15:47:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:47:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-rif-irc
15:48:01 <csma> zakim, this will be rif
15:48:01 <Zakim> ok, csma; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
15:48:13 <csma> Meeting: RIF telecon 20 November 2007
15:48:32 <csma> Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
15:48:40 <csma> Scribe: Dave Reynolds
15:49:12 <csma> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/0070.html
15:49:43 <csma> Regrets: Adrian Paschke
15:50:46 <csma> csma has changed the topic to: 20 November RIF telecon agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/0070.html
15:53:23 <csma> rrsagent, list agenda
15:53:23 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'list agenda', csma.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:53:49 <csma> agenda
15:54:07 <csma> list agenda
15:54:16 <csma> close agenda
15:54:20 <csma> list agenda
15:54:46 <csma> agendun-
15:54:53 <csma> agendum-
15:54:59 <csma> agenda-
15:55:06 <csma> zakim, close agenda
15:55:06 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close agenda', csma
15:55:12 <csma> zakim, reset agenda
15:55:12 <Zakim> I don't understand 'reset agenda', csma
15:55:34 <csma> zakim, remove agenda
15:55:34 <Zakim> I don't understand 'remove agenda', csma
15:55:45 <csma> zakim, remove agendum 7
15:55:45 <Zakim> agendum 7, PRD, dropped
15:55:54 <csma> list agenda
15:56:02 <csma> zakim, close agenda
15:56:02 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close agenda', csma
15:56:07 <csma> zakim, drop agenda
15:56:07 <Zakim> sorry, csma, I don't know what conference this is
15:56:29 <csma> zakim, this will be rid
15:56:29 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, csma
15:56:48 <csma> zakim, this will be rif
15:56:48 <Zakim> ok, csma; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
15:58:36 <csma> zakim, clear agenda
15:58:36 <Zakim> agenda cleared
15:58:50 <csma> agenda+ Admin
15:59:08 <csma> agenda+ Liaisons
15:59:12 <csma> agenda+ F2F9
15:59:26 <csma> agenda+ Issue 2
15:59:30 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:59:40 <csma> agenda+ Issue 42
16:00:09 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:00:10 <csma> agenda+ XML 1.0 or XML 1.1?
16:00:11 <Zakim> +??P17
16:00:13 <Zakim> +Dave_Reynolds (was ??P17)
16:00:17 <csma> agenda+ BLD planning
16:00:23 <csma> agenda+ Issue 40
16:00:42 <patranja> patranja has joined #rif
16:00:47 <PaulVincent> PaulVincent has joined #RIF
16:01:18 <josb> josb has joined #rif
16:01:28 <Zakim> +josb
16:01:30 <Zakim> +??P26
16:01:52 <IgorMozetic> IgorMozetic has joined #rif
16:01:57 <csma> zakim, ??P26 is me
16:02:00 <Zakim> +csma; got it
16:02:06 <csma> q-
16:02:15 <csma> ack ??P26
16:02:43 <csma> scribenick: DaveReynolds
16:02:54 <DaveReynolds> Scribe: Dave Reynolds
16:02:57 <Zakim> +Sandro
16:02:59 <Zakim> -Sandro
16:03:03 <Zakim> +Sandro
16:03:25 <Zakim> +PaulaP
16:03:31 <Zakim> +??P7
16:03:56 <Zakim> -??P7
16:03:57 <barry_b> barry_b has joined #rif
16:04:19 <csma> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:04:19 <Harold> Harold has joined #rif
16:04:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see Dave_Reynolds, josb (muted), csma, Sandro, PaulaP
16:04:57 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #rif
16:05:01 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
16:05:01 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-rif-irc#T16-05-01
16:05:23 <csma> next agendum
16:05:37 <sandro> zakim, next agendum
16:05:54 <sandro> (er, slow Zakim!)
