IRC log of owl on 2008-11-05

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:57:44 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #owl
17:57:44 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/11/05-owl-irc
17:57:59 [MarkusK_]
MarkusK_ has joined #owl
17:58:01 [pfps]
zakim, who is here?
17:58:01 [Zakim]
sorry, pfps, I don't know what conference this is
17:58:02 [IanH]
IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.11.05/Agenda
17:58:03 [Zakim]
On IRC I see MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace, sandro, trackbot
17:58:08 [pfps]
zakim, this is owlwg
17:58:08 [Zakim]
ok, pfps; that matches SW_OWL()1:00PM
17:58:15 [Zakim]
+Elisa_Kendall
17:58:16 [pfps]
zakim, who is here?
17:58:17 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall
17:58:18 [Zakim]
On IRC I see MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace, sandro, trackbot
17:58:55 [Zakim]
+ +31.20.525.aaaa
17:59:00 [bmotik]
bmotik has joined #owl
17:59:00 [Rinke]
zakim, aaa is me
17:59:00 [Zakim]
sorry, Rinke, I do not recognize a party named 'aaa'
17:59:06 [Rinke]
zakim, aaaa is me
17:59:07 [Zakim]
+Ian_Horrocks
17:59:07 [Zakim]
+Rinke; got it
17:59:21 [Elisa]
scribe Elisa
17:59:21 [Zakim]
+??P9
17:59:23 [IanH]
zakim, Ian_Horrocks is IanH
17:59:23 [Zakim]
+IanH; got it
17:59:30 [bmotik]
Zakim, ??P9 is me
17:59:30 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:59:32 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
17:59:32 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Rinke, IanH, bmotik
17:59:33 [Rinke]
scribenick Elisa
17:59:33 [pfps]
scribenick elisa
17:59:34 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:59:34 [Zakim]
On IRC I see bmotik, MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace, sandro, trackbot
17:59:36 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:59:58 [IanH]
ScribeNick: Elisa
17:59:59 [pfps]
scribenick: elisa
18:00:25 [msmith]
msmith has joined #owl
18:00:31 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
18:00:40 [ivan]
ivan has joined #owl
18:00:41 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Rinke, IanH, bmotik (muted)
18:00:45 [pfps]
rrsagent, make records public
18:00:49 [Zakim]
+Tony
18:00:52 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
18:01:00 [Zakim]
On IRC I see ivan, msmith, bmotik, MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace, sandro, trackbot
18:01:07 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
18:01:10 [Zakim]
+Ivan
18:01:26 [Zakim]
+??P11
18:01:48 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.408.aabb
18:02:07 [dlm]
dlm has joined #owl
18:02:40 [Achille]
Achille has joined #owl
18:02:51 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
18:02:51 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Rinke, IanH, bmotik (muted), Tony, Ivan, MarkusK_, msmith
18:02:54 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Achille, dlm, ivan, msmith, bmotik, MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace, sandro, trackbot
18:03:00 [Zakim]
+[IBM]
18:03:13 [Achille]
Zakim, IBM is me
18:03:13 [Zakim]
+Achille; got it
18:03:16 [bcuencagrau]
bcuencagrau has joined #owl
18:03:48 [Elisa]
topic: Admin
18:04:28 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
18:04:28 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Rinke, IanH, bmotik (muted), Tony, Ivan, MarkusK_, msmith, Achille
18:04:31 [Zakim]
On IRC I see bcuencagrau, Achille, dlm, ivan, msmith, bmotik, MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace, sandro, trackbot
18:04:32 [Zakim]
+Tony.a
18:04:33 [uli]
uli has joined #owl
18:04:34 [Zakim]
+??P15
18:04:39 [Elisa]
agenda amendments?
18:04:51 [schneid]
schneid has joined #owl
18:04:53 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, ??P15 is me
18:04:53 [Zakim]
+bcuencagrau; got it
18:05:01 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, mute me
18:05:01 [Zakim]
bcuencagrau should now be muted
18:05:06 [Zakim]
+Alan
18:05:17 [pfps]
15 oct minutes look OK
18:05:18 [Zakim]
+??P19
18:05:21 [Zakim]
+Sandro
18:05:22 [Zakim]
+Evan_Wallace
18:05:26 [alanr]
I'd like to have another week to review them
18:05:26 [uli]
zakim, ??P19 is me
18:05:26 [Zakim]
+uli; got it
18:05:33 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: Accept previous minutes from 15 October (http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-15)
18:05:36 [uli]
zakim, mute me
18:05:36 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
18:06:06 [Elisa]
Accepted: previous minutes from 15 October (http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-15)
18:06:08 [Harold]
Harold has joined #owl
18:06:14 [pfps]
Day 2 needs work - there are problems
18:06:25 [pfps]
I sent out a message
18:06:29 [Zakim]
+??P22
18:06:37 [schneid]
zakim, ??P22 is me
18:06:37 [Zakim]
+schneid; got it
18:06:44 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: Accept previous minutes from F2F4 - Day 1: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-23
18:06:49 [Christine]
Christine has joined #owl
18:07:07 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
18:07:07 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
18:07:16 [Elisa]
pfps: I just fixed some minor things in day 1
18:07:26 [Elisa]
otherwise day 1 looks ok
18:07:47 [Elisa]
RESOLVED: Accept minutes from F2F4 Day 1: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-23
18:08:25 [Elisa]
Postponing Day 2 minutes approval to next week
18:08:42 [Elisa]
Topic: Action Item Status
18:09:02 [Zakim]
+ +1.603.897.aacc
18:09:03 [Zakim]
+??P24
18:09:11 [pfps]
pending review actions all look done to me
18:09:12 [Zhe]
Zhe has joined #owl
18:09:13 [Elisa]
Pending Review Actions: accept pending review actions as done
18:09:19 [Zhe]
zakim, mute me
18:09:19 [Zakim]
sorry, Zhe, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
