IRC log of lld on 2010-11-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:49:27 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #lld
14:49:27 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:49:39 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #lld
14:49:45 [TomB]
rrsagent, bookmark
14:49:45 [RRSAgent]
14:49:51 [TomB]
zakim, this will be lld
14:49:51 [Zakim]
ok, TomB; I see INC_LLDXG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
14:49:56 [TomB]
Meeting: LLD XG
14:49:59 [TomB]
Chair: Tom
14:50:05 [Asaf]
reconnecting in a minute.
14:50:11 [Asaf]
Asaf has left #lld
14:50:32 [TomB]
14:50:47 [TomB]
14:51:09 [TomB]
rrsagent, please make record public
14:51:30 [TomB]
Regrets: Mark, Ray, Emma, Lars, Jon, Monica, Kai, Oreste, Bernard, Karen, Martin
14:52:51 [antoine]
antoine has joined #lld
14:53:09 [Zakim]
INC_LLDXG()10:00AM has now started
14:53:16 [Zakim]
14:54:05 [jneubert]
jneubert has joined #lld
14:55:06 [GordonD]
GordonD has joined #lld
14:55:39 [Zakim]
14:55:50 [antoine]
zakim, ??P2
14:55:50 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??P2', antoine
14:55:54 [antoine]
zakim, ??P2 is me
14:55:54 [Zakim]
+antoine; got it
14:56:02 [marcia]
marcia has joined #lld
14:56:19 [antoine]
zakim, who is here?
14:56:19 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P1, antoine
14:56:20 [Zakim]
On IRC I see marcia, GordonD, jneubert, antoine, Zakim, RRSAgent, TomB, aconstan, mhausenblas, digikim, ww, edsu
14:56:29 [TomB]
zakim, ??p1 is me
14:56:29 [Zakim]
+TomB; got it
14:56:45 [jeff_]
jeff_ has joined #lld
14:57:14 [michaelp]
michaelp has joined #lld
14:57:29 [Zakim]
14:57:34 [Zakim]
+ +1.614.764.aaaa
14:57:41 [AnetteS]
AnetteS has joined #lld
14:57:49 [antoine]
zakim, ??P4 is GordonD
14:57:49 [Zakim]
+GordonD; got it
14:58:00 [TomB]
zakim, aaa is jeff_
14:58:00 [Zakim]
sorry, TomB, I do not recognize a party named 'aaa'
14:58:01 [antoine]
zakim, aaaa is jeff_
14:58:01 [Zakim]
+jeff_; got it
14:58:15 [antoine]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
14:58:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate antoine
14:58:22 [Zakim]
14:58:26 [ww]
Zakim: ??P6 is me
14:58:32 [ww]
Zakim, ??P6 is me
14:58:32 [Zakim]
+ww; got it
14:58:43 [Zakim]
+ +49.221.400.7.aabb
14:58:51 [Zakim]
+ +1.330.655.aacc
14:59:00 [TomB]
zakim, aabb is AnetteS
14:59:00 [Zakim]
+AnetteS; got it
14:59:07 [antoine]
zakim, aacc is marcia
14:59:07 [Zakim]
+marcia; got it
14:59:08 [TomB]
zakim, aacc is marcia
14:59:08 [Zakim]
sorry, TomB, I do not recognize a party named 'aacc'
14:59:19 [AnetteS]
zakim, mute me
14:59:19 [Zakim]
AnetteS should now be muted
14:59:25 [Zakim]
14:59:34 [pmurray]
pmurray has joined #lld
14:59:41 [antoine]
zakim, jeff_.a is michaelp
14:59:41 [Zakim]
+michaelp; got it
15:00:44 [Zakim]
+ +1.404.892.aadd
15:00:55 [pmurray]
zakim, aadd is me
15:00:55 [Zakim]
+pmurray; got it
15:01:04 [jodi]
jodi has joined #LLD
15:01:29 [AlexanderH]
AlexanderH has joined #lld
15:02:05 [TomB]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:02:05 [Zakim]
On the phone I see TomB, antoine, GordonD (muted), jeff_, ww, AnetteS (muted), marcia, michaelp (muted), pmurray (muted)
15:02:08 [Zakim]
15:02:19 [antoine]
zakim, IPcaller is AlexanderH
15:02:19 [Zakim]
+AlexanderH; got it
15:02:57 [AnetteS]
zakim, unmute me
15:02:57 [Zakim]
AnetteS should no longer be muted
15:02:58 [Zakim]
+ +1.856.528.aaee
15:03:07 [jodi]
zakim, aaee is Jodi
15:03:07 [Zakim]
+Jodi; got it
15:03:42 [AnetteS]
zakim, mute me
15:03:42 [Zakim]
AnetteS should now be muted
15:04:13 [TomB]
Anette, take a look at to prepare...
