12:53:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #egov
12:53:21 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/09/02-egov-irc
12:53:37 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #egov
12:53:56 <Sharron> zakim, this will be egov
12:53:56 <Zakim> ok, Sharron; I see T&S_EGOV()9:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
12:54:12 <Sharron> rrsagent, make logs public
12:54:31 <Sharron> Scribe: Sharron Rush
12:54:57 <Sharron> ScribeNick: Sharron
12:55:15 <Sharron> Meeting: egov
12:56:10 <Sharron> Chair: John, Kevin
12:57:11 <josema> josema has joined #egov
12:57:58 <josema> agenda?
12:58:01 <josema> agenda+ Agenda adjustments and next meetings
12:58:12 <josema> agenda+ Charter sent to AC
12:58:24 <Zakim> T&S_EGOV()9:00AM has now started
12:58:28 <josema> agenda+ Data.gov.* memo
12:58:31 <Zakim> +AdamHarvey
12:58:41 <josema> agenda+ F2F3
12:58:53 <josema> agenda+ What's going on/coming up
12:58:57 <Zakim> +Sharron
12:59:23 <josema> trackbot, start telcon
12:59:25 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:59:27 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be EGOV
12:59:28 <trackbot> Meeting: eGovernment Interest Group Teleconference
12:59:28 <trackbot> Date: 02 September 2009
12:59:31 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see T&S_EGOV()9:00AM already started
12:59:44 <josema> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2009Sep/0000
12:59:49 <josema> chair: john
13:00:03 <josema> josema has changed the topic to: eGov IG call; agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2009Sep/0000
13:00:12 <Zakim> +Josema
13:00:21 <josema> zakim, who's here?
13:00:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdamHarvey, Sharron, Josema (muted)
13:00:22 <Zakim> On IRC I see josema, Zakim, RRSAgent, Sharron, AdamHarvey, johnlsheridan, Rinke, hughb, trackbot, sandro
13:00:53 <Zakim> +john
13:01:17 <johnlsheridan> agenda?
13:01:31 <josema> zakim, who's here?
13:01:31 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdamHarvey, Sharron, Josema, john
13:01:32 <Zakim> On IRC I see josema, Zakim, RRSAgent, Sharron, AdamHarvey, johnlsheridan, Rinke, hughb, trackbot, sandro
13:01:43 <josema> zakim, who's noisy?
13:01:55 <Zakim> josema, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Josema (5%)
13:02:02 <Rachel> Rachel has joined #egov
13:02:19 <Daniel_Bennett> Daniel_Bennett has joined #egov
13:02:36 <josema> scribe: Sharron
13:02:37 <Zakim> +Brand
13:02:47 <Zakim> +Rachel
13:02:52 <Zakim> + +7.341.1.aaaa
13:03:21 <josema> zakim, aaaa is hughb
13:03:21 <Zakim> +hughb; got it
13:04:22 <Zakim> +Daniel_Bennett
13:04:25 <Sharron> Topic: Agenda adjustments
13:04:37 <Sharron> John:  Is everyone happy with the agenda today?
13:04:41 <josema> zakim, take up next agendum
13:04:41 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Agenda adjustments and next meetings" taken up [from josema]
13:04:43 <Sharron> All:  Yes
13:04:49 <Sharron> Topic:  The Charter
13:04:53 <josema> zakim, take up next agendum
13:04:53 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, josema
13:04:59 <josema> zakim, close this agendum
13:04:59 <Zakim> agendum 1 closed
13:05:00 <Sharron> John:  Charter was sent to AC
13:05:01 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
13:05:01 <josema> zakim, take up next agendum
13:05:02 <Zakim> 2. Charter sent to AC [from josema]
13:05:03 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Charter sent to AC" taken up [from josema]
13:05:08 <josema> zakim, who's here?
13:05:08 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdamHarvey, Sharron, Josema, john, Brand, Rachel, hughb, Daniel_Bennett
13:05:10 <Zakim> On IRC I see Daniel_Bennett, Rachel, josema, Zakim, RRSAgent, Sharron, AdamHarvey, johnlsheridan, Rinke, hughb, trackbot, sandro
13:05:35 <Sharron> John:  Josema, can you give an update?