18:09:27 [Elisa]
Due and overdue actions
18:09:41 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
18:09:41 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Rinke, IanH, bmotik (muted), Tony, Ivan, MarkusK_, msmith, Achille, Tony.a, bcuencagrau (muted), Alan, uli (muted), Sandro,
18:09:45 [Zakim]
... Evan_Wallace, schneid (muted), +1.603.897.aacc, ??P24
18:09:47 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Zhe, Christine, Harold, schneid, uli, bcuencagrau, Achille, dlm, ivan, msmith, bmotik, MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace,
18:09:49 [Zakim]
... sandro, trackbot
18:09:52 [alanr]
202 is done given resolution of punning
18:09:53 [Christine]
zakim +??P24 is me
18:09:56 [Zhe]
zakim, +1.603.897.aacc is me
18:09:56 [Zakim]
+Zhe; got it
18:10:09 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
18:10:09 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Rinke, IanH, bmotik (muted), Tony, Ivan, MarkusK_, msmith, Achille, Tony.a, bcuencagrau (muted), Alan, uli (muted), Sandro,
18:10:12 [Zakim]
... Evan_Wallace, schneid (muted), Zhe, ??P24
18:10:13 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Zhe, Christine, Harold, schneid, uli, bcuencagrau, Achille, dlm, ivan, msmith, bmotik, MarkusK_, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, Carsten, Rinke, pfps, alanr, ewallace,
18:10:15 [Zakim]
... sandro, trackbot
18:10:19 [Zhe]
zakim, muteme
18:10:19 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'muteme', Zhe
18:10:24 [Zhe]
zakim, mute me
18:10:24 [Zakim]
Zhe should now be muted
18:10:46 [uli]
zakim, ??P24 is Christine
18:10:46 [Zakim]
+Christine; got it
18:11:03 [Zhe]
zakim, unmute me
18:11:03 [Zakim]
Zhe should no longer be muted
18:12:05 [Elisa]
Regarding action 224: the action with respect to the implementation is moot, not much to do there
18:12:18 [Elisa]
... I felt obligated to do something so I did a review
18:12:43 [Elisa]
Christine: most of the TBDs have been done; what might be useful is to have a review of the last version
18:12:49 [ewallace]
I would call Zhe's task done
18:13:52 [Elisa]
Similar action on Achille - action 226 deferred to next week, revised in tracker, but could review the document rather than add more on the implementation section
18:14:15 [Elisa]
Christine: I think it's the same: the implementation part is mostly done
18:14:37 [Elisa]
Ian: we can discuss the document status later in the agenda - could ask later
18:15:10 [Elisa]
Action 224 and 226 are done
18:15:10 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - 224
18:15:18 [sandro]
action-224 closed
18:15:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-224 Fill TBD implementation perspective in the Req before F2F closed
18:15:22 [sandro]
action-226 closed
18:15:22 [trackbot]
ACTION-226 Fill TBD implementation perspective in the Req before F2F closed
18:15:48 [sandro]
action-227?
18:15:48 [trackbot]
ACTION-227 -- Alan Ruttenberg to email to Elisa and other interesyed person about metamodel -- due 2008-10-08 -- CLOSED
18:15:48 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/227
18:15:49 [pfps]
I think that that has been done -
18:15:56 [Elisa]
Regarding action 217 on Jie regarding RIF
18:16:16 [Elisa]
action-217 closed
18:16:16 [trackbot]
ACTION-217 Get to the RIF to ensure that RDF changes are done properly closed
18:16:38 [Elisa]
action-202 closed
18:16:38 [trackbot]
ACTION-202 Have another try at punning proposal in the light of discussion with peter and come up with test cases closed
18:16:59 [Elisa]
action-240 closed
18:16:59 [trackbot]
ACTION-240 Show a format for the use cases that he likes, making clear what it is and does. closed
18:18:05 [Elisa]
Markus: is still discussing the test case issues with RIF member, but the action (239) is postponed for one week
18:18:19 [Elisa]
action-239 closed
18:18:19 [trackbot]
ACTION-239 Align OWL test case suite with RIF efforts, and to make required editorial changes to test part of "Conformance and Test Cases" closed
18:18:35 [Elisa]
Topic: Reviewing and Publishing
18:19:03 [pfps]
I put some "DONE" & "MOSTLY DONE" for the stuff that I did
18:19:22 [Elisa]
Ian: I created a Last Call Check List to assist editors in keeping track of updates required after the F2F (http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Last_Call_Check_List)
18:19:24 [bmotik]
Zakin, unmute me
18:19:30 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
18:19:30 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
18:19:34 [IanH]
q?
18:19:40 [Elisa]
... the deadline for revisions is not until next week
18:19:53 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
18:19:53 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
18:20:00 [Elisa]
Boris: I hope to have them finished next week, but the deadline is two weeks from now
18:20:13 [sandro]
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Last_Call_Check_List
18:20:18 [Elisa]
Ian: progress is being made, no point to going through the list point by point
18:20:30 [Elisa]
... there are a few items that might be clarified
18:20:38 [bmotik]
q+
18:20:41 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
18:20:41 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
18:20:42 [IanH]
q?
18:20:44 [pfps]
let the ... freeze in the dark :-)
18:20:45 [Elisa]
... one is the problem Michael pointed out regarding IE
18:20:48 [IanH]
ack bmotik
18:21:12 [Elisa]
Boris: my suggestion is we do nothing - there are two problems (1) IE implements the style sheet incorrectly, and
18:21:28 [schneid]
q+
18:21:32 [Elisa]
(2) some of the XML entities dont show correctly
18:21:43 [schneid]
zakim, unmute me
18:21:43 [Zakim]
schneid should no longer be muted
18:21:46 [Elisa]
... this may be partly due to fonts, but don't know what to do there
18:21:48 [IanH]
ack schneid
18:22:29 [ivan]
q+
18:22:33 [IanH]
q?