16:05:55 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, sandro
16:06:11 <IgorMozetic> is zakim working properly? (74394# not valid)
16:06:19 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
16:06:22 <Hassan> Hassan has joined #rif
16:06:26 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-371: done
16:06:49 <Zakim> +??P39
16:06:50 <Harold> zakim, [NRCC] is me
16:06:51 <Zakim> +Harold; got it
16:06:52 <Zakim> +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
16:06:56 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-374: done (extension requested)
16:07:14 <Zakim> +??P41
16:07:14 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: committee meets tomorrow, might have answer then
16:07:23 <IgorMozetic> zakim, ??P41 is me
16:07:23 <Zakim> +IgorMozetic; got it
16:07:32 <IgorMozetic> zakim, mute me
16:07:32 <Zakim> IgorMozetic should now be muted
16:07:35 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-376: done
16:07:45 <sandro> Odd, IgorMozetic....    Sometimes the tones get too distorted by the phone system to be recognized......
16:08:22 <DaveReynolds> Harold: haven't seen notification of WD publication on RDF list
16:08:25 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
16:08:43 <DaveReynolds> Harold: should we have larger scale notification of the new WDs?
16:09:12 <Zakim> +??P49
16:09:25 <csma> q?
16:10:03 <Zakim> +barry_b
16:10:13 <barry_b> Zakim, mute me
16:10:13 <Zakim> barry_b should now be muted
16:10:27 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: only concern is limited attention, people will only look at docs so many times. If we are going to have a refactored draft in the new couple of months would be reasonable to wait to then then publicize more aggressively.
16:10:45 <josb> Ack me
16:10:49 <sandro> RRSAgent, make record public
16:10:54 <DaveReynolds> s/then then/till then/
16:11:18 <DaveReynolds> Jos: would be interested in getting as much f/b as possible on the compatibility doc
16:11:53 <DaveReynolds> cmsa: suggested tabling this question until discuss the BLD plan
16:11:56 <csma> q?
16:12:30 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/att-0057/2007_11_13_rif_minutes.html
16:12:39 <Zakim> +Leora_Morgenstern
16:12:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
16:12:47 <Zakim> Leora_Morgenstern should now be muted
16:12:48 <DaveReynolds> No objections. Minutes accepted.
16:13:56 <DaveReynolds> zakim, next agendum
16:13:56 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Liaisons" taken up [from csma]
16:14:27 <Zakim> +Gary_Hallmark
16:14:47 <csma> http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?dtc/07-11-04.pdf
16:15:24 <DaveReynolds> Paul: all input appreciated on PRR review, finalization due around Feb
16:15:43 <DaveReynolds> cmsa: on first page of doc is email address for comments
16:15:48 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/0014.html
16:15:49 <DaveReynolds> s/cmsa/csma/
16:16:34 <GaryHallmark> GaryHallmark has joined #rif
16:16:50 <DaveReynolds> csma: notes that Bijan is liaison from OWL-WG to RIF, do we want a reverse liaison?
16:17:09 <DaveReynolds> csma: currently Sandro is our liaison
16:17:46 <josb> yes; I can help
16:17:47 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
16:18:08 <DaveReynolds> josb volunteers to help Sandro with tracking the OWL-WG liaison issues
16:18:24 <DaveReynolds> zakim, next agendum
16:18:24 <Zakim> agendum 3. "F2F9" taken up [from csma]
16:18:28 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/F2F9
16:18:31 <mdean> mdean has joined #rif
16:18:45 <DaveReynolds> Sandro notes that the chair hasn't filled out the survey!
16:19:01 <IgorMozetic> ack me
16:19:41 <DaveReynolds> Igor: ideally would like to decide F2F9 dates by Dec 4th
16:20:49 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: encourages everyone, especially chairs and editors, to fill survey in next day. Then can set up location survey for next week or so.
16:21:08 <mdean> mdean has joined #rif
16:23:18 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: need next survey to up for a full week, that would mean that at next telecon will have to both decide on dates and confirm hosts can support dates
16:23:30 <DaveReynolds> s/to up/to be up/
16:25:03 <DaveReynolds> csma: deadline for date survey end of this week
16:25:27 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: each host work out which dates for them and propose a couple of dates over the weekend ready for next telecon (27th)
16:25:27 <csma> q?