15:04:43 [Asaf]
Asaf has joined #lld
15:04:45 [pmurray]
zakim, unmute me
15:04:45 [Zakim]
pmurray should no longer be muted
15:05:09 [Zakim]
15:05:09 [pmurray]
zakim, mute me
15:05:10 [Zakim]
pmurray should now be muted
15:05:17 [TomB]
Scribe: jodi
15:05:18 [AnetteS]
thanks, Antoine
15:05:25 [TomB]
Scribenick: jodi
15:05:33 [Zakim]
15:05:39 [TomB]
zakim, IPcaller is kim
15:05:39 [Zakim]
+kim; got it
15:05:46 [TomB]
zakim, ??p19 is Asaf
15:05:46 [Zakim]
+Asaf; got it
15:06:04 [jodi]
Topic: Administrative
15:06:21 [antoine]
minutes are actually good!
15:06:27 [jodi]
TomB: Propose that we accept last week's minutes. Apologies for technical difficulties.
15:06:34 [ww]
15:06:40 [jodi]
Resolved: To accept the minutes of previous teleconference
15:07:30 [jodi]
Topic: CKAN for datasets
15:07:30 [ww]
15:08:17 [jodi]
William: CKAN as free software is being used by governments, community groups and (most interestingly) LOD group to make the LOD cloud diagram.
15:08:58 [jodi]
William: Collaboratively developed as a wiki. Various metadata types: ...
15:09:22 [Zakim]
15:09:23 [jodi]
William: Groups are curated, anyone can create a group, and say which packages should be in a group, according to criteria.
15:09:38 [antoine]
zakim, ??P24 is edsu
15:09:38 [Zakim]
+edsu; got it
15:10:28 [edsu]
15:10:32 [jodi]
William: CKAN has RDF export of packages. Extras fields need to be mapped on a case-by-case basis.
15:10:38 [TomB]
+1 for lld group on CKAN
15:10:47 [TomB]
+1 for wiki page
15:10:58 [jodi]
William: I suggest creating CKAN LLD group and a wiki page on the XG wiki to establish our conventions.
15:10:59 [antoine]
15:11:36 [jodi]
Antoine: Bibliographic group would be an alternative starting point.
15:11:36 [marcia]
+1 ww
15:11:39 [jodi]
more on CKAN and LLD:
15:11:41 [edsu]
q+ can we use richard cyganiak's
15:12:15 [jodi]
Antoine: Karen, Jonathan, Ed, and others are admins for the CKAN Bibliographic group.
15:12:19 [TomB]
ack edsu
15:12:42 [jneubert]
jneubert has joined #lld
15:12:46 [jodi]
Ed: Two questions: 1) Bibliographic group on CKAN now is not specifically about LD - just bilbiographic data in general
15:13:04 [Asaf]
but here's an example from that group: ->
15:13:20 [jodi]
Ed: That group might contain packages referring to open MARC data.
15:13:51 [jodi]
2) Would Richard Cyganiak be ok with our using the LOD group as a starting point? It already contains many bibliographic Linked Data sources.
15:14:21 [jodi]
?: We would need to negotiate with Richard to see whether we're looking for the same criteria etc.
15:14:34 [antoine]
15:14:43 [jodi]
William: The existing Bibliographic group is fairly open; Linked Data is not required.
15:14:47 [marcia]
15:14:52 [AnetteS]
can a dataset be in more than one ckan group?
15:14:54 [antoine]
15:15:07 [jodi]
William: We can ask the admins, who are on the call.
15:15:13 [TomB]
q+ to ask whether a dataset is "in" one group or another, or merely referenced?
15:15:15 [jodi]
Ed: What is the scope? What kind of datasets would we list?
15:15:19 [TomB]
ack marcia
15:15:57 [edsu]
here's richard's lodcloud group on ckan:
15:16:11 [TomB]
ack antoine
15:16:14 [jodi]
Marcia: The name 'Bibliographic' data might limit the focus. What about thesauri, etc
15:16:32 [jodi]
edsu: can you quickly pull up the colored cloud, where the blue (or something) is the library/bib-related? to give a sense of the scope
15:16:50 [GordonD]
Non-bibliographic linked data of interest: circulation data, library location and directory data ...
