:08 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:00:29 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
15:00:32 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #rif
15:00:49 <IgorMozetic> IgorMozetic has joined #rif
15:00:53 <Zakim> +Dave_Reynolds (was Guest P14 74394)
15:00:55 <PaulVincent> PaulVincent has joined #rif
15:00:56 <Zakim> +Dave_Reynolds
15:01:25 <Zakim> +PaulaP
15:01:27 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:01:56 <Zakim> +??P34
15:02:27 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:02:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, ChrisW, Harold, Mike_Dean, Dave_Reynolds, PaulaP (muted), DavidHirtle, ??P34
15:03:07 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:04:10 <Hassan> Hassan has joined #rif
15:04:16 <ChrisW> scribenick: DavidHirtle
15:04:25 <ChrisW> Scribe: David Hirtle
15:05:06 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:05:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, ChrisW, Harold, Mike_Dean, Dave_Reynolds, PaulaP (muted), DavidHirtle, PaulVincent, AxelPolleres
15:05:16 <PaulVincent> Thanks Dave! I so enjoy my little chats with Zakim... 
15:05:27 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:05:27 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:06:08 <Zakim> +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
15:06:11 <ChrisW> zakim, close item 1
15:06:11 <Zakim> agendum 1, Admin, closed
15:06:12 <Zakim> I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:06:13 <Zakim> 2. F2F6 [from ChrisW]
15:06:14 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:06:14 <Zakim> agendum 2. "F2F6" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:06:29 <Allen> Allen has joined #rif
15:07:19 <Zakim> +Allen_Ginsberg
15:07:49 <Zakim> +??P43
15:07:58 <IgorMozetic> zakim, ??P43 is me
15:07:58 <Zakim> +IgorMozetic; got it
15:08:12 <DavidHirtle> chris: anyone who hasn't filled out the survey for the F2F, please do so
15:08:22 <IgorMozetic> zakim, mute me
15:08:22 <Zakim> IgorMozetic should now be muted
15:08:23 <AllenG> AllenG has joined #rif
15:08:54 <PaulVincent> Unless dinner is ++ better than the meeting...
15:09:10 <DavidHirtle> chris: 22 people who will attend the meeting, and 28 who will attend the dinner...
15:09:38 <DavidHirtle> sandro: make your hotel reservations soon if you haven't already
15:10:10 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:10:10 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Liason" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:10:27 <PaulVincent> NO update from PRR
15:10:38 <AllenGinsberg> AllenGinsberg has joined #rif
15:10:45 <AxelPolleres> q+ on SPARQL review
15:10:48 <ChrisW> POWDER working group
15:11:11 <sandro> -> http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/blog 
15:11:22 <DavidHirtle> chris: POWDER is another SemWeb WG working on content rating...
15:11:29 <AxelPolleres> interesting, that fits with one of our use cases.
15:11:32 <sandro> -> http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/
15:11:42 <Zakim> -IgorMozetic
15:11:53 <DavidHirtle> ... they've identified some rules use cases and want some feedback from us
15:12:19 <DavidHirtle> ... I'll forward to our list; feel free to reply
15:12:25 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:12:36 <IgorMozetic> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
15:12:36 <Zakim> +IgorMozetic; got it
15:12:41 <IgorMozetic> zakim, mute me
15:12:41 <Zakim> IgorMozetic should now be muted
15:13:30 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:13:30 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Core: Issue 31" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:14:47 <sandro> Axel: I sent comments on SPARQL that could perhaps been endorsed by RIF.  For now I just sent them as myself.
15:15:05 <CGI868> CGI868 has joined #rif
15:15:07 <sandro> Chris: Alas, we didn't have time to make that formally from RIF.
15:15:12 <sandro> Chris: I think it's fine.
15:15:32 <sandro> zakim, who is here?
15:15:32 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, ChrisW, Harold, Mike_Dean, Dave_Reynolds, PaulaP (muted), DavidHirtle, PaulVincent, AxelPolleres, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), Allen_Ginsberg, IgorMozetic
15:15:36 <Zakim> ... (muted)
15:15:37 <Zakim> On IRC I see CGI868, AllenGinsberg, AllenG, Allen, Hassan, PaulVincent, IgorMozetic, AxelPolleres, DaveReynolds, mdean, Harold, PaulaP, DavidHirtle, sandro, RRSAgent, ChrisW,
15:15:39 <Zakim> ... Zakim, rifbot
15:15:41 <sandro> Topic: Issue-31 
15:15:47 <MichaelKifer> MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:16:24 <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Issue-31
15:17:31 <Zakim> + +39.047.101.aaaa
15:17:43 <MichaelKifer> zakim, aaaa is me
15:17:43 <Zakim> +MichaelKifer; got it
15:17:53 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:17:53 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:18:39 <sandro> q?