16:25:44 <DaveReynolds> s/for/work for/
16:26:54 <DaveReynolds> Action: AxelPolleres to post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th
16:26:54 <rifbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - AxelPolleres
16:27:13 <DaveReynolds> Action: Igor to post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th
16:27:13 <rifbot> Created ACTION-379 - Post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th [on Igor Mozetic - due 2007-11-27].
16:27:21 <DaveReynolds> Action: csma to post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th
16:27:21 <rifbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - csma
16:27:29 <DaveReynolds> Action: christian to post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th
16:27:30 <rifbot> Created ACTION-380 - Post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2007-11-27].
16:27:37 <DaveReynolds> Action: Axel to post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th
16:27:37 <rifbot> Created ACTION-381 - Post proposed F2F9 dates by next telecon, i.e. sometime Monday 26th [on Axel Polleres - due 2007-11-27].
16:27:59 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-377: closed
16:28:15 <DaveReynolds> zakim, next agendum
16:28:15 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Issue 2" taken up [from csma]
16:28:43 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-375: continued
16:29:01 <josb> yes
16:29:04 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-369: done
16:29:11 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-370: done
16:29:27 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-367: done
16:29:41 <josb> ack me
16:30:21 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-365: pending discussion, drafted reply
16:30:31 <josb> right
16:31:02 <DaveReynolds> ACTION-364, ACTION-362: pending discussion
16:31:16 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/2
16:31:34 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/0021.html
16:31:57 <josb> yes
16:32:17 <csma> PROPOSED: Close issue 2, based on Jos's analysis in [7]
16:32:19 <DaveReynolds> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-2 based on Jos' analysis
16:32:47 <csma> q?
16:32:57 <IgorMozetic> zakim, mute me
16:32:57 <Zakim> IgorMozetic should now be muted
16:33:00 <DaveReynolds> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-2 based on Jos' analysis
16:33:17 <DaveReynolds> zakim, next agendum
16:33:17 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Issue 42" taken up [from csma]
16:33:28 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/42
16:33:44 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/0018.html
16:34:41 <josb> ack me
16:35:11 <DaveReynolds> Jos: originally wanted rif:text to be able to treat all constants uniformly in the syntax
16:36:02 <DaveReynolds> Jos: if we violate this for one type of constant then we might want to re-evaluate how we represent other constants (e.g. IRIs, local constants)
16:36:28 <MichaelKifer> MichaelKifer has joined #rif
16:37:01 <DaveReynolds> Jos: drawback of sticky with rif:text is that we are creating a new datatype which is not really our business
16:38:11 <DaveReynolds> csma: why not only allow addition of language tags and stop there?
16:38:32 <DaveReynolds> Jos: that then creates two kinds of constants, a strange lack of uniformity
16:38:58 <Zakim> +MichaelKifer
16:39:14 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
16:39:14 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
16:39:19 <DaveReynolds> Harold: can't we have both a symbol space and a language tag?
16:40:26 <DaveReynolds> csma: but the lang tag might apply to other types?
16:40:36 <DaveReynolds> Jos: no!  (scribe agrees)
16:40:58 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: by definition XML literals don't allow language tagging
16:41:05 <DaveReynolds> q+
16:41:10 <Zakim> -Leora_Morgenstern
16:41:15 <DaveReynolds> Harold: e.g. lang tag even for IRIs
16:41:18 <csma> q?
16:41:29 <Zakim> +Leora_Morgenstern
16:41:50 <sandro> (chat.com could be english or french, right?)
16:41:51 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
16:41:51 <Zakim> Leora_Morgenstern should now be muted
16:42:36 <DaveReynolds> DaveR: no, lang just applies to text for user presentation not to other data types
16:42:55 <IgorMozetic> I vote for uniformity
16:43:46 <DaveReynolds> q-
16:43:59 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
16:43:59 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
16:44:19 <josb> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/0018.html
16:45:10 <DaveReynolds> csma: seems it needs more discussion, so postpone to later telecon
16:46:12 <Hassan> +1 with MK
16:46:19 <DaveReynolds> MK: benefit of uniformity is just one mechanism for defining constants, as opposed to mess of special cases
16:46:30 <IgorMozetic> +1 for MK
16:46:45 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
16:46:45 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
16:47:09 <DaveReynolds> zakim, next agendum 
16:47:09 <Zakim> agendum 6. "XML 1.0 or XML 1.1?" taken up [from csma]
16:47:26 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Nov/0019.html
16:48:32 <DaveReynolds> csma: XML 1.1 is a little more permissive but is still WD
16:48:45 <josb> yes
16:49:10 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: clarifies this about XML Schema Datatypes not XML!
16:49:21 <sandro> XSD1.1, not XML1.1
16:49:54 <DaveReynolds> csma: so the proposal is to refer to XSD 1.0 and change that if XSD 1.1 reaches Rec before BLD
16:50:26 <josb> ack me
16:51:20 <DaveReynolds> Jos: no real drawback to referring to XSD 1.0 but should explicitly state we will switch to XSD 1.1 when Rec, to satisfy people who want to use XML 1.1
16:51:40 <DaveReynolds> Jos: that remark should be explicit in doc
16:51:44 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: makes sense
16:51:47 <sandro> +1
16:52:41 <csma> q?
16:52:43 <josb> PROPOSED: we refer to XSD 1.0 while it is not a Rec, but add an explicit remark that we will switch to 1.1 if it reaches Rec before RIF
16:53:10 <sandro> PROPOSED: We'll refer to XSD 1.0 instead of XSD 1.1 in our document for now, including a clear note that it our intention to change to XSD 1.1 when it becomes available, so that people can use XML 1.1.
16:53:51 <josb> yes
16:54:26 <sandro> RESOLVED: We'll refer to XSD 1.0 instead of XSD 1.1 in our document for now, including a clear note that it our intention to change to XSD 1.1 when it becomes available, so that people can use XML 1.1.
16:55:26 <DaveReynolds> csma: is equality issue critical path or not?
16:55:42 <sandro> +1 equality if CriticalPath
16:55:54 <sandro> s/if/is/
16:56:01 <DaveReynolds> csma: so ISSUE-47 is critical path
16:56:26 <DaveReynolds> csma: so 13 critical path issues
16:56:51 <DaveReynolds> csma: Sandro needs to add issue on invisible extensions, is that CP?
16:57:47 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: there is extensibility work that is critical path though that issue doesn't capture all of that
16:58:35 <DaveReynolds> csma: if people think there are other issues that are CP to last call should raise them as soon as possible
16:59:11 <sandro> ACTION: sandro to report any critical-path issues related to extensibility 
16:59:11 <rifbot> Created ACTION-382 - Report any critical-path issues related to extensibility  [on Sandro Hawke - due 2007-11-27].
16:59:12 <DaveReynolds> csma: roundtripping - CP or not?
16:59:37 <josb> q+
16:59:44 <csma> ack josb
17:00:16 <DaveReynolds> csma: aren't ISSUE-46, ISSUE-39 and ISSUE-xx  interdependent yet 46 is not marked CP
17:00:21 <csma> q?
17:00:35 <DaveReynolds> Jos: modules is just one way to do this
17:00:38 <csma> s/xx/33/
17:01:25 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/34
17:01:35 <DaveReynolds> csma: ISSUE-34, should that be closed?
17:01:48 <josb> q+
17:01:54 <csma> ack josb
17:01:54 <josb> ack me
17:02:30 <DaveReynolds> Jos: this was originally raised to record Sandro's concern on whether this conflicts with extensility
17:02:36 <DaveReynolds> Sandro: right, can't close that yet
17:02:48 <josb> 36?
17:05:00 <DaveReynolds> csma: said at F2F8 that 2nd BLD WD will resolve issues 45 (lists),  41(#), 43(##), 44(named args) and 40(builtins)
17:05:15 <Harold> If a set of builtins uses unrelated URIs to point to each builtin's specification, there is nothing ressembling a module. If, however, a set of builtins uses a shared base URI and different local URIs to point to each builtin's specification, the base URI can be regarded as a module.