15:17:13 [edsu]
jodi: ?
15:18:19 [TomB]
ack TomB
15:18:19 [Zakim]
TomB, you wanted to ask whether a dataset is "in" one group or another, or merely referenced?
15:18:24 [jodi]
Antoine: We're interested in bibliographic, but not everything is bibliographic data. We want to be an "inclusion group" [not sure what this means] include everything in the LOD cloud. Want to include the bibliographic data group. What are the tech limitations of CKAN? Can we include everything into the LOD cloud?
15:18:39 [jodi]
edsu: thanks, the light green is the part I wanted to point out there. :)
15:18:47 [edsu]
antoine: you can probably use tags to sub divide datasets in a group
15:19:56 [jodi]
Tom: These are overlapping groups. We're not entirely contained in LOD or Bibliographic. Can we reference existing datasets in CKAN? If so, let's create our own list and reference anything already described in the LOD and Bibliographic CKAN groups. Then we wouldn't have to worry so much about...
15:20:09 [antoine]
s/not everything is bibliographic data/we are not only interested only in bibliographic data
15:20:28 [jodi]
William: Could be in any number of packages. No inclusion/subsetting relations, but we can look into how to do that.
15:21:03 [jodi]
Antoine: Different colors in LOD, Richard wanted help subclassing.
15:21:28 [edsu]
15:21:40 [jodi]
ACTION: William: to summarize options for using CKAN to the list, before next concall
15:21:56 [GordonD]
We could invert the approach - what in LOD is of interest to LLDXG?
15:22:08 [jodi]
Topic: Authority data
15:22:30 [antoine]
GordonD+ - that's what I'd like to have with "tagging" LOD sets with something like a "LLD" tag
15:22:44 [jodi]
TomB: Jeff and Alexander - assess progress on analyzing the clusters. How far have we gotten?
15:23:20 [jodi]
TomB: Lots of attempts to visualize connections between things. Must hack through the thickets and move towards segments of a draft report. The 7 months we have left are going to zip by in a flash.
15:23:41 [jodi]
TomB: Need to have chunks of text to review for a draft.
15:24:37 [Zakim]
15:25:08 [jodi]
Jeff: Alexander and I have started a dialogue through email about the problems. Must convince each other that the patterns exist. There are 6-7 of them (LCSH is the disputed one.) 5 are descriptions of datasets--authority data we want to express in Linked Data. Other one: enrichment--more of a meta case.
15:25:48 [jodi]
Enrichment is nice: to explore what these use cases have in common. SKOS a nice level of abstraction -- naming.
15:26:02 [jodi]
s/Enrichment/s Jeff: Enrichment
15:26:34 [jodi]
Jeff: Not clear why there's tension about naming. Some things are attached to the name, some are attached to the thing.
15:26:47 [antoine]
s/"inclusion group" [not sure what this means]/included group, ie. we
15:27:03 [jodi]
Jeff: I can imagine using SKOS but it's not the only way to do that. Would like to explore that with VIAF with the contributors, to get comfortable with it, explore alternatives.
15:27:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate antoine
15:27:35 [jodi]
Jeff: FRBR point of view is different. Side-by-side comparison of the two perspectives -- each with their strengths and weaknesses.
15:28:03 [jodi]
Jeff: Certain classes of things appear to be in alignment, but I'm reluctant to merge them. As we go on, the differences will become apparent. I think the comparison/contrast will help.
15:28:46 [jodi]
Alexander: We already discussed merging. Beyond the library point of view: we are interested in real world things (and highly structured info) about persons and corporate bodies.
15:29:05 [jodi]
Alexander: ... distinguish between two people with the same name. Biographical information in the background.
15:29:44 [jodi]
Alexander: Perspective *between* libraries. Need to align, enrich Linked Data. Local datasets, or link to existing external ones.
15:30:09 [jodi]
Alexander: 1) Reuse of data between libraries 2) How non-library world can reuse our library data
15:30:43 [jodi]
Alexander: Need SKOS: these are the ontologies used outside of libraries. We have to follow both tracks (reuse within and outside libraries).
15:31:14 [marcia]
+1 Jeff for seperating the thing from the labels of the thing. This model applies to names of people and corporate boday, as well as to others, such as concepts, works.
15:31:17 [jodi]
Alexander: To exchange our data with the outside world, we need the infrastructure to exchange WITHIN libraries. Otherwise it's really difficult to establish the second (outside libraries) track.
15:31:41 [jodi]
TomB: Reuse of data between libraries? Do we assume that this will be LOD?
15:32:33 [jodi]
Tom: What kind of difficulties are you talking about in reusing--agreeing on descriptive properties to use, or -- the technical details?
15:32:44 [jodi]
Alexander: both the properties and the infrastructure
15:33:12 [jodi]
Alexander: Right now, MARC is how we exchange data. RDA can only succeed with the LD data structure. RDA as a cataloging structure is all about the linking of data.
15:33:34 [jodi]
Alexander: For RDA to work, a good infrastructure is needed.
15:33:57 [jodi]
Jeff: The idea of exchanging data is worth discussing. In the MARC paradigm we're exchanging records.
15:34:22 [jodi]
Jeff: In the LD world, it's not clear. Caching is different from exchange.
15:34:27 [TomB]
+1 with Jeff that "exchanging" metadata - that's exactly what I was trying to get at
15:34:36 [jodi]
Alexander: Not the physical exchange, the reuse of existing data in my system.
15:34:54 [GordonD]
I suspect the VIAF use case is the key uc in the authority data cluster. It covers interoperability of data between libraries and external communities; but needs to be extended to LLD of individual authority files.
15:35:08 [jodi]
Alexander: If I have a cataloging system or the front-end (e.g. OPAC), the user can search on a number of Linked Data sets.
15:35:32 [marcia]
I can understand Alex
15:35:34 [jodi]
Alexander: With LD, can search on a worldwide set of data. So it's reuse, not exchange.
15:35:37 [GordonD]
That is, we should perhaps look at the application of FRAD/FRSAD at the local level, and its interaction with VIAF namespace at the aggregated level.
15:36:03 [TomB]
s/Jeff that/Jeff re:/
15:36:04 [Asaf]
15:36:43 [jodi]
Jeff: How this gets represented as a product of our (Alex+my) understanding. There's some danger of our imagining what they are doing, without enough detail.
15:37:02 [antoine]
15:37:02 [jodi]
Jeff: If there are no principles--or insufficiently strong principles--it's a mess.
15:37:27 [TomB]
q+ to ask if we are talking about a need for patterns to follow?
15:37:30 [jodi]
Jeff: Use FOAF, RDA, FRBR... we should encourage that but it's more fundamental. They should be interoperable, outside of the modeling choices.
15:37:32 [TomB]
ack antoine
15:38:01 [jodi]
Jeff: Things need to be interoperable. It's not just about choosing patterns that we agree are the 'right patterns'.
15:38:04 [GordonD]
+1 Jeff's suggestion that there is something more fundamental to be uncovered.
15:38:31 [marcia]
+1 Jeff +GordonD
15:38:32 [TomB]
ack TomB
15:38:32 [Zakim]
TomB, you wanted to ask if we are talking about a need for patterns to follow?
15:38:45 [jodi]
Antoine: I wondered at first --Do you think it's that the use cases are insufficiently documented? -- in which case you could ask the use case owners. But it sounds like it's more about the patterns.
15:39:11 [antoine]
15:39:14 [jodi]
Jeff: I suspect that they haven't thought about the details of which vocabs, patterns they'd use. I'm not sure that brings us more info.
15:39:40 [jodi]
Tom: I think we're talking about patterns. I'd like to circle around to what the product is.
15:40:20 [jodi]
Tom: What will this cluster produce? It seems you have a really rich vein of issues and you're teasing them out well. I can imagine a 2-3 page section discussing the different design choices/patterns, citing the different use cases.
15:40:42 [jodi]
Tom: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can imagine that you're pretty far along towards writing up something like that.
15:41:09 [jodi]
Tom: Other products... Clusters are normalizing use cases. You're talking about interacting with the use case authors.
15:41:50 [jodi]
Tom: Do you see tweaking the use case descriptions and interacting with the use case authors as part of the outcome?
15:42:08 [jodi]
Jeff: What if we annotated the use cases to focus on certain points?
15:42:21 [antoine]
15:42:23 [jodi]
Jeff: 2-3 pages of design points and patterns, and then annotate to point out alternative patterns...
15:42:33 [marcia]
+1 Jeff
15:43:31 [jodi]
Tom: Yes. And 2-3 pages is not a magic number. But 10 is too many: We don't want to write a book in the next 7 months. Writing it down will help.
15:44:06 [jodi]
Tom: Want the design choices and patterns listed, so that the alternatives are clear.
15:44:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate antoine
15:44:45 [jodi]
Tom: Want to look beyond that: Where is the work? Which problems have the highest priority? Where do we recommend that people pay attention and focus resources moving forward in order to resolve the issues?
15:44:49 [TomB]
15:44:54 [TomB]
ack antoine
15:45:03 [jodi]
Antoine: I support that.
15:45:49 [jodi]
Tom: If you can rough out an analysis, even as an outline, and push it to the list, that would be great.
15:46:06 [jodi]
Topic: Use Case Methodology
15:47:26 [jodi]
TomB: Too many overlapping categories on the wikis. Clusters, Topics, Goals, Requirements, Vocabularies, Developments/Curation/Use, Summary. (May want to publish summaries with annotation in an appendix.)
15:48:24 [jodi]
Tom: How can we most efficiently visualize and make the connections between clusters, topics, goals, requirements? So that people can refer to these easily as writing? A report is the ultimate goal.
15:49:13 [antoine]
q+ on "Too many categories" or "An inescapable many categories"?
15:49:20 [jodi]
Tom: We had ?'s clustering using a database and tools, we have a table that tries to cross-reference use cases. We have various tools. Jodi has pointed out that the wiki allows us to leverage clusters. And to use something called transclusion, that allows bits of text to be dynamically included into the wiki pages that you see.
15:49:31 [antoine]
s/?/Paul Walk
15:49:39 [jodi]
15:50:19 [antoine]
Jodi: a bit of text at the top
15:50:30 [antoine]
... text at the bottom comes from other pages
15:50:30 [jodi]
To Transclude a page, invoke its title like this: <nowiki>{{:Use Cases}}</nowiki>. You can get more info from [ MediaWiki help].
15:50:30 [jodi]
If we want to include category contents, as well as descriptions, we [ may need a plugin].
15:50:30 [jodi]
15:50:31 [jodi]
==Category LLD Description==
15:50:31 [jodi]
15:50:33 [jodi]
==Topics we Discussed==
15:50:35 [jodi]
15:51:02 [jodi]
15:51:20 [antoine]
Jodi: citing the name of the page you want to include is enough to trigger text inclusion
15:51:46 [pmurray]
This is a nice way to automate the process of brining things together.
15:51:52 [antoine]
15:52:05 [antoine]
TomB: anybody has experience?
15:52:23 [pmurray]
This is the first I've seen of this feature of Mediawiki, but I like what it has done.
15:52:39 [Asaf]
I have some experience with the feature.
15:52:46 [pmurray]
I think some explanatory text at the top of the page on how to edit content on the page would be all that is needed.
15:52:53 [antoine]
TomB: it's interesting. I'm slightly worried about interaction between pages
15:52:59 [Asaf]
15:53:05 [digikim]
perhaps the transcluded parts could be bigger, "chapter size"...
15:53:12 [antoine]
... and people looking at the page being included in the transclusion page
15:53:36 [jodi]
In the edit screen, the pages used (transcluded in) are also linked underneath "Templates used on this page".
15:53:39 [antoine]
... we would need one or two owners for the transclusion pages to check that the linking is done correctly
15:53:41 [TomB]
15:53:49 [digikim]
from the report point of view, defining the TOC would be a good way to organize this...
15:53:58 [jodi]
Tom: I like it but it looks a little confusing to work with in practice.
15:54:11 [antoine]
TomB: what would be the alternative?
15:54:29 [jodi]
antoine, k, thanks! :)
15:54:36 [antoine]
... alternatice would be one big page
15:54:53 [antoine]
TomB: anyone having alternative opinion?
15:54:54 [digikim]
antoine: ...or a page divided in ca. 10 transcluded parts
15:54:59 [antoine]
+1 for transclution
15:54:59 [Asaf]
I say let's give it a shot and see how it goes.
15:55:05 [TomB]
can you still hear me?
15:55:11 [jodi]
15:55:12 [digikim]
15:55:16 [marcia]
15:55:16 [GordonD]
+ 1 for transclusion
15:55:19 [antoine]
15:55:26 [AnetteS]
+1 for transclusion
15:55:26 [antoine]
+1 (again)
15:55:32 [pmurray]
+1 to try it; it seems easy enough to try and we can back off to manual processes if it doesn't work
15:55:43 [digikim]
+1 for (big part) transclusion :)
15:55:43 [michaelp]
+1 for bigger but fewer chunks
15:56:09 [antoine]
TomB: Ed you are skeptical?
15:56:27 [antoine]
edsu: I'm not strongly for or against
15:56:33 [ksclarke]
ksclarke has joined #lld
15:56:45 [antoine]
... personally I'd personally prefer to focus on the report
15:57:02 [antoine]
... I'm not sure it will help write the report
15:57:32 [antoine]
TomB: I'm making the assumption that anything transcluded would be a subsection/paragraph in final report
15:57:49 [jeff_]
zakim, mute me
15:57:49 [Zakim]
jeff_ should now be muted
15:57:54 [antoine]
... I don't see us having us products that don't make it in the final report
15:58:12 [antoine]
... if a topic has topic page and is transcluded in a discussion page
15:58:36 [antoine]
... I'd like this page being transfered into a section with some paragraphs explaining what topics are
15:58:50 [antoine]
... we should have each topic having the attention of someone
15:59:14 [antoine]
... everything that has one wiki page transcluded should make it to the report as a paragraph/sub-section
15:59:22 [jodi]
it's hard to know what the report will be until we outline it
15:59:29 [edsu]
seems like most people were in favor TomB
15:59:39 [ksclarke1]
ksclarke1 has joined #lld
15:59:50 [antoine]
TomB: Seems we need to move and have an outline of the report
16:00:12 [antoine]
... Jodi, if I understand well it seems that the transclusion is useful for creating a structure
16:00:22 [antoine]
... allows to re-shuffle entire section easily
16:00:25 [antoine]
Jodi: yes
16:00:50 [antoine]
TomB: almost at the top of the hour. Our next task should be to move towards an outline of the report
16:00:58 [antoine]
... to help us focus our attention
16:01:26 [antoine]
... we should have a key person for each section
16:01:49 [marcia]
I like the way we had today, to focus on one cluster each time
16:02:03 [GordonD]
+1 marcia
16:02:04 [antoine]
16:02:04 [Zakim]
16:02:07 [Zakim]
16:02:08 [digikim]
16:02:10 [AnetteS]
16:02:10 [jeff_]
jeff_ has left #lld
16:02:11 [edsu]
adios :-)
16:02:12 [Zakim]
16:02:15 [Zakim]
16:02:15 [antoine]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
16:02:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate antoine
16:02:16 [Zakim]
16:02:17 [Zakim]
16:02:18 [Zakim]
16:02:21 [Zakim]
16:02:22 [Zakim]
16:02:28 [Zakim]
16:03:12 [digikim]
antoine: thanks for the email(s); we are very busy but try to help out with LLD, too -- too many projects going on and no "official" resources for LLD work :)
16:03:51 [antoine]
digikim: I understand!
16:04:21 [antoine]'s great that you are still around!
16:04:57 [digikim]
it's great to be involved, just would like to give a more substantial input :)
16:06:08 [Zakim]
16:06:55 [TomB]
zakim, list attendees
16:06:55 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been antoine, TomB, +1.614.764.aaaa, GordonD, jeff_, ww, +49.221.400.7.aabb, +1.330.655.aacc, AnetteS, marcia, michaelp, +1.404.892.aadd,
16:06:58 [Zakim]
... pmurray, AlexanderH, +1.856.528.aaee, Jodi, kim, Asaf, edsu
16:07:00 [TomB]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
16:07:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate TomB
16:07:06 [TomB]
zakim, bye
16:07:06 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were antoine, TomB, +1.614.764.aaaa, GordonD, jeff_, ww, +49.221.400.7.aabb, +1.330.655.aacc, AnetteS, marcia, michaelp, +1.404.892.aadd,
16:07:06 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #lld
16:07:09 [Zakim]
... pmurray, AlexanderH, +1.856.528.aaee, Jodi, kim, Asaf, edsu
16:07:13 [TomB]
rssagent, bye
16:07:24 [TomB]
rrsagent, bye
16:07:24 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in :
16:07:24 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: William: to summarize options for using CKAN to the list, before next concall [1]
16:07:24 [RRSAgent]
recorded in