15:18:45 <DavidHirtle> chris: main discussion in the group is between ONDS and OS choices
15:19:14 <sandro> Sandro: translation to DS is hard, from DS is easy.
15:19:53 <sandro> Chris: Straw Poll.  Who likes OS?
15:21:21 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:21:21 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:21:24 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:21:24 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:21:24 <AxelPolleres> Can MK comment on that?
15:21:25 <sandro> Chris: translations from lower numbers to higher numbers is easy; not the other way around.
15:21:25 <DavidHirtle> chris: translating from a higher number choice back to lower number (esp 3 to 1) is hard
15:21:42 <Hassan> q+
15:22:18 <DavidHirtle> hassan: why is it difficult to translate from higher number to lower?
15:22:26 <AxelPolleres> That was a question.
15:22:47 <DaveReynolds> Actually #2 (ONDS) to #3 (OS) is not quite trivial if you have equality
15:23:09 <AxelPolleres> what hassan mentions is 2 -> 1, that is easy.
15:23:56 <DaveReynolds> agreed 1 <-> 2 is trivial, it is 3 (OS) which makes it hard, both ways
15:24:00 <Hassan> q-
15:24:06 <DavidHirtle> chris: there are some entailments that make it extremely difficult from 3 down to 1 (or even 2)
15:24:29 <MichaelKifer> q+
15:24:39 <DavidHirtle> hassan: if you interpret it then it has a unique meaning; you can spew it out unambiguously
15:25:17 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:25:17 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:25:50 <DavidHirtle> michael: hassan is right, translations in both directions are possible
15:25:51 <sandro> p(a), q(b), p=q, in OS entails p(b) and q(a), right.
15:26:44 <sandro> ChrisW, I'd be interested to hear the results of the straw poll, but I'd like to know if folks can vote for more than one option.
15:26:51 <Hassan> OSR is even better IMHO
15:27:08 <DavidHirtle> chris: michael, from OS into DS is easy?
15:27:43 <DavidHirtle> michael: depends on what you mean by easy; can use a predicate etc.
15:27:43 <sandro> MichaelKifer: it was proven in the HiLog paper ... 
15:27:56 <sandro> Chris: a predicate for each arity ... a combinatoric explosion of rules.
15:28:19 <DavidHirtle> hassan: where's the combinatorial explosion come from?
15:28:22 <sandro> Hassan: please explain combinatoric explosion
15:28:23 <DavidHirtle> michael: number of rules
15:28:49 <sandro> MichaelKifer: grown in the size of each rule, but the same number of rules, same number of symbols.   I think the grown is actually linear.
15:29:06 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:29:06 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:29:08 <MichaelKifer> q-
15:29:48 <DavidHirtle> sandro: if no one is going to argue other side, no need for argument
15:30:02 <DavidHirtle> chris: yes, vote for more than one if you're happy with that
15:30:16 <DavidHirtle> ... or we'll just ask who is against
15:30:27 <DavidHirtle> ... who's opposed to choice 3 (OS)?
15:30:52 <sandro> (say "-1 OS" if you are opposed.)
15:31:11 <sandro> (no one opposed)
15:31:12 <DavidHirtle> ... anyone opposed to 2 (ONDS)?
15:31:18 <sandro> -1 ONDS
15:31:23 <MichaelKifer> -1 onds
15:31:27 <DaveReynolds> preference against ONDS but not rule it out
15:31:32 <DavidHirtle> hassan: I'm opposed to it
15:31:35 <sandro> -1 DS
15:31:40 <DavidHirtle> chris: who's opposed to DS?