18:22:35 [Elisa]
Michael: I probably agree with Boris, but Bijan came up with script that checks for version and changes rendering
18:22:57 [IanH]
q?
18:22:58 [Elisa]
... but this is really hack-y, and if IE 8 fixes it, we should not worry about it
18:23:00 [IanH]
ack ivan
18:23:02 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
18:23:02 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
18:23:22 [IanH]
q?
18:23:34 [Elisa]
Ivan: I was wondering if directly using unicode chars would work
18:23:38 [schneid]
q+
18:23:41 [IanH]
q?
18:23:44 [schneid]
zakim,unmute me
18:23:44 [Zakim]
schneid should no longer be muted
18:23:49 [IanH]
ack schneid
18:24:07 [Elisa]
Michael: I answered this mail, and its the same problem -- I checked it and had the same problem with entities
18:24:09 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
18:24:09 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
18:24:23 [ivan]
q+
18:24:27 [pfps]
+1 to doing nothing :-)
18:24:35 [IanH]
q?
18:24:37 [Elisa]
Ian: can we decide not to do anything about this, since it is not unique to us, and hopefully Microsoft will fix it
18:24:39 [IanH]
ack ivan
18:24:42 [schneid]
schneid: I had the same problem with unicode characters as with HTML entities
18:24:45 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
18:24:45 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
18:24:58 [schneid]
+1 to PDF versions
18:25:07 [alanr]
+1
18:25:11 [Elisa]
Ivan: we should also provide pdf or some similar versions of the documents, as an alternative, knowing how many people
18:25:16 [IanH]
q?
18:25:23 [Elisa]
... are using IE -- so that we don't leave them out
18:25:25 [pfps]
+1 to *us* doing nothing
18:25:38 [Elisa]
Ian: is there any significant over head in producting the pdf?
18:25:46 [bmotik]
q+
18:25:52 [IanH]
q?
18:25:53 [bmotik]
Zakim, unm,ute me
18:25:53 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'unm,ute me', bmotik
18:25:56 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
18:25:56 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
18:25:57 [IanH]
ack bmotik
18:25:59 [Elisa]
Ivan: there are some acrobat tools that assist, and don't think it would be a major thing to do
18:26:24 [Elisa]
Boris: if it is just about printing the html, I'm ok, but am adverse to producing an entirely alternate version
18:26:44 [Zhe]
+1
18:26:45 [IanH]
q?
18:26:47 [Elisa]
Ian: suppose we propose that we make our documents available in pdf for those who have trouble with their browsers
18:26:56 [pfps]
who is going to "bell this cat"?
18:27:25 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: we will provide pdf versions of our documents for those who need them
18:27:32 [sandro]
+1
18:27:41 [uli]
how pretty does this need to be?
18:28:12 [Zhe]
:)
18:28:17 [Elisa]
Ivan: I'm not concerned with the tools - you can play with the font size to make it look better
18:28:26 [sandro]
PrinceXML
18:28:48 [Elisa]
Sandro: Bijan also suggests PrinceXML
18:29:06 [Elisa]
Ivan is volunteering to do this - needs to be done before rec
18:29:21 [Elisa]
Ian: we should do this when we produce the documents for last call
18:29:38 [Elisa]
Ivan: I'm happy to take the action
18:30:36 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: Ivan will provide pdf versions of our last call documents for those who need them
18:30:39 [pfps]
+0.1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
18:30:45 [IanH]
+1
18:30:47 [Achille]
+1
18:30:47 [schneid]
+1
18:30:48 [Elisa]
+1
18:30:49 [alanr]
+1
18:30:49 [ewallace]
+1
18:30:50 [ivan]
+1
18:30:52 [msmith]
+1
18:30:52 [Zhe]
+1
18:30:54 [Rinke]
+1
18:30:54 [uli]
+1
18:30:54 [Christine]
+1
18:30:56 [Harold]
+1
18:30:59 [bmotik]
+1
18:31:02 [MarkusK_]
+1
18:31:18 [ivan]
another PDF generating tool: http://www.pdf995.com/
18:31:19 [Elisa]
RESOLVED: Ivan will provide pdf versions of our last call documents for those who need them
18:31:30 [Elisa]
Action: Ivan will provide pdf versions of our last call documents for those who need them
18:31:30 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-241 - Will provide pdf versions of our last call documents for those who need them [on Ivan Herman - due 2008-11-12].
18:31:34 [MarkusK_]
There is a company offering a free service for transforming wiki page collections to PDF
18:31:45 [MarkusK_]
... http://pediapress.com/collection/
18:31:59 [MarkusK_]
... Their business is in print-on-demand, PDF creation should be free
18:32:28 [alanr]
q+
18:32:29 [pfps]
I'm up for "nothing"
18:32:29 [IanH]
q?
18:32:34 [IanH]
ack alanr
18:32:45 [bmotik]
Peter, can you send a link to the IRC?
18:33:03 [Elisa]
Ian: next issue was a survey sent around by pfps on the differences between functional syntax keywords and RDF syntax URIs (see
18:33:08 [IanH]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Oct/0150.html
18:33:14 [alanr]
ivan: I suggested we normalize to rdf
18:33:31 [bmotik]
q+
18:33:31 [IanH]
q?
18:33:32 [Elisa]
Alan: I found a few more
18:33:42 [IanH]
ack bmotik
18:33:45 [Elisa]
Ian: suggestion is to change the functional syntax
18:34:19 [IanH]
q?
18:34:22 [Elisa]
Boris: we can change exists self to self restriction, but for qualified cardinality we don't want to add to the terminals for this
18:34:35 [ivan]
q+
18:34:45 [Elisa]
... then there is the issue of DisjointClasses - I would leave the difference for this
18:34:49 [IanH]
q?
18:34:54 [Christine]
Christine has joined #owl
18:34:57 [Elisa]
Ian: but there is an issue of backwards compatibility
18:35:07 [IanH]
q?