17:05:35 <josb> (by the way, regarding an earlier discussion in the telecon, Chris advertised our working drafts during his keynote at ISWC)
17:05:36 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
17:05:36 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
17:05:38 <DaveReynolds> csma: can we do work on 40 and get quick decisions on the others in 1.5 months
17:06:32 <DaveReynolds> MK: someone has to work out the actual document for builtins
17:06:37 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
17:06:37 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
17:07:28 <josb> ack me
17:07:38 <DaveReynolds> csma: want to keep OWL compat doc in sync with BLD, can we have 2nd WD on 1.5m timescale?
17:07:53 <AxelPolleres> Hello MichaelKifer, welcome to #rif
17:07:57 <DaveReynolds> Jos: yes, but would like to discuss the current page in an up coming telecon
17:08:02 <AxelPolleres> ?!?
17:08:42 <DaveReynolds> Action: christian to schedule discussion on OWL compatibility document at future telecon
17:08:42 <rifbot> Created ACTION-383 - Schedule discussion on OWL compatibility document at future telecon [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2007-11-27].
17:09:27 <DaveReynolds> csma: are there issues on the BLD XML syntax, is that just ISSUE-36 or is it related to extensibility?
17:09:56 <DaveReynolds> Harold: current XSD is monolithic, doesn't use any extensibility of XML Schema, could try to modularize it more
17:11:16 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
17:11:16 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
17:11:43 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
17:11:43 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
17:11:50 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
17:11:50 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
17:12:20 <DaveReynolds> MK: builtins should be in a separate document since they are shared by different dialects
17:12:39 <Harold> The current builtins can also be used by PRD.
17:13:02 <Harold> Yes, Paula, kind of Core builtins.
17:13:32 <Harold> So the Core could start with the builtins.
17:14:36 <DaveReynolds> csma: asks Paula to include the additional builtins DaveR mentioned in email
17:14:41 <DaveReynolds> Paula: already in, but will check
17:15:00 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
17:15:00 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
17:15:21 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
17:15:21 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
17:15:35 <DaveReynolds> csma: what's the issue with binding patterns?
17:15:46 <AxelPolleres> q+
17:15:55 <DaveReynolds> MK: no issue, just prefers not to have binding patterns in semantics, complicates things
17:16:52 <DaveReynolds> MK: e.g. a + b = 3, if a and b are unbound have infinite relation so impossible to compute
17:17:15 <csma> q?
17:17:27 <AxelPolleres> allowing ONLY constants would be too limiting.
17:17:38 <DaveReynolds> MK: binding pattern more complicated, e.g. for plus have to say that two need to bound but one can be unbound
17:17:49 <DaveReynolds> MK: have to specify this but don't have to put them in the semantics
17:17:59 <Hassan> q+
17:18:05 <csma> ack axel
17:18:22 <DaveReynolds> Axel: binding pattern is similar issue to safety
17:19:04 <DaveReynolds> Axel: binding patterns give patterns such that builtin is safe (finite extension) so similar to rule safety
17:19:27 <DaveReynolds> Axel: agrees with MK it is not concern for the semantics
17:20:26 <Harold> To prevent 'plus' used as in plus(3 ?a ?b), only allowing deterministic calls like plus(?x 1 2), we can specify the single 'plus' [binding pattern or] mode plus(out in in).
17:20:28 <DaveReynolds> Axel: rule engines vary with the binding patterns they support, some might further limit patterns (e.g. only run plus forwards)
17:20:51 <AxelPolleres> you mean swrl?
17:20:58 <DaveReynolds> MK: what do they do in SWRL?
17:21:18 <csma> ack hassan
17:21:20 <DaveReynolds> MikeDean: they don't specify binding patterns, just as relations
17:21:50 <AxelPolleres> +1 to mike dean: exactly, if not specified, then it causes difficulties for implementers...
17:22:06 <DaveReynolds> Hassan: tend to disagree that binding patterns is part of semantics, whether rules pass value by unification is important
17:22:48 <DaveReynolds> MK: part of the semantics, point is they are not part of the model theoretic semantics
17:22:55 <AxelPolleres> I also agree that it need't be part of the semantics.
17:23:36 <AxelPolleres> but for a dialect, not only the list of built-ins, but also the supported binding patterns should be specified.
17:23:53 <AxelPolleres> this is more an issue of arch/extensibility than semantics.
