IRC log of swd on 2009-05-05

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:56:43 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #swd
14:56:43 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc
14:57:07 [TomB]: rrsagent, bookmark
14:57:07 [RRSAgent]: See http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T14-57-07
14:57:21 [TomB]: zakim, this will be swd
14:57:21 [Zakim]: ok, TomB; I see SW_SWD()11:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
14:57:33 [TomB]: Meeting: SWD WG
14:57:35 [TomB]: Chair: Tom
14:57:47 [TomB]: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009May/0007.html
14:58:00 [TomB]: Previous: http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html
14:58:08 [TomB]: Regrets: Sean, Diego, Antoine, Margherita
14:59:29 [Zakim]: SW_SWD()11:00AM has now started
14:59:36 [Zakim]: +[IPcaller]
14:59:41 [TomB]: zakim, IPcaller is me
14:59:41 [Zakim]: +TomB; got it
15:00:39 [aliman]: aliman has joined #swd
15:00:43 [edsu]: edsu has joined #swd
15:01:37 [Guus]: Guus has joined #swd
15:02:36 [Zakim]: +Ralph
15:02:50 [Zakim]: +bcuencagrau
15:03:21 [TomB]: zakim, bcuencagrau is Aliman
15:03:21 [Zakim]: +Aliman; got it
15:03:37 [Zakim]: +[LC]
15:03:44 [edsu]: Zakim: LC is edsu
15:03:48 [edsu]: Zakim, LC is edsu
15:03:48 [Zakim]: +edsu; got it
15:04:10 [Zakim]: +Guus_Schreiber
15:04:55 [Guus]: zakim, who is here?
15:04:55 [Zakim]: On the phone I see TomB, Ralph, Aliman, edsu, Guus_Schreiber
15:04:58 [Zakim]: On IRC I see Guus, edsu, aliman, RRSAgent, TomB, Zakim, Ralph
15:05:06 [TomB]: Scribenick: aliman
15:05:10 [TomB]: Scribe: Alistair
15:06:32 [aliman]: tomb: regrets from antoine, diego, margherita, sean
15:06:55 [aliman]: TOPIC: ADMIN
15:07:10 [aliman]: tomb: RESOLVED accept minutes of last weeks call
15:07:24 [aliman]: tomb: next call, in 2 weeks. i will be away
15:07:29 [aliman]: guus: i'll be here
15:07:37 [aliman]: tomb: next call on 19th May
15:07:42 [aliman]: TOPIC: SKOS
15:07:55 [aliman]: tomb: lcsh is back online, thanks ed
15:08:00 [aliman]: ed: thanks for your help
15:08:00 [Ralph]: yay Ed! & LC!
15:08:22 [aliman]: tomb: clay is away today, but will come back for one of our final calls, so we can congratulate him too
15:09:14 [aliman]: edsu: lcsh.info uris will redirect to new uris, 301
15:09:29 [Zakim]: -Guus_Schreiber
15:10:01 [Zakim]: +Guus_Schreiber
15:10:23 [aliman]: edsu: put a blog at lcsh.info, comments are still there. now added a note to the page, about new service, and about permanent redirect for new uris.
15:10:32 [aliman]: ralph: permanent redirect is reasonable
15:11:15 [aliman]: edsu: will leave it up to jan 1 2010, then turn it off. so people who made assertions using those uris, hopefully checking they're still ok. so how long do you give people to notice it's moved?
15:11:23 [aliman]: ralph: interesting case study.
15:11:52 [Ralph]: Ralph: I'd like to talk with you more about this case, Ed
15:11:53 [aliman]: tomb: issue of id=concept ... is #concept an anchor in a document, or what? is it really a non-issue as m hausenblaus said?
15:12:34 [aliman]: ...there needs to be an explanation in place. dan (brickley) makes a good point, two standards coming out of this wg, any subtleties about using together, we should write them up and publish.
15:13:01 [aliman]: edsu: what happened as a result of dan/michael email, we changed id in xhtml to something different, so #concept not used in rdfa at all.
15:13:06 [Ralph]: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009May/0003.html id="concept" - non-issue?
15:13:19 [aliman]: tomb: non-issue for lcsh?
15:14:04 [aliman]: edsu: yes. came up before with lcsh.info. wasn't a resolution then either. would be nice to have something to point at. document michael pointed to in wiki didn't cover the exact issue.