18:35:11 [schneid]
DataProperty is probably better than owl:datatypeProperty?
18:35:43 [IanH]
q?
18:35:46 [IanH]
ack ivan
18:35:56 [Elisa]
Boris: at the level of the structural syntax, we have only DisjointClasses, whereas in the terminals we also have disjointWith ... would prefer to have only DisjointClasses
18:36:20 [IanH]
q?
18:36:21 [bmotik]
q+
18:36:26 [Elisa]
Ivan: I think there are cases where we should keep the differences, but we should use the same names where possible
18:36:45 [Elisa]
... we can't change the qualified cardinality, but I don't see why we can't align the others
18:36:46 [alanr]
q+
18:36:57 [Elisa]
Ian: it seems we're not that far from agreement here
18:37:20 [Elisa]
... it's really a matter of going through the list and deciding in each case what we're going to do with that thing,
18:37:23 [IanH]
q?
18:37:28 [Elisa]
... rather than going through the whole list
18:37:53 [ivan]
q+
18:38:03 [IanH]
q?
18:38:09 [IanH]
ack bmotik
18:38:12 [ivan]
ack bmotik
18:38:14 [Elisa]
Boris: I would do one or two things in terms of what's in the list ... I would not change much except for exisits self
18:38:18 [IanH]
ack alanr
18:39:04 [IanH]
q?
18:39:08 [IanH]
ack ivan
18:39:16 [Elisa]
Alan: in the case where we've introduced something in OWL 2 in both the functional and RDF syntax, we can certainly make a proposal there, but if there are backward compatibility issues then we'll have to deal with that
18:39:59 [IanH]
q?
18:40:04 [Elisa]
Ivan: I don't buy the argument that capitalization has to be different in the functional syntax, as it makes life difficult for those who have to go back and forth between the RDF and
18:40:13 [alanr]
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/AligningSyntaxKeywords
18:40:14 [Elisa]
... functional syntax
18:40:19 [schneid]
in FS, these are /all/ functions, with different arity. in RDF, there is a clear distinction between classes (capital) and properties (non-capital)
18:40:30 [Elisa]
... the RDF should take precedence if the only difference is capitalizatoin
18:41:05 [alanr]
I can
18:41:07 [IanH]
q?
18:41:07 [Elisa]
Ian: we should take this offline regarding what should change and not change and then come back with something more concrete
18:41:21 [schneid]
one does not really see this distinction with the FS glasses on
18:41:27 [Elisa]
... who will take the job of making a proposal from Peter's email
18:41:34 [Elisa]
Alan: I'll take it on
18:41:53 [schneid]
I would be confused by different capitalization in FS
18:41:55 [Elisa]
Ian: if you would talk with Boris and Ivan on this, to get closer to agreement before coming back to us
18:42:45 [Elisa]
Action: Alan will make a proposal regarding naming alignment between the functional syntax and RDF syntax based on the summary from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Oct/0150.html
18:42:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-242 - Will make a proposal regarding naming alignment between the functional syntax and RDF syntax based on the summary from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Oct/0150.html [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-11-12].
18:43:01 [MarkusK_]
q+
18:43:09 [MarkusK_]
http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/projects/owltests/
18:43:22 [Elisa]
Ian: last item is the adding test cases issue - in addition to the question of the web site Markus set up, there is the issue of what we are going to do
18:43:30 [IanH]
q?
18:43:33 [Elisa]
... in the test cases and conformance document
18:43:38 [IanH]
ack MarkusK_
18:43:46 [Elisa]
Markus: the web site is not officially announced yet
18:44:13 [Elisa]
... we might still have changes in the schema we are going to use for the test cases, so a good time to watch this would be after next week
18:44:38 [Elisa]
Ian: about the web site - the thing I would like to get clarity about is the test cases document itself -- are we going to have
18:44:41 [IanH]
q?
18:44:45 [MarkusK_]
q+
18:44:50 [IanH]
q?
18:44:53 [Elisa]
... pointers to each test case, to a place where the test cases live?
18:44:56 [MarkusK_]
q-
18:45:15 [Elisa]
Alan: I think it should be to where the test cases live - I'll offer a strawman on that
18:45:23 [sandro]
q?
18:45:31 [msmith]
q+
18:45:32 [sandro]
q+
18:45:38 [IanH]
q?
18:45:43 [IanH]
ack msmith
18:45:53 [Elisa]
Ian: a pointer would make this more extensible in the documents
18:46:07 [MarkusK_]
Markus: (earlier) I am still waiting for W3C to agree on a license policy for the publicly collected test cases
18:46:10 [alanr]
q+
18:46:18 [Elisa]
Michael: I agree, but we need to have a way to say which tests we've agreed on, not just any test people add,
18:46:19 [IanH]
q?
18:46:24 [IanH]
ack sandro
18:46:27 [alanr]
q+ to say in conformance doc how we tell the difference
18:46:28 [Elisa]
... so we need a mechanism to agree on this
18:47:01 [IanH]
q?
18:47:05 [Elisa]
Sandro: we need a way to lend some weight to that approval in the documents, which have been approved by the working group
18:47:06 [IanH]
ack alanr
18:47:06 [Zakim]
alanr, you wanted to say in conformance doc how we tell the difference
18:47:25 [IanH]
q?
18:47:28 [Elisa]
Alan: we should document this in the conformance document - we should say how to tell which are approved in the conformance document
18:47:47 [IanH]
q?
18:47:49 [MarkusK_]
+1 to highlight approved tests, while keeping an external site for collecting more tests after the WG
18:47:49 [Elisa]
Ian: we could have two completely separate sets of tests, where the extra set is only informative
18:48:27 [Elisa]
... we need to distinguish which are normative and which are informative, so there are a couple of ways to do this
18:48:31 [IanH]
q?
18:48:41 [IanH]
q?