17:23:56 <AxelPolleres> q+
17:23:57 <DaveReynolds> Hassan: can have models for infinite relations perfectly happening
17:24:14 <Hassan> q-
17:25:38 <DaveReynolds> csma: can't we just have simplest binding patterns?
17:26:04 <DaveReynolds> Axel: part of extensibility, dialect should be allowed to specify binding patterns
17:26:10 <csma> q?
17:26:15 <csma> ack axel
17:26:34 <Zakim> -barry_b
17:27:02 <DaveReynolds> Axel: in generic defn of builtins allow higher order predicates (builtins with take as inputs other predicates), make sense for things like aggregation
17:27:10 <josb> no
17:27:15 <DaveReynolds> Axel: is this something we want to account for in BLD?
17:27:55 <DaveReynolds> Hassan: higher order or meta? Seems more like meta - e.g. prolog's univ.
17:28:16 <DaveReynolds> Axel: no, takes extension of another predicate
17:28:50 <DaveReynolds> csma: perhaps beyond scope of BLD
17:28:55 <josb> it is beyond bld!
17:29:11 <DaveReynolds> Action: Axel to post use case for higher order builtins
17:29:12 <rifbot> Created ACTION-384 - Post use case for higher order builtins [on Axel Polleres - due 2007-11-27].
17:29:29 <DaveReynolds> Action: Paula to start document for the list of builtins
17:29:29 <rifbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Paula
17:29:51 <AxelPolleres> bye
17:29:57 <AxelPolleres> Ah! 
17:30:02 <AxelPolleres> one more point!!!
17:30:05 <AxelPolleres> q+
17:30:06 <csma> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:30:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see Dave_Reynolds, josb (muted), csma, Sandro, PaulaP, Harold, AxelPolleres, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), IgorMozetic (muted), PaulVincent, Gary_Hallmark, Mike_Dean,
17:30:10 <Zakim> ... MichaelKifer, Leora_Morgenstern (muted)
17:30:23 <DaveReynolds> Action: Patranjan to start document for the list of builtins
17:30:23 <rifbot> Created ACTION-385 - Start document for the list of builtins [on Paula-Lavinia Patranjan - due 2007-11-27].
17:31:05 <csma> zakim, pick a victim
17:31:05 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose AxelPolleres
17:31:05 <PaulaP> regrets for the next telecon
17:31:23 <LeoraMorgenstern> I'll do it.
17:31:34 <PaulaP> +1
17:31:41 <PaulaP> bye
17:31:43 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
17:31:44 <PaulVincent> bye
17:31:45 <Zakim> -Gary_Hallmark
17:31:46 <Zakim> -Leora_Morgenstern
17:31:47 <Zakim> -IgorMozetic
17:31:49 <Zakim> -PaulaP
17:31:50 <Zakim> -josb
17:31:51 <Zakim> -PaulVincent
17:31:53 <Zakim> -MichaelKifer
17:31:55 <Zakim> -Harold
17:31:56 <Zakim> -Sandro
17:31:58 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
17:32:05 <Zakim> -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
17:32:05 <csma> rrsagent, make record public
17:32:16 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
17:32:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-rif-minutes.html csma
17:33:56 <Zakim> -Dave_Reynolds
17:34:01 <csma> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:34:01 <Zakim> On the phone I see csma
17:34:11 <Zakim> -csma
17:34:12 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:34:14 <Zakim> Attendees were Dave_Reynolds, josb, csma, Sandro, PaulaP, Harold, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, AxelPolleres, IgorMozetic, PaulVincent, barry_b, Leora_Morgenstern, Gary_Hallmark, Mike_Dean,
17:34:16 <Zakim> ... MichaelKifer
17:34:35 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
17:34:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-rif-minutes.html csma
17:37:37 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
17:37:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-rif-minutes.html csma
17:40:27 <csma> Dave, apparently no chance that I can get RRSAgent to add the presents in the proper place
17:40:39 <csma> ...you will have to do it by hand!
17:41:09 <DaveReynolds> Seems OK to me
17:41:20 <csma> Bye
17:41:22 <csma> csma has left #rif