15:31:40 <AxelPolleres> -1 DS
15:31:41 <PaulaP> -1
15:31:42 <Hassan> hak  -1
15:31:45 <MichaelKifer> -1 ds
15:31:46 <sandro> Allen: -1 DS
15:32:03 <DavidHirtle> chris: so no one's opposed to 3; sounds like consensus
15:32:13 <MichaelKifer> q+
15:32:34 <DavidHirtle> sandro: hassan seems to prefer 4, but we don't need to choose now: can just add reflection later
15:33:19 <DavidHirtle> hassan: better to have reflection from the start, especially if it's not too costly to add
15:33:58 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:33:58 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:34:27 <DavidHirtle> chris: is there an encoding of a reflective rule (rule that takes the syntax of the language and puts it into the language)?
15:34:39 <DavidHirtle> michael: I don't know; haven't discussed it
15:35:04 <DavidHirtle> sandro: by picking 3, we're not ruling out 4
15:35:22 <DavidHirtle> michael: we need to pick up one and define semantics accordingly
15:35:34 <DavidHirtle> sandro: have you thought about semantics of 3 vs 4?
15:35:57 <DavidHirtle> michael: I know how to do semantics for 3 etc. but there are options for 4 (even syntactic)... we cannot just leave it open
15:36:35 <DavidHirtle> chris: I agree with that; we should agree on 3 or 4
15:37:21 <sandro> Hassan: Reflection is the possibility to describe your abstract syntax in your semantics.
15:37:43 <sandro> MichaelKifer: How much introspection do you want to allow?
15:37:45 <Harold> Pat Hayes recently put forward the very
15:37:45 <Harold> general IKL system
15:38:03 <Harold> which may be of interest here
15:38:14 <Harold> regarding syntactic self-description:
15:38:28 <Harold> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Oct/0109.html
15:38:44 <DavidHirtle> sandro: let's resolve on 3 or 4 for now and discuss it more next week
15:38:46 <DavidHirtle> chris: sure
15:39:17 <sandro> MichaelKifer: introspection for encoding rules as data isn't a problem, but if we get close to Liar Paradox, etc, then it's another matter.
15:40:02 <DavidHirtle> michael: I'm concerned about what happens when we go into a first order dialect
15:40:17 <sandro> MichaelKifer: so it's easy enough to have some quotation, but if we get extended to FOL it may cause problems.
15:40:21 <Harold> How much would we go in the direction of KIF and CG if we introduce quotation mechanism?
15:42:00 <DavidHirtle> michael: a first order extension of this could lead to paradoxes, e.g. whatever I'm saying is a lie
15:42:43 <DavidHirtle> hassan: a very simple reflection mechanism can't harm you
15:43:13 <ChrisW> q?
15:43:18 <ChrisW> ack m
15:43:18 <DavidHirtle> michael: I don't know what the consequences are going to be if we allow reflection in the core; in a dialect only, it's not a problem
15:44:43 <DavidHirtle> hassan: if you're designing a language, having the possibility to describe your own syntax is an advantage
15:44:55 <DavidHirtle> ... I don't see any consequences
15:45:07 <sandro> s/any c/any dire c/
15:45:08 <DavidHirtle> michael: in FOL, if you allow self-reference, you have to be very careful
15:45:31 <Harold> Could we have a 1st-order-capable Core and a (Reflective) Extension Layer above it, of possible use for some Dialects.
15:46:29 <DavidHirtle> chris: everyone seems to be talking about a different aspect of reflection
15:46:46 <DavidHirtle> ... hassan, could you write up a proposal about reflection you have in mind?
15:47:26 <DavidHirtle> hassan: sure, but I'm just using general programming language notion
15:48:03 <sandro> hassan: I'm talking about something like Prolog's "univ" ( written "=.." ).
15:48:20 <sandro> Chris: My concern is whether there is a way to support that in things like FOL.
15:48:30 <DavidHirtle> hassan: a language that does not support reflection doesn't have to worry about it
15:48:52 <sandro> Chris: We're trying to make the the Core be something that can be translated to every other languages.
15:48:52 <DavidHirtle> chris: yes, it does, in order to be compliant
15:50:23 <DavidHirtle> sandro: concrete example: we have a ruleset and we're translating it to FOL ... if the rule is trying to infer new data, does it affect rules themselves?
15:51:15 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:51:15 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:51:33 <DavidHirtle> chris: anyone else in favor of adding reflection?
15:51:40 <DavidHirtle> (no one)
15:51:54 <DavidHirtle> chris: hassan, please send a message to the list and we'll discuss next week
15:51:57 <sandro> s/n?/n to Core?