15:14:11 [aliman]: tomb: no i don't think it did either.
15:14:36 [aliman]: ...is this sufficiently important to write a paragraph about? or let it drop for now?
15:14:43 [aliman]: ralph: have we opened in tracker?
15:14:58 [aliman]: tomb: no, should we? late in game to be writing new things.
15:15:00 [aliman]: q+
15:15:28 [aliman]: ralph: i like idea of writing a paragraph, summarising our feelings. so recording in tracker is good place to not use it.
15:15:38 [aliman]: ...not suitable for specifications, e.g. primer.
15:15:40 [TomB]: ack aliman
15:16:03 [aliman]: aliman: maybe could go in primer?
15:16:04 [seanb]: seanb has joined #swd
15:16:37 [edsu]: q+
15:16:38 [aliman]: tomb: if someone could volunteer to post something to list, then could use that to open issue in tracker.
15:16:55 [Ralph]: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009May/0000.html DanBri's raising the question (or issue)
15:17:03 [aliman]: ...really only need two or three sentences. even just leaving in tracker as resolution to issue would be a bare minimum, leave behind a record.
15:17:13 [aliman]: tomb: any volunteers?
15:17:27 [aliman]: ralph: i'd use danbri's message 0000 to open issue, then discussion following that.
15:17:30 [edsu]: +1 for using danbri's message
15:17:45 [aliman]: ralph: i'll open the issue now.
15:18:49 [aliman]: edsu: is this issue, for rdfa more generally? reservation about putting in the primer, not specific to skos primer.
15:18:54 [aliman]: aliman: earlier i meant rdfa primer.
15:18:55 [edsu]: +1 for RDFa Primer # i'm not just trying to get out of work :)
15:19:12 [aliman]: ralph: yes, more rdfa question than skos question.
15:19:29 [aliman]: tomb: can we ask rdfa group to come up with a statement?
15:19:49 [aliman]: edsu: their response will be, they felt they already addressed the issue in that wiki document.
15:20:23 [aliman]: tomb: i don't see the answer in that wiki document. also good to have more permanent record.
15:20:49 [Zakim]: +??P4
15:20:57 [seanb]: zakim, ??P4 is me
15:20:57 [Zakim]: +seanb; got it
15:21:11 [aliman]: ACTION: ralph to raise issue XX with rdfa tf
15:21:35 [aliman]: tomb: SKOS Reference - W3C Candidate Recommendation (2009-03-17) - CR period ended 30 April
15:21:45 [aliman]: ...how many comments?
15:21:56 [aliman]: aliman: do you mean implementation submissions?
15:22:17 [aliman]: sean: i only see one open CR comment, bunch of raised ones which are skos implementations.
15:23:02 [Ralph]: -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/214 issue 214; "id='concept'"
15:23:37 [aliman]: aliman: there were a couple of comments from xx barclay, will put them in tracker and draft responses.
15:23:55 [aliman]: ACTION: Tom repost his label proposal, dropping the word 'concept' [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action01] -- DONE http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0076.html
15:23:59 [aliman]: --done
15:24:08 [aliman]: ACTION: Sean update labels in the SKOS Rec draft per resolution of 21-April [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action07]
15:24:10 [aliman]: --done
15:24:13 [Ralph]: s/issue XX/issue-214
15:24:32 [TomB]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0105.html
15:25:07 [aliman]: tomb: namespace documents. there were some issues brought up on list. who do we list as contributor?
15:25:54 [aliman]: seanb: in namespace document?
15:26:08 [aliman]: tomb: we have a namespace document, which redirects via conneg either to html or rdf.
15:26:25 [aliman]: ...some inresolved issues, one is who to attribute as contributor.
15:26:46 [aliman]: ...another is what it's scope should be, re owl dl.
15:27:23 [Ralph]: skos.rdf currently says:
15:27:24 [Ralph]: [[
15:27:25 [Ralph]: <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core">
15:27:25 [Ralph]: <dct:title xml:lang="en">SKOS Vocabulary</dct:title>
15:27:25 [Ralph]: <dct:contributor>Dave Beckett</dct:contributor>
15:27:25 [Ralph]: <dct:contributor>Nikki Rogers</dct:contributor>
15:27:26 [Ralph]: <dct:contributor>Participants in W3C's Semantic Web Deployment Working Grou
15:27:28 [Ralph]: p.</dct:contributor>
15:27:28 [aliman]: seanb: in reference document, don't have any explicit acknowledgments of contributions.
15:27:30 [Ralph]: ]]
15:27:48 [aliman]: aliman: no we don't, but maybe an oversight.
15:27:59 [aliman]: tomb: i don't see ack.
15:28:08 [aliman]: ...often at end of sotd?
15:28:24 [aliman]: ralph: it moves around, editors'/group choice. current preference at end of doc.
15:28:34 [aliman]: ...new website design encouraging at end of doc.
15:28:45 [aliman]: seanb: in owl docs, came after references.
15:29:03 [aliman]: ralph: content is entirely up to wg to decide. location is alongside references.
15:29:34 [aliman]: ACTION: skos editors to draft acknowledgements section for SKOS Reference
15:30:05 [aliman]: tomb: in this case, previous wgs and swad-europe, plus input from public-esw-thes, nice to acknowledge.
15:30:16 [aliman]: seanb: do we want list of all in wgs?
15:30:29 [aliman]: ...might include people who didn't make a contribution.
15:30:49 [Ralph]: -> http://beta.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-emma-20090303/ example of new Recommendation style (frontmatter w/ acknowledgements in an appendix)
15:30:53 [aliman]: tomb: also no-shows.
15:34:16 [aliman]: tomb: i'm happy to name groups who made contribution
15:34:50 [aliman]: seanb: i'll post some draft text, but needs more acknowledgment for swd because where most of work has gone on.
15:35:36 [aliman]: tomb: owl dl prune? not clear how that was resolved. how do we point to it, and what is status?
15:35:53 [aliman]: seanb: status is, it's something i've generated.
15:36:20 [Ralph]: Alistair: as I thought about this, I returned to what the OWL WG asked us to say about the RDF schema
15:36:32 [Ralph]: ... i.e. that the RDF schema is a normative subset of the SKOS datamodel
15:36:53 [Ralph]: ... I thought in more detail about what this might really mean and how it informs the DL prune
15:37:10 [Ralph]: ... I talked with Antoine but we didn't reach a clear consensus
15:37:42 [Ralph]: ... I deliberately avoided using 'informative' and 'normative' labels when I wrote the first bits of the spec; I was just trying to describe the semantics
15:38:11 [Ralph]: ... on the face of it, the DL prune just seems to be another subset
15:39:07 [Ralph]: ... if the OWL Full schema is normative and the OWL DL schema is informative, what is this actually saying?
15:39:15 [aliman]: tomb: if one is informative, another is normative, can we point both from skos namespace?
15:39:49 [Ralph]: Alistair: I'd have no problem citing the OWL DL prune from the namespace document
15:40:08 [aliman]: aliman: i'm fine with link from skos namespace document to owl dl prune.
15:40:21 [Ralph]: Tom: in the HTML document?
15:40:23 [Ralph]: Alistair: yes
15:40:43 [aliman]: tomb: so html variant of namespace document would link to owl dl prune?
15:40:46 [aliman]: aliman: yes
15:40:55 [Ralph]: Ralph: and an rdfs:seeAlso triple in the RDF document
15:40:59 [aliman]: seanb: useful to have it somewhere. people have been asking for it.
15:41:19 [Ralph]: Alistair: no objection to giving the DL prune a high profile with such links
15:41:45 [Ralph]: ... the only question I have is what the official status of the DL prune might be
15:42:13 [aliman]: tomb: we have an implicit proposal, to consider the regular [owl full] rdf schema as normative, and to consider the owl dl prune as informative, and reference them both from the html document with hyperlinks and from the rdf schema with seeAlso.
15:42:19 [Ralph]: +1
15:42:23 [aliman]: ...is everyone more or less in agreement.
15:43:11 [Ralph]: Alistair: not to open a can of worms, I have no objection to the statement but it's not clear to me what such a statement means
15:43:49 [aliman]: tomb: another issue is, there is a document called "skos ... rdf schema" which is confusing
15:44:09 [aliman]: ...because it's obviously an html document. alistair proposed "skos namespace document" which seems straightforward.
15:44:20 [aliman]: ...then text could include link to the owl dl prune in addition.
15:44:36 [aliman]: ...but a user dereferencing uri wouldn't get conneg.
15:45:35 [aliman]: ...question of normative/informative, we need to give this document here some attention. don't really want a discussion of normative vs. informative.
15:45:36 [TomB]: ack Ralph
15:45:58 [aliman]: ralph: i wonder if both documents aren't really informative, because full thing is described in skos reference.
15:47:15 [Ralph]: Alistair: Peter Patel-Schneider pointed out in an early comment that we did not cite a normative machine-readable representation
15:47:32 [Ralph]: ... from that point of view I'm happy to say the OWL Full schema is normative
15:47:52 [aliman]: ralph: i'm ok with it.
15:48:12 [aliman]: tomb: i think we should just resolve it.
15:48:30 [Ralph]: s/with it/with saying the OWL Full schema is normative
15:49:53 [aliman]: PROPOSED: that the skos (reference?) namespace document dereference by content negotiation to the html expression (variant?), which includes a link to the informative owl dl prune, and to the rdf expression (variant?) with rdfs:seeAlso link to owl dl prune.
15:50:26 [aliman]: tomb: i like "skos namespace document", i think it's clearer
15:51:09 [aliman]: PROPOSED: that the skos namespace document dereference by content negotiation to the html variant, which includes a link to the informative owl dl prune, and to the rdf variant, which includes rdfs:seeAlso link to owl dl prune.
15:51:57 [aliman]: seanb: what to put in skos namespace document? i.e. informative vs/ normative.
15:52:15 [aliman]: http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#triples
15:52:43 [aliman]: tomb: quote language from skos reference re normative subset in the namespace document.
15:53:35 [aliman]: tomb: any objections to proposed text of resolution?
15:54:22 [Ralph]: +1
15:54:33 [aliman]: aliman: i second proposal
15:54:49 [aliman]: RESOLVED: that the skos namespace document dereference by content negotiation to the html variant, which includes a link to the informative owl dl prune, and to the rdf variant, which includes rdfs:seeAlso link to owl dl prune.
15:55:14 [aliman]: tomb: antoine has done some work on primer, see links in agenda.
15:55:19 [aliman]: ...implementation report?
15:55:33 [aliman]: seanb: continuing to log implementations in tracker, and have generated html report.
15:55:34 [Ralph]: Sean++ for recording implementations in tracker
15:55:40 [GuuS]: GuuS has joined #swd
15:55:56 [aliman]: ...also started table of constructs used in vocabularies, so have a google spreadsheet, but ongoing analysis.
15:56:02 [seanb]: -> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=rmQPwhMMWXxY62FinzE44Eg
15:56:06 [aliman]: guus: can you post link?
15:56:47 [seanb]: -> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=rmQPwhMMWXxY62FinzE44Eg implementation report
15:57:19 [aliman]: guus: i did a scan of all the emails, we have 20, very good news, anything else is a bonus, but this is good enough.
15:57:35 [aliman]: ...i note some things, collections are not used in that many.
15:57:43 [aliman]: seanb: no explicit mention so far.
15:58:11 [aliman]: guus: if i look at the rest, everything is covered in the skos namespace, correct?
15:58:27 [aliman]: seanb: yes, i think so. still have some more to review, but think everything is covered.
15:58:33 [aliman]: guus: all the main ones are covered.
15:58:56 [aliman]: ...if you go to XL, i found only one who covered it, covered older version.
15:59:24 [GuuS]: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/194
16:00:02 [aliman]: ...issue 194, i inspected the skos code, what they do is have one concept "subject category", they link it to ??? which has all label definitions.
16:00:53 [aliman]: aliman: thomas bandholtz submitted something using xl
16:01:17 [aliman]: guus: as a point of order, important for finishing the group, so ask for 15 minute extension?
16:01:19 [aliman]: tomb: ok.
16:02:24 [edsu]: . o O (i thought agrovoc used collections)
16:03:10 [Ralph]: [[
16:03:10 [Ralph]: The working groups intend to submit this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation after 1 May having met the following criteria:
16:03:10 [Ralph]: 1. At least two implementations have been demonstrated that use features of the SKOS vocabulary. Other vocabularies that use SKOS are candidates for inclusion in the implementation report.
16:03:10 [Ralph]: 2. All issues raised during the CR period against this document have received formal responses.
16:03:11 [Ralph]: ]]
16:03:40 [Ralph]: -- The working groups intend to submit this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation after 1 May having met the following criteria:
16:03:40 [Ralph]: 1. At least two implementations have been demonstrated that use features of the SKOS vocabulary. Other vocabularies that use SKOS are candidates for inclusion in the implementation report.
16:03:40 [Ralph]: 2. All issues raised during the CR period against this document have received formal responses.
16:03:52 [Ralph]: -- http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#status
16:03:55 [aliman]: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0032.html UMTHES implementation
16:04:01 [Ralph]: s/-- The working groups intend to submit this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation after 1 May having met the following criteria://
16:04:09 [Ralph]: s/ 1. At least two implementations have been demonstrated that use features of the SKOS vocabulary. Other vocabularies that use SKOS are candidates for inclusion in the implementation report.//
16:04:16 [Ralph]: s/ 2. All issues raised during the CR period against this document have received formal responses.//
16:04:23 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
16:04:40 [aliman]: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0030.html email on umthes use of skos xl
16:05:04 [aliman]: guus: table that sean has prepared, together with description of implementations. what you showed covers vocabularies?
16:05:08 [aliman]: seanb: yes.
16:05:24 [aliman]: guus: other angle is the services, checkers.
16:05:40 [aliman]: seanb: it's a work in progress, will try to split them apart.
16:06:34 [aliman]: guus: we need structural description of each implementation, derive from emails, then two tables of features, one for vocabs, one for software.
16:06:49 [Ralph]: regrets- sean
16:07:28 [aliman]: seanb: constructing the table is where the work is. other stuff is generated off the tracker.
16:08:05 [aliman]: ...if we're happy with implementation.html plus detailed table on where vocabs and apps cover the constructs?
16:08:09 [aliman]: guus: i'm happy.
16:08:45 [aliman]: ACTION: sean to complete implementation report by 19th
16:08:54 [aliman]: guus: will issues be closed by 19th?
16:11:02 [aliman]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0030.html
16:11:12 [aliman]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0032.html
16:12:43 [aliman]: ACTION: Sean to look for SKOS constructs not used by current implementations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action04]
16:12:46 [aliman]: --continues
16:13:08 [aliman]: ACTION: Ralph publish Antoine's new intermediate pages for legacy specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action11]
16:13:10 [aliman]: --continues
16:13:26 [aliman]: ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]
16:13:29 [aliman]: --continues
16:13:50 [aliman]: ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15]
16:13:53 [aliman]: --continues
16:14:01 [aliman]: ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
16:14:03 [aliman]: --continues
16:14:15 [aliman]: ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of the metadata note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03]
16:14:17 [aliman]: --continues
16:15:25 [Zakim]: -edsu
16:15:25 [Zakim]: -Ralph
16:15:26 [Zakim]: -Aliman
16:15:29 [Zakim]: -seanb
16:15:30 [Zakim]: -TomB
16:15:34 [edsu]: edsu has left #swd
16:15:54 [Zakim]: SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended
16:15:55 [Zakim]: Attendees were TomB, Ralph, Aliman, edsu, Guus_Schreiber, seanb
16:15:59 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
16:58:25 [Ralph]: zakim, bye
16:58:25 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #swd
17:54:30 [Ralph]: rrsagent, bye
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: I see 11 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-actions.rdf :
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: ralph to raise issue XX with rdfa tf [1]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T15-21-11
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Tom repost his label proposal, dropping the word 'concept' [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action01] -- DONE http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0076.html [2]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T15-23-55
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Sean update labels in the SKOS Rec draft per resolution of 21-April [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action07] [3]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T15-24-08
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: skos editors to draft acknowledgements section for SKOS Reference [4]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T15-29-34
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: sean to complete implementation report by 19th [5]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T16-08-45
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Sean to look for SKOS constructs not used by current implementations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action04] [6]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T16-12-43
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Ralph publish Antoine's new intermediate pages for legacy specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action11] [7]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T16-13-08
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02] [8]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T16-13-26
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15] [9]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T16-13-50
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20] [10]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T16-14-01
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of the metadata note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03] [11]
17:54:30 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc#T16-14-15