18:48:43 [MarkusK_]
q+
18:49:03 [Elisa]
... mark those that are normative, and put them in the document, or point to two separate places, with one set as normative
18:49:41 [IanH]
q?
18:49:42 [Elisa]
Markus: we should keep them separate, with a set that are normative called out explicitly, but continue to collect the non-normative ones
18:49:55 [IanH]
ack MarkusK_
18:50:07 [Elisa]
Ian: it's a good idea, but we have to be a little bit careful of what we do from the standards perspective
18:50:31 [schneid]
q+
18:50:37 [IanH]
q?
18:50:41 [schneid]
zaikim, unmute me
18:50:45 [Elisa]
... so (1) the document contains a pointer to where the test cases live, and (2) the document also contains a pointer to a second set of tests that continue to grow as people add to them
18:50:47 [msmith]
point to extra tests informatively, at least
18:50:47 [schneid]
zakim, unmute me
18:50:47 [Zakim]
schneid should no longer be muted
18:50:51 [IanH]
ack schneid
18:50:54 [ivan]
q+
18:51:07 [MarkusK_]
q+
18:51:12 [IanH]
q?
18:51:16 [Zakim]
-Tony.a
18:51:28 [Elisa]
schneid: the alternative is that we have a pointer to the normative ones in our document, and at that location we have a pointer to additional informative tests
18:51:30 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
18:51:30 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
18:51:35 [msmith]
q+ on this
18:51:44 [Elisa]
Ivan: do we refer to the test cases when we describe conformance?
18:51:48 [IanH]
q?
18:51:49 [msmith]
q-
18:51:51 [Elisa]
Ian: no specific tests are mentioned
18:51:53 [IanH]
ack ivan
18:51:59 [IanH]
ack MarkusK_
18:52:29 [Elisa]
Markus: I prefer to have a link in the document
18:52:34 [IanH]
q?
18:52:40 [Elisa]
Ian: I agree
18:52:58 [msmith]
+1
18:53:00 [MarkusK_]
+1
18:53:02 [uli]
+1
18:53:03 [Elisa]
... there will be two pointers in the document, one to the frozen set and one to the informative growing set
18:53:48 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: There will be two pointers in the conformance and test cases document, one to a frozen normative test set and one to an informative set that can evolve over time
18:53:59 [IanH]
+1
18:53:59 [msmith]
+1
18:54:01 [MarkusK_]
+1
18:54:01 [bcuencagrau]
+1
18:54:01 [Elisa]
+1
18:54:02 [alanr]
+1
18:54:04 [uli]
+1
18:54:05 [schneid]
+1
18:54:06 [Zhe]
+1
18:54:07 [Rinke]
+1
18:54:08 [ewallace]
+1
18:54:11 [sandro]
+0
18:54:12 [pfps]
+1
18:54:19 [Elisa]
RESOLVED: There will be two pointers in the conformance and test cases document, one to a frozen normative test set and one to an informative set that can evolve over time
18:54:37 [IanH]
q?
18:54:41 [msmith]
action msmith to edit test section of test & conf to include two links and explanatory text
18:54:41 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - msmith
18:54:43 [Elisa]
Ian: Remaining documents -what to do with them.
18:54:53 [bmotik]
q+
18:54:57 [IanH]
q?
18:55:07 [Elisa]
Ian: Internationalized String Spec - what should we do with this
18:55:22 [msmith]
action smith to edit test section of test & conf to include two links and explanatory text
18:55:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-243 - Edit test section of test & conf to include two links and explanatory text [on Michael Smith - due 2008-11-12].
18:55:23 [pfps]
I'm happy with the ISS document
18:55:24 [IanH]
q?
18:55:26 [Zakim]
-Tony
18:55:31 [Elisa]
Boris: I had a discussion with Axel from the RIF group, and a decision was going to be made about voting on this
18:55:32 [IanH]
ack bmotik
18:55:51 [pfps]
q+
18:55:55 [IanH]
q?
18:55:56 [bmotik]
q+
18:55:56 [Elisa]
Sandro: this didn't get on the agenda for this week, will be done next Tuesday in RIF, and we can do so on Wednesday
18:56:06 [Elisa]
pfps: why can't we do it now?
18:56:06 [pfps]
q-
18:56:10 [IanH]
q?
18:56:14 [IanH]
ack bmotik
18:56:19 [Elisa]
Ian: ok - since we are happy with this
18:56:37 [Elisa]
Boris: there is one open issue from Jeremy Carroll
18:57:03 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: We will publish the Internationalized String Specification as a first public working draft
18:57:05 [pfps]
+1
18:57:09 [IanH]
+1
18:57:11 [Elisa]
+1
18:57:13 [bcuencagrau]
+1
18:57:16 [MarkusK_]
+1
18:57:20 [Rinke]
+1
18:57:22 [ewallace]
0
18:57:22 [alanr]
_1
18:57:23 [uli]
+1
18:57:24 [alanr]
+1
18:57:25 [Zhe]
+1
18:57:32 [schneid]
should be by institute?
18:57:36 [bmotik]
+1
18:57:38 [ivan]
+1
18:57:41 [sandro]
+1
18:57:41 [msmith]
+1
18:57:43 [schneid]
+1
18:57:45 [Achille]
+1
18:57:55 [Christine]
+1
18:58:06 [Elisa]
RESOLVED: To publish the Internationalized String Specification as a first public working draft
18:58:12 [sandro]
RRSAgent, pointer?
18:58:12 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2008/11/05-owl-irc#T18-58-12
18:58:37 [uli]
but it isn't ready yet
18:58:41 [uli]
indeed
18:58:46 [IanH]
q?
18:58:51 [Elisa]
Ian: the next document is the data range extension, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Data_Range_Extension:_Linear_Equations
18:59:02 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
18:59:02 [Zakim]
uli should no longer be muted
18:59:08 [Elisa]
... I thought the plan was that it would be ready and be reviewed now?
18:59:10 [IanH]
q?
18:59:38 [Elisa]
Uli: we've seen the reviews, the easy issues have been addressed, there are various medium pieces we can take care of by next week
19:00:01 [Elisa]
... the most contentious part is the implementation part, and I'm not sure we can have this by next wek
19:00:16 [Elisa]
Ian: what's your expectation of what we will do with this?
19:00:21 [IanH]
q?
19:00:41 [Elisa]
Uli: Producing this as a note would be fine
19:00:59 [IanH]
q?
19:01:07 [Elisa]
Ian: so that seems less contentious and makes the time pressure less, as it does not have to be fully formed in time for the last call
19:01:36 [Elisa]
Uli: One of the things was that we wanted some feedback through the reviews, and I'm not sure what they are seeing
19:01:57 [Elisa]
Ian: so we need to decide what to do about issue 87 and issue 127
19:01:58 [IanH]
q?
19:01:58 [alanr]
q+
19:02:08 [IanH]
q?
19:02:13 [IanH]
ack alanr
19:02:15 [Elisa]
Uli: publishing a note would only make sense if we leave the hooks in
19:02:40 [bmotik]
q+
19:02:46 [IanH]
q?
19:02:48 [Elisa]
Alan: if we put this as a note we still have the same level of standard for publication, so I would like to put the hooks at risk, in case there is discussion about that
19:03:22 [Elisa]
Boris: why do we have to put them at risk - it is clear that some version of that can be implemented, I would be open to working on this but after last call
19:03:25 [IanH]
q?
19:03:30 [IanH]
ack bmotik
19:03:35 [Elisa]
... do we really think this won't get in?
19:03:40 [pfps]
q?
19:03:53 [pfps]
q+
19:03:54 [Elisa]
Alan: I don't think there is much consequence to putting this at risk
19:04:17 [pfps]
q-
19:04:21 [Elisa]
Ian: we put it at risk but if the reviewer comments are addressed and the document is in the same shape as the others then the risk goes away
19:04:22 [IanH]
q?
19:04:31 [Elisa]
Uli: fine with me
19:04:43 [pfps]
maybe the "at risk" status would go away before LC even
19:04:52 [Elisa]
Boris: I can't see a scenario where it doesn't happen, but I'm fine with this
19:05:27 [Elisa]
Ian: it wasn't clear what we would do about 87 - we would resolve 127 with this at risk thing, but
19:05:37 [uli]
zakim, mute me
19:05:37 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
19:06:08 [uli]
we can discuss them again
19:06:08 [Elisa]
... we would resolve 127 by saying that the hooks are at risk given that the document achieves nirvanna(sp?)
19:06:13 [pfps]
q+
19:06:18 [IanH]
q?
19:06:29 [Elisa]
Alan: if it doesn't achieve nirvanna, then these at risk things would be pulled out ...
19:06:43 [Zakim]
-Alan
19:07:01 [alanr]
phone died caling back in
19:07:05 [IanH]
q?
19:07:09 [uli]
q+
19:07:22 [Elisa]
pfps: I'm a little bit worried - it is extraordinarily likely that some n-ary things will be addressed, I'm worried about removing this just because we didn't dot some i
19:07:26 [Zakim]
+Alan_Ruttenberg
19:07:52 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
19:07:52 [Zakim]
uli should no longer be muted
19:08:14 [IanH]
ack q?
19:08:21 [IanH]
ack pfps
19:08:22 [Elisa]
Ian: could we soften the issue about 127 to say it would be left open and if the document doesn't come up to snuff we can discuss it again
19:08:23 [IanH]
ack uli
19:08:58 [alanr]
q+
19:09:00 [uli]
zakim, mute me
19:09:00 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
19:09:01 [IanH]
q?
19:09:02 [Elisa]
Uli: it is highly unlikely that we don't dot some i regarding all parts of this, and in the worst case we could pull out the more ambitious parts
19:09:28 [Elisa]
Alan: I would like there to be n-ary, what I don't want is hook for n-ary without actually having n-ary
19:09:57 [schneid]
and RDF based semantics
19:09:58 [Elisa]
Ian: so can we agree to leave 127 open for the moment pending the document being completed, and mark it at risk in the syntax and mapping documents
19:10:30 [alanr]
q+
19:10:31 [IanH]
q?
19:10:35 [Elisa]
Ian: so it is not clear to me what to do about 87
19:10:37 [schneid]
RDF based semantics also has the "nary hooks"
19:10:38 [pfps]
q+
19:10:38 [IanH]
ack alanr
19:10:56 [Elisa]
Alan: I was wondering - there was some issue regarding whether this is a datatype or another kind of literal
19:10:57 [uli]
a datatype
19:11:13 [Elisa]
Ian: I believe its a datatype
19:11:18 [schneid]
rational would be subtype of real
19:11:29 [msmith]
q+
19:11:31 [Elisa]
Ian: can you represent them all as reals?
19:11:32 [IanH]
q?
19:11:39 [IanH]
ack pfps
19:11:41 [pfps]
ack pfps
19:11:50 [Elisa]
pfps: rationals are a small subset of reals
19:11:55 [IanH]
ack msmith
19:11:55 [pfps]
"1/3"^^owl:real
19:11:57 [Christine]
Christine has joined #owl
19:12:01 [IanH]
q?
19:12:02 [alanr]
we don't have 1/1 for datatypes to lexical forms
19:12:07 [Elisa]
Michael: there was no way to represent them lexically
19:12:22 [pfps]
"pi"^^owl:real ??
19:12:40 [alanr]
q?
19:12:44 [alanr]
q+
19:12:48 [IanH]
q?
19:12:51 [Elisa]
Ian: so if people implement the n-ary extension, they would also implement this additional datatype
19:12:53 [IanH]
ack alanr
19:12:58 [msmith]
msmith: I believe rational is needed as a datatype for lexical, not just value space
19:13:02 [bmotik]
q+
19:13:04 [uli]
i thought they did
19:13:07 [pfps]
q+
19:13:10 [IanH]
q?
19:13:13 [IanH]
ack bmotik
19:13:18 [Elisa]
Alan: I still don't see the need for the dataset, just the lexical form
19:13:22 [pfps]
q-
19:13:27 [IanH]
q?
19:13:38 [msmith]
msmith: I think they can be merged into the linear data range extension
19:13:39 [Elisa]
Boris: I don't see any danger in adding another datatype
19:13:58 [IanH]
q?
19:13:59 [alanr]
q+
19:14:04 [Elisa]
... all the existing datatypes would fall under rational and we would have it for symmetry
19:14:37 [IanH]
q?
19:14:38 [bmotik]
q+
19:14:42 [IanH]
ack alanr
19:14:49 [Elisa]
Alan: there was an issue regarding whether an equation was satisfiable over rationals vs. satisfiable over reals ... does this add an issue for reasoners
19:15:09 [IanH]
q?
19:15:14 [IanH]
ack bmotik
19:15:22 [Elisa]
Boris: I don't really see this - we would be no worse off if we have it
19:15:39 [bmotik]
q+
19:15:42 [IanH]
q?
19:15:43 [msmith]
q+
19:15:43 [alanr]
q+
19:15:45 [Elisa]
Ian: do we want to add the lexical form? if the answer to that is no, then there is no need to add the datatype
19:15:54 [IanH]
ack bmotik
19:16:05 [Elisa]
... we could do what Mike suggested and make it part of the extension
19:16:46 [IanH]
ack msmith
19:16:48 [Elisa]
Boris: I don't see a problem, except that this is something they should have done in XML schema ...
19:17:10 [IanH]
ack alanr
19:17:21 [Elisa]
Michael: a number of the use cases Bijan had were to simply be able to write 1/3
19:17:26 [bmotik]
q+
19:17:40 [IanH]
q?
19:17:45 [Elisa]
Ian: we're all agreed that we should at least have the lexical form
19:17:46 [IanH]
ack bmotik
19:17:48 [IanH]
q?
19:18:00 [alanr]
q+
19:18:14 [msmith]
+1 to desire for symmetry
19:18:18 [IanH]
q?
19:18:21 [Elisa]
Boris: I'm against just adding it as a lexical form and not adding the corresponding datatype - I would put these together, and don't see any problems with having it there
19:18:22 [IanH]
ack alanr
19:18:27 [bmotik]
q+
19:18:38 [msmith]
q+
19:19:02 [Elisa]
Alan: every integer literal is a real as well, so I would just look at the lexical for rational as another way of specifying real ... perhaps this just needs to be talked through a bit more
19:19:23 [Elisa]
Ian: let's try to push this to next week to come back with a proposal to resolve
19:19:36 [IanH]
ack bmotik
19:20:37 [Elisa]
Boris: it is true that every rational data value is an owl real value, but if you look at the structural syntax specification, you have separate datatypes with literals based on datatypes in other cases
19:20:39 [msmith]
q-
19:20:46 [msmith]
yup
19:20:52 [Elisa]
... the datatype would allow us to hang the lexical specification off that
19:21:20 [Elisa]
Ian: let's come back next week with a proposal via email to resolve this, and we know where we're going with the data range extension
19:21:27 [schneid]
just as the interpretation of "1.0"^^xsd:double is an integer, but the literal is not an xsd:integer literal
19:21:31 [IanH]
q?
19:21:36 [pfps]
q+
19:21:42 [IanH]
q?
19:21:46 [IanH]
ack pfps
19:21:51 [ivan]
+1
19:21:53 [Elisa]
Ian: Quick Reference Guide - are we ready to publish a first public working draft
19:21:58 [uli]
+1
19:22:06 [Elisa]
pfps: I think it's ready
19:22:09 [Christine]
+q
19:22:17 [uli]
i reviewed it!
19:22:19 [ivan]
:-)
19:22:41 [uli]
why?
19:22:44 [ivan]
why?
19:22:47 [Elisa]
Christine: we should cut the examples section at the end ..
19:22:49 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
19:22:49 [Zakim]
uli should no longer be muted
19:22:51 [pfps]
no need for FPWD
19:22:56 [uli]
zakim, mute me
19:22:56 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
19:23:05 [IanH]
q?
19:23:12 [IanH]
ack Christine
19:23:29 [Elisa]
Christine: because it's not finished, and is redundant with examples in the other documents - it's not a good place for them
19:23:53 [IanH]
q?
19:24:04 [Elisa]
Ian: to be fair, I'm not sure quite why the examples are needed there ...
19:24:18 [IanH]
q?
19:25:03 [ewallace]
Elisa: I believe that Jie included the examples because his quick ref had examples
19:25:17 [pfps]
I would be OK with the examples being removed, but I don't see them as a problem (at least right now)
19:25:18 [ewallace]
... I am not sure these are required in such a document.
19:25:25 [Elisa]
Christine: the document is general on OWL2 and the examples are specific
19:25:52 [ivan]
q+
19:26:01 [Elisa]
Ian: people seemed to think this document was in reasonable shape, so we could publish it as a FPWD ...
19:26:02 [IanH]
q?
19:26:15 [Elisa]
Christine: I think we should get rid of it and then publish it
19:26:16 [IanH]
q?
19:26:17 [uli]
q+
19:26:19 [IanH]
ack ivan
19:26:25 [Zakim]
-Zhe
19:26:44 [Elisa]
Ivan: having had a very quick look at this, there are certain constructions of OWL that are fairly complicated when you put them in RDF
19:27:00 [Elisa]
... having examples here that focus on those cases is useful for the average reader
19:27:05 [IanH]
q?
19:27:14 [IanH]
ack uli
19:27:15 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
19:27:17 [Zakim]
uli was not muted, uli
19:27:44 [alanr]
q+
19:28:24 [Elisa]
Uli: I noticed one thing that I didn't pay attention to before - authors aren't ordered lexically ... should be editors, done separately / permuted
19:28:31 [IanH]
q?
19:28:32 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
19:28:32 [Zakim]
uli was not muted, uli
19:28:37 [alanr]
q-
19:28:38 [uli]
zakim, mute me
19:28:39 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
19:29:11 [Elisa]
Ian: in spite of questions about the examples section, I'm inclined to move it to FPWD, and put it out for feedback
19:29:52 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: That we publish the Quick Reference Guide as a first public working draft (see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Quick_Reference_Guide
19:29:54 [pfps]
+1 for *FPWD* publication
19:30:07 [ewallace]
+1 (NIST)
19:30:08 [ivan]
+1 (W3C)
19:30:09 [MarkusK_]
+1 (FZI)
19:30:11 [Rinke]
+1 (UvA)
19:30:13 [Elisa]
+1 (Sandpiper)
19:30:14 [Achille]
+1 (IBM)
19:30:15 [Christine]
+1 (UVSQ)
19:30:16 [uli]
+1 (UoM)
19:30:17 [alanr]
+1 (Science Commons)
19:30:17 [pfps]
+1 for *FPWD* publication (Alcatel-Lucent)
19:30:21 [msmith]
+1 (C&P)
19:30:22 [bmotik]
+1 (Oxford)
19:30:26 [dlm]
+1 (RPI)
19:30:36 [Zhe]
+1 (ORACLE)
19:30:44 [IanH]
q?
19:31:06 [pfps]
is it a LC document? If not, then no need
19:31:18 [Elisa]
RESOLVED: To publish the Quick Reference Guide as a first public working draft (see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Quick_Reference_Guide (html only)
19:31:38 [alanr]
I can't
19:31:44 [Achille]
I
19:31:46 [ewallace]
I can
19:31:48 [Achille]
I can't
19:31:48 [bmotik]
I can
19:31:50 [ivan]
yep
19:31:52 [pfps]
fine
19:31:54 [uli]
I could
19:31:56 [Zakim]
-Rinke
19:32:02 [Zakim]
-Achille
19:32:07 [alanr]
ok
19:32:14 [Zakim]
-Alan_Ruttenberg
19:32:37 [Elisa]
Ian: status of requirements document - quite a bit of work has been done, and we have offers for additional review
19:32:38 [ewallace]
I think it's ready for FPWD pub.
19:32:45 [IanH]
q?
19:32:50 [Elisa]
... is this document ready for FPWD?
19:33:16 [Elisa]
Christine: yes, I think it is ready, and there are no contentious issues remaining
19:33:16 [IanH]
q?
19:33:24 [Elisa]
+1 for FPWD
19:33:37 [ivan]
+1
19:33:41 [bmotik]
+1
19:33:50 [Elisa]
Ian: I'm happy to publish it as a FPWD if everyone else is in favor
19:34:09 [ewallace]
Did we tell Alan that no decisions would be made?
19:34:09 [bcuencagrau]
+1
19:34:25 [msmith]
+1
19:34:27 [bmotik]
+1
19:34:32 [Elisa]
PROPOSED: To publish the Requirements document as a first public working draft (see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/RequirementsDraft)
19:34:33 [Christine]
+1
19:34:35 [pfps]
+1 to publish (Alcatel-Lucent) :-)
19:34:37 [MarkusK_]
+1 (FZI)
19:34:54 [Elisa]
+1 (Sandpiper)
19:34:58 [ivan]
+1 (W3C)
19:35:08 [ewallace]
+1 (NIST) for FPWD of Reqs/features
19:35:13 [Elisa]
RESOLVED: To publish the Requirements document as a first public working draft (see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/RequirementsDraft)
19:35:27 [uli]
+1
19:35:59 [Elisa]
Ian: there are numerous versions of this document floating around in the wiki -- can we make sure that all of the pointers are redirected to the FPWD?
19:36:20 [Elisa]
Ian: we should put this document in the standard place in the wiki rather than a redirection.
19:36:23 [MarkusK_]
+1 to still make redirects for the old versions
19:36:48 [sandro]
agreed -- redirect from all old URLs
19:37:14 [sandro]
new location should be: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Requirements or http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/UCR
19:37:30 [Elisa]
Markus: I want to have redirects at the old places so people with the old versions are not confused. there should be one version, but redirects from the older locations
19:37:52 [Elisa]
Ian: we can take the details of where it lives offline
19:38:15 [Elisa]
Sandro: which one did we agree to publish?
19:38:17 [Christine]
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/OWL2NewFeatures
19:39:03 [Elisa]
Ian: AOB?
19:39:14 [uli]
bye
19:39:14 [Zakim]
-Ivan
19:39:16 [Zakim]
-msmith
19:39:18 [Zakim]
-bmotik
19:39:20 [Zakim]
-Evan_Wallace
19:39:21 [uli]
uli has left #owl
19:39:21 [Zakim]
-Peter_Patel-Schneider
19:39:22 [Zakim]
-bcuencagrau
19:39:24 [Zakim]
-uli
19:39:32 [Zakim]
-MarkusK_
19:39:36 [Zakim]
-schneid
19:39:45 [Zakim]
-Christine
19:42:24 [alanr]
alanr has joined #owl
19:42:29 [Zakim]
-Sandro
19:43:51 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
19:43:51 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, IanH
19:43:53 [Zakim]
On IRC I see alanr, Christine, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, Elisa, ewallace, sandro, trackbot
19:44:39 [Zakim]
-Elisa_Kendall
19:44:40 [Zakim]
-IanH
19:44:40 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended
19:44:41 [Zakim]
Attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, +31.20.525.aaaa, Rinke, IanH, bmotik, Tony, Ivan, MarkusK_, +1.202.408.aabb, msmith, Achille, bcuencagrau, Alan, Sandro,
19:44:43 [Zakim]
... Evan_Wallace, uli, schneid, Zhe, Christine, Alan_Ruttenberg