15:52:10 <DavidHirtle> chris: if no other support, we'll have to move to a dialect
15:53:06 <DavidHirtle> sandro: let's resolve that we agreed on 3 or 4, not 1 or 2
15:53:46 <DavidHirtle> hassan: I won't object to 3; I won't be able to attend next week
15:53:57 <PaulVincent> I'd be interested in reading Hassan's arguments for 4...
15:54:01 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:54:01 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:54:11 <DavidHirtle> michael: I won't be on the telecon next week either
15:54:12 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:54:12 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:54:16 <sandro> PROPOSED: To go with 3 or 4, and next week we'll decide between 3 and 4, if Hassan's e-mail convinced anyone.
15:54:34 <sandro> PROPOSED: To go with 3 (OS) or 4 (OSR), and next week we'll decide between 3 and 4, if Hassan's e-mail convinced anyone.
15:54:54 <DavidHirtle> chris: any objections?
15:55:10 <sandro> RESOLVED: To go with 3 (OS) or 4 (OSR), and next week we'll decide between 3 and 4, if Hassan's e-mail convinced anyone.    (cf  http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Issue-31)
15:55:14 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:55:14 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Core: Metadata" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:55:39 <DavidHirtle> chris: I'm not really prepared on this issue; christian not here
15:55:48 <DavidHirtle> sandro: I feel somewhat prepared
15:56:00 <DavidHirtle> ... DaveR may be more than me if he'd rather
15:57:15 <DavidHirtle> DaveR: I took issue to be that we have requirement about attaching metadata to rules... how do we represent, what are core items, etc?
15:57:22 <sandro> DaveReynolds: How do we represent Metadata?  What core vocab should we have?   And How extensible should it be?
15:57:41 <sandro> DaveReynolds: I think it should be, in the style of RDF, completely open ended.
16:00:08 <sandro> Sandro: what if you use RDF in RIF Core format?
16:00:15 <Hassan> BTW: having meta-data is having some relection 
16:00:26 <sandro> Chris: So what if you have a rule like "All the rules authored by Chris are false" ?
16:00:52 <DavidHirtle> chris: we have to be careful about putting this in core because of problems in translating rules into languages that don't support it
16:02:01 <sandro> Sandro: How about having a file have a Ruleset and a Metadata set, and you can merge them at your own risk.
16:02:40 <DavidHirtle> chris: one obvious way to express RDF as metadata would be to use triples
16:03:14 <DavidHirtle> ... what metadata do we need?
16:03:49 <sandro> 4.1.5. Embedded metadata
16:03:49 <sandro> RIF must support metadata such as author and rule name.
16:04:32 <Harold> A 'rulename' can be used to *attach* metadata to rules such as 'author'.
16:04:34 <PaulVincent> Rule metadata - see Dublin Core; properties like priority etc
16:04:35 <sandro> Chris: just wondering about kinds of metadata that might impact the core.....
16:04:57 <sandro> DaveReynolds: date, provenance, 
16:05:02 <DavidHirtle> chris: is Dublin Core enough?
16:05:23 <sandro> DaveReynolds: for round-tripping, we might need "the original form of name"
16:05:27 <PaulVincent> q+
16:06:09 <ChrisW> ack p
16:06:17 <DavidHirtle> Paul: usually in rule-matching systems, data defined for customer
16:07:25 <Zakim> -Sandro
16:07:41 <DaveReynolds> +1 to Chris, translator hint annotations seem valuable
16:07:41 <Zakim> + +1.403.762.aabb
16:08:02 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:08:02 <Zakim> On the phone I see ChrisW, Harold, Mike_Dean, Dave_Reynolds, PaulaP (muted), DavidHirtle, PaulVincent, AxelPolleres, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), Allen_Ginsberg, IgorMozetic (muted),
16:08:04 <DavidHirtle> Paul: obvious one is original language in which rules are defined, also source rules as comments
16:08:06 <Zakim> ... MichaelKifer (muted), +1.403.762.aabb
16:08:39 <Harold> q+
16:09:01 <DavidHirtle> chris: we have this Dublin Core metadata, round-trip "preservation metadata", any other kinds?
16:09:09 <DavidHirtle> allen: dialect identification metadata?
16:09:18 <DavidHirtle> sandro: I don't think that's metadata
16:09:45 <DavidHirtle> Harold: instead of giving dialect as metadata, could have different URLs pointing to different XML Schemas of RIF
16:09:53 <DaveReynolds> Harold - surely a URL refernce is just a form of metadata?