13:06:15 <Zakim> +Sylvia
13:06:27 <Zakim> +Sandro
13:06:45 <Sharron> Jose:  According to W3C process, charter has been submitted to Advisory Committee and must remain with them 4 weeks.  It was delayed because of my departure, etc.  It has been submitted and they have until the 28th of September to review and approve.
13:06:49 <Zakim> +??P21
13:07:51 <Owen> Owen has joined #egov
13:08:06 <Sharron> ...people can make comments, each representative decides who can see comments submitted.  For those of you who work for W3C member orgs, ask your AC rep ro review and support it.  The more reviewers who have comments the better.
13:08:36 <Sharron> ...mailing list is on public announcements and individuals can submit comments.
13:09:05 <Sharron> ...before the charter went to the AC there were some changes.  I made the changed version available a couple of days ago.
13:09:10 <josema> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2009Aug/0027
13:09:48 <Sylvia> Sylvia has joined #eGov
13:10:21 <Sharron> ...not many changes, removal of duplicate content, etc.  Changed length of charter from 2 years to 1.  Keeping fingers crossed to have as many good reviews as possible
13:10:50 <Sharron> John:  For those of us who are AC reps, should we be actively supporting the charter?  Is that worthwhile?
13:11:21 <Sharron> Jose:  Yes, especially since you can decide to keep comments within small group or make public.
13:11:41 <josema> zakim, take up next agendum
13:11:41 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Data.gov.* memo" taken up [from josema]
13:11:47 <Sharron> Topic:  data.gov memo
13:12:01 <Sharron> John:  Can you speak to this Daniel?
13:13:22 <Sharron> Daniel:  I received some comments leading to some changes.  Owen's suggestions have not yet been made, should be in the bibliography.  I welcome people from the group to read through and comment. 
13:13:30 <Sharron> John:  What issues were raised.
13:14:01 <Sharron> Daniel: Clarity at the start about what the memo is about.  
13:14:29 <Zakim> -Josema
13:14:41 <Sharron> ...various clean up to language, need for explicit references, examples. 
13:14:51 <Sharron> John:  No substantial differences of view?
13:15:03 <Zakim> +josema
13:15:32 <Sharron> Daniel:  Not that I saw. I incorporated soem of the comments from the last call.
13:15:41 <Zakim> -josema
13:15:59 <hughb> I have been away a few weeks - wondering why it moved to Google Docs (off wiki)
13:16:02 <Sharron> ...changed the title of the section
13:16:30 <Zakim> + +1.202.236.aabb - is perhaps George?
13:16:38 <johnlsheridan> q?
13:16:52 <josema> josema has joined #egov
13:16:53 <Sharron> Rachel:  For the purposes of the ETF I want to make sure that all comments that came in over the list have been incorporated and our job will be to clear up language.
13:17:00 <Zakim> +martin
13:17:17 <Sharron> Daniel:  There were requests for examples and soem bibliography issues
13:17:20 <josema> zakim, martin is me
13:17:20 <Zakim> +josema; got it
13:17:33 <Sharron> Rachel:  So is it ready for us to take over?  Is Friday the deadline for this?
13:17:47 <Sharron> Daniel:  Before September 9th
13:17:55 <josema> q+ to talk about deadlines, working draft, formatting
13:18:07 <Sharron> Rachel:  I'll shoot for getting it in by Friday.
13:18:08 <johnlsheridan> ack josema
13:18:08 <Zakim> josema, you wanted to talk about deadlines, working draft, formatting
13:18:17 <Sharron> Daniel:  I tried to make it as readable
13:19:25 <Sharron> Jose: How to publish the memo, we wanted to publish before next week's summit.  To talk about our work, we have been talking to W3C about that. Asking about the best way to publish this memo.
13:20:17 <Sharron> ...given that many of us are still learning about how to do publication in w3c framework, they have suggested that we publish as a Working Draft
13:20:34 <hughb> I expect it would be quite tweakable
13:20:51 <Sharron> ...this memo then should be in the same format as the previous WD we published.
13:21:06 <Sharron> ...that means it must be in w3c format, etc
13:21:21 <Sharron> Rachel:  So we should get it done quickly?
13:21:54 <Sharron> Jose: It is a good milestone and we should get it done if we can by that time, but to be mindful of the needed format.  I am happy to help.
13:22:16 <Sharron> Rachel:  I will do the content and turn it over to someone else for the formatting.
13:22:19 <Zakim> +Sandro.a
13:22:26 <johnlsheridan> q?
13:22:28 <Zakim> -Sandro
13:22:34 <Sharron> ...will let you know if I can not find someone to format.
13:22:38 <sandro> q+
13:22:58 <Sharron> Hughb:  I may be able to help
13:23:08 <josema> q?
13:23:33 <Sharron> John:  Thanks Daniel, Hugh and Rachel.  I think the document has come along quite well
13:23:49 <josema> ack sa
13:24:33 <Sharron> Hughb: Thinking through logisitics of publication by Tuesday.  The difference between Working Draft and Note is soemthing to address.
13:24:47 <johnlsheridan> q?
13:24:58 <sandro> "sandro"   
13:25:03 <Sharron> Sandro: does Note carry more weight?  we need a title that
13:25:04 <kevin> kevin has joined #egov
13:25:21 <josema> I propose data-gov-memo or data-gov-star-memo or something like that, not a big deal ;)
13:25:24 <kevin> good morning all, wont be able to join via phone but will "listen" in via IRC
13:25:27 <Sharron> ...is short
13:25:36 <josema> for the short-name I mean
13:25:41 <josema> s/name/name,
13:25:46 <kevin> Jose, we could ask COMM what the appropriate name should be
13:25:58 <Sharron> John:  Does anyone have an opinion about exactly what the difference means in terms of publication and reception?
13:26:44 <Sharron> Sandro: Is Working Draft a negative?  Note may have more weight
13:26:56 <josema> q+ to ask if people feels it's _done_
13:27:11 <johnlsheridan> ack josema
13:27:11 <Zakim> josema, you wanted to ask if people feels it's _done_
13:27:17 <sandro> for shortname, I'd think    gov-data        so http://www.w3.org/TR/gov-data
13:27:18 <Sharron> ...but if it is not ready to be a Note, we should be frank about that.
13:27:42 <Sharron> Jose: It depends on how we feel about the doc being complete or not.
13:27:47 <kevin> Sharon, yes, I realize that is w3c process but it is hurting perceptions and understanding of our work
13:28:01 <johnlsheridan> Its "done" but is it "done done"?
13:28:17 <kevin> got lots of feedback from DC community, like with issues paper draft they are waiting to the final before reviewing or using, we dont want that to be the case
13:28:41 <kevin> agree with john, lets say done but revisions and updates coming, doc will mature
13:28:50 <johnlsheridan> also encourages further participation maybe?
13:29:00 <josema> kevin, I think that's exactly what a working draft is!
13:29:14 <josema> (although I understand the issue with "working draft")
13:29:15 <kevin> I know, but that is not what our readers think
13:29:28 <josema> ah, governments... oh, well... ;)
13:29:41 <Rachel> agree, Sharon - working draft tells people we are still looking for their help to polish
13:29:48 <johnlsheridan> so your vote is for "note" Kevin?
13:29:51 <Sharron> Daniel: The idea that this will be the starting point for Year 2 is a good one.  To start the conversation with the greater community
13:29:56 <kevin> I am cool with our understanding and w3 process but think we need to watch our messaging to community, draft or working draft means different things to differnt people
13:30:09 <hughb> audience will need to understand better about living documents on the Web
13:30:10 <kevin> Sharon and Daniel, I like that
13:30:34 <AdamHarvey> +1 to Note for PR purposes, but I still feel it is a Draft on our end
13:30:35 <josema> we can use the "status" section for that
13:30:46 <Sharron> John:  What is the consensus position.  Arguments are balanced on both sides of this question...Working Draft or Note?
13:30:51 <josema> q+ to remind john about need of resolution
13:30:57 <johnlsheridan> ack josema
13:30:57 <Zakim> josema, you wanted to remind john about need of resolution
13:30:59 <hughb> draft
13:31:12 <Sharron> +1 for Working Draft
13:31:18 <kevin> all, we need to leave some of the decision to the comm team, they will know better 
13:31:20 <Rachel> I don't know how much people outside w3c understand "note" 
13:31:39 <Rachel> so if we want input from outside w3c, I think "working draft" is more meaningful
13:31:47 <kevin> again to Rachel's point, lets let comm decide waht it is ultimately called and labeled
13:32:27 <kevin> after giving them criteria of what it is and what we hope
13:32:40 <Sharron> Jose: Must resolve that we want to publish the document.  Ask the group if we agree to publish and the resoultion should appear in the minutes
13:33:36 <johnlsheridan> Propose: we publish the data.gov.* memo as a working draft
13:33:52 <sandro> +1
13:33:55 <Rinke> +1
13:33:56 <Daniel_Bennett> +1
13:33:57 <hughb> +1
13:33:58 <josema> +1
13:34:00 <johnlsheridan> +1
13:34:01 <Rachel> +1
13:34:08 <Sharron> John:  Proposed: that we publish the data.gov.* memo as a Working Draft
13:34:18 <kevin> -1 but fine
13:34:24 <Sharron> +1
13:34:33 <AdamHarvey> 0
13:34:48 <sandro> kevin, to me "-1" means you strongly object, and will try to block this move.
13:34:52 <Sharron> John:  Also use it as an opportunity for people in the government community to contribute to this ongoing work
13:35:04 <Owen> -1 Does "Working Draft" imply that the document is on the Recommendation track?
13:35:10 <sandro> No, Owen.
13:35:12 <Sylvia> +1
13:35:28 <kevin> Sandro, I dont agree but wont block the decision for consensus reasons.
13:35:36 <Owen> OK +1
13:35:42 <sandro> I'd use "-0" for "I don't like it, but I wont block it"
13:36:02 <Sharron> John: Can we move on?
13:36:17 <Sharron> Sandro:  Can we say there is no blockage and we have consensus?
13:36:35 <Sharron> All: agreed
13:36:36 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
13:36:36 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/09/02-egov-irc#T13-36-36
13:36:54 <Sharron> Sandro:  Will talk to webmasters and try to get this published by Tuesday
13:37:08 <kevin> last comment, we have worked with COMM on outreach and have much feedback from reporters who are helping us get the word out, draft wont be received well, most will say, ok will wait for final, talk to me then.
13:37:19 <Sharron> Resolved:  To publish the data.gov.* as a Working Draft
13:37:25 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
13:37:25 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/09/02-egov-irc#T13-37-25
13:37:29 <kevin> me too ok so -0
13:37:52 <AdamHarvey> Do we still want graphics included with the doc?
13:38:15 <josema> good question... I was thinking of them as accompanying... somehow...
13:38:19 <kevin> adam, yes, needed much
13:38:22 <Sharron> John: Yes if we can have them, but it depends on ETF 
13:38:26 <Daniel_Bennett> yes
13:38:35 <AdamHarvey> Right on, I'm on ETF, so I can work with Rachel, etc. as needed
13:38:42 <kevin> Edelman and Karen M want to use graphics to convey doc to those who arent tech next week
13:38:44 <josema> included or not, I don't have an opinion, but, yes, please, add graphics! :)
13:38:51 <Daniel_Bennett> wow, most convo on IRC
13:39:07 <AdamHarvey> (sorry, can't speak on phone right now)
13:39:46 <johnlsheridan> agenda?
13:40:01 <johnlsheridan> zakim next agendum
13:40:03 <hughb> goodnight all - thanks :)
13:40:06 <Sharron> Topic: Face to Face 3
13:40:08 <josema> adam, I envision an issue with graphics: the pointers; we won't have the documents nor the pointers either
13:40:16 <Zakim> -hughb
13:40:34 <kevin> ready for what is up? next?
13:40:42 <kevin> can briefly outline stuff for next week
13:40:55 <kevin> hugh, good night
13:42:15 <Sharron> Jose:  We have had 2 F2F meetings as a group. The best was in DC where govet agency reps were included. We discussed having the next meeting in Santa Clara in Nov or do something different along the lines of what we did in DC
13:43:06 <Sharron> ...Since last one was in US, we thought next one would appropriately be in Europe.  There is a lot of Open gov activity there 
13:43:08 <kevin> Sharon, I dont think we will get a large group in santa clara but open to getting as many of us as possible together
13:43:26 <kevin> I am on the plenary committee and we are starting to work through the agenda, egov is included
13:43:34 <Sharron> agreed, it would be great to catch up in person even informally
13:43:46 <kevin> agree with Jose on next major planned meeting, should be in JLS home
13:44:03 <Sharron> Jose:  my proposal is to organize this meeting in Europe in Nov or Dec 
13:44:13 <kevin> this year?
13:44:41 <kevin> might want to wait till spring and some conclusion on our funding intitiatives and outreach to get money for travel
13:45:16 <Sharron> Jose: Ask the group about opinions ofr a meeting at that time/
13:45:22 <johnlsheridan> Brussels is the best venue (only 2 hours from London via Eurostar)
13:45:50 <Sharron> John:  Excellent idea, Brussels is good venue, easy to get to on the train, draw out some help-in-kind from commission
13:46:11 <Sharron> Owen:  If you think it will bring additional support to these efforts, it would be great
13:46:16 <josema> I very much hope so, that's one of the goals
13:47:11 <Sharron> Jose:  egov conference in Sweden is another possibility, mid-Novemeber
13:47:33 <kevin> sharon, that is a week after plenary in CA, I couldnt make it
13:47:35 <Sharron> ...democracy forum coming to Europe, Barcelona in November
13:48:05 <johnlsheridan> q?
13:48:15 <josema> just my personal opinion for now...
13:48:26 <Daniel_Bennett> note for US, Nov 21st through 28 heavy vacation/Thanksgiving travel
13:50:06 <josema> thanks, Daniel, we need to keep it in mind, too, since I'd expect remotees to join (at least at times)
13:50:25 <josema> yup
13:50:27 <Sharron> Jose: Will explore the feasibility and propose specific dates
13:50:34 <kevin> agreed with Daniel and +1 on Jose comment
13:51:58 <Daniel_Bennett> http://www.w3.org/2009/11/TPAC/
13:52:19 <josema> 2-6 Nov 2009
13:52:22 <kevin> I agree with Jose, would love to have Rachel there, its close right?
13:52:29 <Daniel_Bennett> Santa Clara Marriott, Santa Clara, California, (Silicon Valley) USA 
13:52:31 <Daniel_Bennett> 2 November - 6 November 2009
13:52:37 <josema> not too far for her, I believe
13:52:47 <kevin> cant wait, reservations already made..
13:53:19 <johnlsheridan> zakim, next agendum
13:53:19 <Zakim> agendum 4. "F2F3" taken up [from josema]
13:53:20 <josema> ah, spokane-santa clara = 900 miles (not far)
13:53:32 <josema> agenda?
13:53:32 <johnlsheridan> zakim, next agendum
13:53:39 <Zakim> agendum 4 was just opened, johnlsheridan
13:53:43 <AdamHarvey> john are you muted?
13:53:44 <josema> zakim, take up next agendum
13:53:44 <Zakim> agendum 4 was just opened, josema
13:53:47 <josema> arghhh.
13:53:54 <josema> zakim, close this agendum
13:53:54 <Zakim> agendum 4 closed
13:53:55 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
13:53:56 <Zakim> 5. What's going on/coming up [from josema]
13:53:58 <josema> zakim, take up next agendum
13:53:58 <Zakim> agendum 5. "What's going on/coming up" taken up [from josema]
13:53:59 <Sharron> Topic:   What's going on/coming up
13:54:00 <josema> he
13:54:08 <kevin> want me to cover next week?
13:54:20 <johnlsheridan> yes please
13:54:44 <kevin> ok. chairs are meeting with comm at 11am, edelman is putting a media plan together
13:55:01 <kevin> for next week which will leverage data.gov memo
13:55:06 <kevin> and work of group
13:55:35 <kevin> Karen Meyers and Sandro will be joining me at expo and summit, Karen is trying to schedule meetings with differnt folks as well
13:55:39 <josema> kevin, next week? or do you mean next IG call?
13:55:52 <kevin> we are looking to leverage event to promote group work
13:55:53 <Sharron> John: Main aim for next week is to leave the data.gov.* with the group
13:56:03 <kevin> Jose, mean next week, egov summit
13:56:09 <josema> ah, got it
13:56:13 <josema> sorry
13:56:21 <kevin> my fault
13:56:32 <kevin> problem without being on phone and trying to know context
13:56:41 <kevin> also though discussions around me here
13:56:46 <kevin> woops tough
13:56:58 <Sharron> John:  My collegue, Richard Sterling from Cabinet office will be there and I will introduce him to Karen and Kevin
13:57:11 <kevin> will attempt to send a summary of media plan and activities to group by COB Friday
13:57:27 <Sharron> ...anyone else going to egov2 conference?
13:57:30 <AdamHarvey> Wanted to attend Gov 2.0 , but can't afford it...
13:57:33 <josema> cool, thanks, Kevin
13:57:33 <kevin> excellent JLS
13:57:56 <kevin> Should also cover XBRL conference if Daniel can and there are no summit questions
13:57:59 <Sylvia> wanted too but no budget
13:58:15 <kevin> We would like to get a couple pages of new egov site up for next week if that is possible BTW
13:58:29 <josema> http://www.w3.org/2009/03/xbrl/cfp.html
13:58:55 <AdamHarvey> Daniel, bad echo
13:59:11 <kevin> Karen is working on outreach and I am getting emails out to govt people this week, we have discussed getting a side meeting of egov people together around oct 4 or 7th
13:59:27 <Rinke> Rinke has left #egov
13:59:33 <kevin> in DC at FDIC
13:59:47 <Rinke> Rinke has joined #egov
13:59:54 <Zakim> + +1.202.319.aacc
13:59:56 <Zakim> -Daniel_Bennett
14:00:18 <Owen> XML in Practice conference September 30 & October 1: http://www.idealliance.org/conferences_and_events/xmlinpractice_2009_conference__exposition
14:00:43 <Sharron> Daniel:  will be speaking, if anyone wants to attend send a note, I can arrange
14:00:44 <kevin> Forgot an item, Daniel, we wanted to know if you would be available next week to chat to media if the opportunity comes up
14:01:17 <Daniel_Bennett> yes
14:01:26 <Daniel_Bennett> I will send all my contact info to you
14:01:39 <kevin> excellent, thank you!! 
14:01:55 <josema> q+ to talk about the invites
14:01:55 <Sharron> Owen:  received invitation but is cost prohibitive.  Is there any expo or free part that I could attend?
14:02:08 <kevin> I hurt when I payed the money, particularly with AIA funds
14:02:17 <kevin> out of my VP Admin budget..
14:02:27 <Sharron> Sandro:  Isn't first day an expo?
14:02:48 <kevin> yes, I got a free invite on Friday given I was paid for conference
14:02:54 <Sharron> Owen:  Encourage you to request an invitation, which I did and only then learned of the cost.  
14:03:01 <kevin> which showed they were getting low registration for expo (my conclusion)
14:03:07 <josema> fully agree with Owen
14:03:14 <kevin> ditto from me owen and sharon
14:03:32 <AdamHarvey> ditto for me as well
14:03:50 <Sharron> John:  ONline Information conference in London, proposed significant focus on semantic content, inquired about some egov features of work
14:04:17 <josema> FOSE 2010 proposal?
14:04:29 <johnlsheridan> go ahead :)
14:05:16 <Sharron> Owen: Presentation proposals for FOSE have been closed, but imagine they would entertain a proposal for us to have a F2F in conjunction
14:05:19 <Vagner-br> Vagner-br has joined #egov
14:05:32 <kevin> we got our submission in for panel and worksho[
14:06:05 <kevin> we have great contact from education director/committee
14:06:21 <kevin> he just left on vacation yesterday but got stuff in on time, he will champion
14:06:29 <kevin> very interested in w3c and egov work
14:06:39 <Owen> FOSE March 23 - 25: http://1105govinfoevents.com/event_planning/cfp.asp?Conference=295
14:06:40 <Sharron> JOse:  Mid-March next year may provide a good opportunity.  Will know more when we get response to our submitted proposals
14:08:43 <Sharron> Jose: Impressed with the organization of ? Democracy Conference.  Have secured place for myself. The Barcelona conference is great but in same week as another governemtn conference, posing conflict for many government officials
14:08:59 <johnlsheridan> malmo or barcelona - whats theweather like in barcelona that time of year?
14:09:32 <josema> he... s/?/Personal
14:09:42 <josema> s/Conference/Conference Europe
14:10:02 <josema> I plan to attend both (crazy me!)
14:10:27 <kevin> good rates to barcelona and madrid from UNITED in March, starting new flights, I think 400 round trip
14:11:13 <Sharron> John:  In UK we are fantastically busy around linked data and will have some announcements soon.
14:13:12 <Sharron> Jose: Facing the question of the maturity of the semantic web technology, many see the potential but don't completely understand. My opinion is that the tech has amtured but government use has not.  That is where our work is.
14:13:28 <kevin> + 1 sharon
14:13:28 <Sharron> ...beleive the memo will be very helpful
14:13:54 <josema> s/amtured/matured
14:13:58 <Sharron> John: Using the phrase that it is "newly mature"
14:14:21 <Rachel> we're laughing on the inside, John
14:14:59 <johnlsheridan> q?
14:15:03 <josema> ack jo
14:15:03 <Zakim> josema, you wanted to talk about the invites
14:15:27 <AdamHarvey> I've got nothing. :)
14:15:47 <Rachel> thanks all!
14:15:48 <AdamHarvey> Goodbye folks!
14:15:48 <Sharron> John: If there is nothing to add, we can adjourn.  Thanks everyone.
14:15:53 <Zakim> -Brand
14:15:54 <Zakim> -AdamHarvey
14:15:54 <Sharron> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:15:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/09/02-egov-minutes.html Sharron
14:15:55 <Zakim> -Sylvia
14:15:55 <Zakim> -??P21
14:15:57 <Zakim> -Rachel
14:15:58 <Zakim> -George?
14:16:00 <Zakim> - +1.202.319.aacc
14:16:01 <Rachel> Rachel has joined #egov
14:16:01 <Zakim> -Sandro.a
14:16:03 <Zakim> -Sharron
14:16:11 <josema> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:16:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see john, josema
14:16:21 <kevin> all done?
14:16:31 <josema> yes
14:16:40 <kevin> ok talk to you shortly
14:21:37 <Rinke> Rinke has joined #egov
14:22:19 <Zakim> -josema
14:22:20 <Zakim> -john
14:22:22 <Zakim> T&S_EGOV()9:00AM has ended
14:22:23 <Zakim> Attendees were AdamHarvey, Sharron, Josema, john, Brand, Rachel, +7.341.1.aaaa, hughb, Daniel_Bennett, Sylvia, Sandro, +1.202.236.aabb, +1.202.319.aacc
14:22:58 <josema> sure, thanks kevin for joining on IRC, talk to you in a few minutes
14:57:20 <josema> zakim, list attendees
14:57:20 <Zakim> sorry, josema, I don't know what conference this is
16:16:27 <josema> josema has changed the topic to: next IG call: Sep 16
16:16:35 <josema> josema has left #egov