16:09:54 <PaulVincent> Reference: http://dublincore.org/ 
16:10:19 <DavidHirtle> sandro: I agree, could have different namespace for each dialect
16:11:45 <DavidHirtle> harold: XSD is quite weak; may involve other things like Schematron
16:12:04 <Harold> Dave, I meant the URL that points to the definition of a dialect such as to its xml schema.
16:13:12 <Harold> s/Schematron/Schematron or even semantic validators (for results of static analysis)/
16:15:53 <DavidHirtle> chris: does each dialect define set of metadata fields?
16:16:57 <Harold> Chris, about the direction of pointing between a RIF file and its metadata, I think essential metadata (about  results of static analysis) cannot point from outside into their RIF file -- they must be attached to the ruleset iteself. 
16:17:28 <Zakim> -PaulaP
16:17:51 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
16:17:51 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, ChrisW
16:17:56 <ChrisW> ack
16:18:00 <ChrisW> q?
16:18:02 <ChrisW> ack h
16:18:04 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
16:18:05 <Zakim> agendum 6. "UCR" taken up [from ChrisW]
16:18:21 <DavidHirtle> chris: where do we stand?
16:18:29 <Zakim> -Harold
16:18:44 <DavidHirtle> allen: need to add text for figures, otherwise nothing else
16:19:04 <DavidHirtle> chris: should we have a use cases section at F2F?
16:19:14 <DavidHirtle> allen: phase 2 requirements...
16:19:43 <DavidHirtle> chris: I think Paula started a list of phase 2 requirements
16:20:38 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
16:20:38 <Zakim> agendum 8. "AOB" taken up [from ChrisW]
16:21:36 <DavidHirtle> allen: I did the ontology thing using imports and sent it to the list a while ago... just wanted to make sure it's okay
16:21:44 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
16:21:44 <Zakim> I do not see any non-closed or non-skipped agenda items, ChrisW
16:21:47 <AxelPolleres> Suggestion: Can we postpone this discussion until in two weeks (will be)
16:21:53 <AxelPolleres> travelling next telecon!
16:21:59 <ChrisW> zakim, take up item 7
16:21:59 <Zakim> agendum 7. "RIFRAF" taken up [from ChrisW]
16:22:03 <DavidHirtle> chris: sure
16:22:12 <AxelPolleres> yes!
16:22:15 <DavidHirtle> chris: so schedule F2F time to talk about RIFRAF
16:22:23 <AxelPolleres> sorry, cannot unmute, my skype is somewhat stuck
16:22:37 <Hassan> +1
16:22:39 <Zakim> -MichaelKifer
16:22:41 <Zakim> -PaulVincent
16:22:42 <Zakim> -IgorMozetic
16:22:43 <AxelPolleres> please schedule rifraf on day 1 (june 2)
16:22:45 <Zakim> -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
16:22:45 <AxelPolleres> thanks!
16:22:46 <Zakim> -Allen_Ginsberg
16:22:50 <Zakim> -Dave_Reynolds
16:22:56 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:22:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/08-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:23:12 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
16:23:23 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
16:23:40 <Zakim> -DavidHirtle
16:23:43 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:23:43 <Zakim> On the phone I see ChrisW, +1.403.762.aabb
16:25:49 <Zakim> -ChrisW
16:25:51 <Zakim> - +1.403.762.aabb
16:25:53 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:25:54 <Zakim> Attendees were Sandro, ChrisW, Mike_Dean, Dave_Reynolds, PaulaP, DavidHirtle, Harold, AxelPolleres, PaulVincent, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Allen_Ginsberg, IgorMozetic, +39.047.101.aaaa,
16:25:57 <Zakim> ... MichaelKifer, +1.403.762.aabb
16:26:04 <ChrisW> Chair: Chris Welty
16:26:47 <ChrisW> Regrets: FrançoisBry, JosDeBruijn, MichaelSintek, MarkusKrötzsch, DeborahNichols
16:26:53 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:26:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/08-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:27:29 <ChrisW> Chair: Chris Welty
16:27:33 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:27:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/08-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:31:35 <DavidHirtle> DavidHirtle has left #rif
18:49:56 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rif
20:00:15 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif
21:44:15 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif