IRC log of prov on 2011-09-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:39:16 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #prov

14:39:16 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/29-prov-irc

14:39:18 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

14:39:18 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #prov

14:39:20 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be

14:39:20 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

14:39:21 [trackbot]

Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference

14:39:21 [trackbot]

Date: 29 September 2011

14:39:26 [Luc]

Zakim, this will be PROV

14:39:26 [Zakim]

ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 21 minutes

14:39:39 [Luc]

Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.29

14:39:48 [Luc]

Chair: Luc Moreau

14:39:58 [Luc]

Scribe: Yogesh Simmhan

14:40:36 [Luc]

rrsagent, make logs public

14:41:48 [Vinh]

Vinh has joined #prov

14:44:32 [pgroth]

pgroth has joined #prov

14:56:06 [Yogesh]

Yogesh has joined #prov

14:56:12 [Zakim]

SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

14:56:17 [Zakim]

+Vinh

14:56:20 [ericstephan]

ericstephan has joined #prov

14:56:26 [Zakim]

+Yogesh

14:56:27 [Curt]

Curt has joined #prov

14:57:14 [dgarijo]

dgarijo has joined #prov

14:57:19 [Luc]

Hi Yogesh, everything setup for you

14:57:27 [Yogesh]

Thanks Luc

14:57:42 [Zakim]

+Curt_Tilmes

14:57:55 [Zakim]

+??P11

14:58:16 [Zakim]

+ +44.238.059.aaaa

14:58:28 [dgarijo]

Zakim, ??P11 is me

14:58:28 [Zakim]

+dgarijo; got it

14:58:30 [Luc]

zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me

14:58:30 [Zakim]

+Luc; got it

14:58:39 [dgarijo]

Hi everyone

14:58:58 [Zakim]

+ +1.509.967.aabb

15:00:01 [smiles]

smiles has joined #prov

15:00:19 [Zakim]

+??P8

15:01:09 [Zakim]

+??P4

15:01:48 [satya]

satya has joined #prov

15:02:06 [StephenCresswell]

StephenCresswell has joined #prov

15:02:07 [Zakim]

+ +1.315.330.aacc

15:02:24 [Paolo]

Paolo has joined #prov

15:02:35 [Yogesh]

Luc: admin issues, release of 1st public working draft, hearing from eric about connection task force report, Simon give primer, and satya formal doc

15:02:36 [tlebo]

tlebo has joined #prov

15:02:47 [Yogesh]

Luc: any other issues? No.

15:02:49 [Luc]

PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Sep 22 telecon

15:02:58 [Zakim]

+Satya_Sahoo

15:02:59 [Luc]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-09-22

15:03:04 [satya]

+1

15:03:07 [GK]

GK has joined #prov

15:03:09 [Yogesh]

+1

15:03:10 [ericstephan]

+1

15:03:11 [Curt]

+1

15:03:12 [dgarijo]

+q

15:03:14 [dgarijo]

-q

15:03:15 [tlebo]

+1

15:03:16 [dgarijo]

+1

15:03:23 [StephenCresswell]

+1

15:03:32 [khalidbelhajjame]

khalidbelhajjame has joined #prov

15:03:44 [Luc]

ACCEPTED: minutes of Sep 22 telecon

15:03:53 [Luc]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open

15:04:16 [Zakim]

+??P46

15:04:16 [Yogesh]

Luc: action assigned to satya on doing named graph e.g.

15:04:28 [GK]

zakin, ??P46 is me

15:04:35 [Yogesh]

satya: paolo closed it last week.

15:04:49 [pgroth]

i think that action was closed

15:04:53 [Luc]

TOPIC: First Public Working Drafts

15:05:22 [Yogesh]

luc: data model doc to be released this week as FPWD

15:05:28 [Luc]

q?

15:05:30 [satya]

q+

15:05:35 [Yogesh]

luc: feedback from participants and is it ok to release?

15:05:54 [Zakim]

+??P10

15:05:56 [Zakim]

+Sandro

15:05:59 [Yogesh]

satya: has been raising issues. Do we address issues and continue working on doc after its released?

15:06:08 [khalidbelhajjame]

zakim, ??P10 is me

15:06:10 [GK]

@Luc: I do *not* regard my comments today as blockers for release as FPWD

15:06:16 [Zakim]

+khalidbelhajjame; got it

15:06:30 [Yogesh]

luc: first draft that is publicly released. Keep working on doc. To decide if there is anything blocking release.

15:06:47 [jcheney]

jcheney has joined #prov

15:06:57 [Yogesh]

satya: is ok with releasing it.

15:07:21 [Yogesh]

luc: keep adding comments so readers know it is a work in progress.

15:07:23 [Luc]

q?

15:07:29 [Luc]

ack satya

15:07:29 [Zakim]

+??P15

15:07:36 [jcheney]

zakim, ??P15 is me

15:07:36 [Zakim]

+jcheney; got it

15:07:39 [smiles]

I take a similar position to Graham - none of my comments blockers

15:07:46 [Zakim]

+Yolanda

15:08:17 [Yogesh]

luc: need to vote formally on release. this is the first docs being released by group. Need to contact W3C director and point to the resolution.

15:08:25 [Luc]

proposed: release the data model document as a FPWD

15:08:40 [sandro]

+1 (W3C)

15:08:58 [ericstephan]

+1 (PNNL)

15:08:58 [satya]

+1 (IE)

15:08:59 [khalidbelhajjame]

+1 (University of Manchester)

15:08:59 [smiles]

+1 (IE)

15:09:00 [Yogesh]

+1 (IE)

15:09:02 [pgroth]

+1 (VUA)

15:09:02 [GK]

+1 (Oxford U)

15:09:03 [Curt]

+1 (NASA)

15:09:09 [jcheney]

+1 (U Edinburgh)

15:09:16 [Paolo]

Hi everybody I'm on IRC but not phone - call overlap

15:09:26 [Yogesh]

sandro: please add affiliation in parantheses after +1. Invited experts to say IE

15:09:28 [dgarijo]

+1

15:09:38 [sandro]

Yolanda: +1 (IE)

15:09:42 [dgarijo]

(UPM)

15:10:11 [dgarijo]

yea, sorry about that :(

15:10:23 [Luc]

ACCEPTED: release the data model document as a FPWD

15:10:41 [Zakim]

+??P25

15:10:49 [pgroth]

cool

15:10:56 [Yogesh]

sandro: need to send email to a list of people about this. will send link.

15:11:15 [GK]

q+, to say: need to use ReSpect features to generate the HTML

15:11:16 [Yogesh]

sandro: editors need to check all links are good, valid CSS/html, etc.

15:11:20 [Luc]

q?

15:11:53 [Yogesh]

GK: need to use ReSpect features to generate the HTML. If so, output should be compliant (but not broken links)

15:12:00 [Luc]

q?

15:12:27 [Yogesh]

luc: editors of other two docs, whats the timetable?

15:12:51 [Yogesh]

GK: Paul will make a call

15:12:56 [sandro]

Here are the full publication rules for a First Public Working Draft: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules?year=2011&uimode=filter&filter=Filter+pubrules&filterValues=form&docstatus=fpwd-wd-tr&patpol=w3c&rectrack=yes&normative=yes&prevrec=none#docreqs

15:13:02 [GK]

s/ReSpect/ReSpec/

15:13:11 [pgroth]

i think we need some more time before the paq is ready

15:13:20 [pgroth]

maybe 1 week or so

15:13:28 [Yogesh]

Luc: issue with entities that was postponed. has dustr settled?

15:13:56 [sandro]

Luc, the steps for publication approval are: http://services.w3.org/xslt?xmlfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/01-transitions.html&xslfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/transitions.xsl&docstatus=fpwd-wd-tr

15:14:10 [Luc]

Thanks Sandro

15:14:11 [Yogesh]

GK: has enough info to draft the changes to entities. Will be away for 2 weeks after this week. Did not expect to do substantial work on it after this point.

15:14:34 [Yogesh]

GK: the doc can go out without the extra drafting, but will defer to Paul's call

15:14:46 [Yogesh]

luc: will talk 1:1 with Paul to understand issue.

15:15:06 [pgroth]

thanks

15:15:37 [Yogesh]

satya: formal model substantial work done , thanks to stian, khalid, daniel.

15:15:51 [Yogesh]

satya: will have a call nect Monday, but will be able to release before that

15:16:02 [jorn]

jorn has joined #prov

15:16:10 [Yogesh]

satya: will send mail to luc, paul and sandro to see if its ready to release

15:16:16 [Yogesh]

luc: decision has to be made by group

15:16:34 [Yogesh]

luc: WG should have time to go through it before decision is made

15:16:45 [Luc]

q?

15:16:47 [Yogesh]

satya: wull send link to WG and we can vote on next week's call

15:16:48 [pgroth]

q+ to ask whether we should go for

15:17:00 [GK]

@pgroth - I wanted to draft a section discussing contexts and Entities, and the that provenance assertions *could* be applicable to multiple Entities. Setting this out would make it easier to address some of the issues about contexts and anchors.

15:17:12 [Luc]

ack pgroth

15:17:12 [Zakim]

pgroth, you wanted to ask whether we should go for

15:17:21 [Luc]

paul, what did you want say?

15:17:28 [pgroth]

I'm not on the phone, but just wanted to ask whether we should wait for the ontology before releasing the conceptual model

15:17:32 [Zakim]

+ +1.512.524.aadd

15:17:53 [khalidbelhajjame]

I don't think we should wait

15:17:57 [Luc]

q?

15:18:03 [smiles]

depends how long it takes to agree the formal model...

15:18:04 [dgarijo]

me neither. The ontology has to be still tested

15:18:18 [GK]

That's a good question: AFAICT, developers (@stain?) are working from the ontology doc.

15:18:26 [ericstephan]

don't wait

15:18:32 [Yogesh]

luc: doesnt see a sense that we should wait

15:18:44 [pgroth]

ok

15:18:50 [tlebo]

comments on the conceptual model from the public will facilitate the OWL development.

15:19:09 [pgroth]

seems like there is consensus to release on the irc

15:19:13 [Yogesh]

GK: unclear about this. Stian has been doing prototyping based on ontology, not conceptual. There may be complementary info. But should not unecessarily hold things up.

15:19:30 [Yogesh]

luc: stian was implementing in OWL to inform the OWL design

15:19:38 [Yogesh]

luc: stian, do you have comments?

15:19:56 [Yogesh]

who is here?

15:19:59 [Yogesh]

zakim, who is here?

15:19:59 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Vinh, Yogesh, Curt_Tilmes, dgarijo, Luc, +1.509.967.aabb, ??P8, ??P4, +1.315.330.aacc, Satya_Sahoo, ??P46, khalidbelhajjame, Sandro, jcheney, Yolanda, ??P25,

15:20:03 [Zakim]

... +1.512.524.aadd

15:20:04 [Zakim]

On IRC I see jorn, jcheney, khalidbelhajjame, GK, tlebo, Paolo, StephenCresswell, satya, smiles, dgarijo, Curt, ericstephan, Yogesh, pgroth, Vinh, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, trackbot,

15:20:06 [Zakim]

... stain, sandro

15:20:36 [Yogesh]

luc: will take a few days before it is released. there will be an announcement that other docs will follow. we can proceed wth conceptual model and OWL spec will be ready soon

15:20:42 [dgarijo]

@GK: @stain used the ontology to test it, yes. But he made also based on the definitions of the conceptual model, to help us improve it :)

15:20:44 [Luc]

Topic: Connection Task Force

15:21:04 [Luc]

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Connection_Task_Force_Informal_Report

15:21:21 [Yogesh]

ericstephan: 1st F2F meeting had preliminary thoughts.

15:21:52 [Yogesh]

ericstephan: several suggestions on other communities, standards bodies inside W3C and other special interest areas

15:22:31 [Yogesh]

...Agreed that will develop a report and provide connections.

15:22:32 [Yogesh]

...Link is available online that shows the degrees of connections.

15:22:38 [Luc]

q?

15:22:40 [Yogesh]

...Please thae a look and give feedback.

15:22:54 [Yogesh]

s/thae/take/

15:23:21 [Yogesh]

luc: Nice to see potential impact on other commnities. What was rationale?

15:23:56 [Yogesh]

ericstephan: "Connectivity Approaches to Community " summarizes ratonale. 1 star means we know them, but they dont know us.

15:24:20 [Yogesh]

...4 stars means we know a name/person who writes a section for us.

15:24:23 [Luc]

q?

15:24:23 [GK]

q+ to ask if you are looking for additional help to build more definite links with lower star ratings; more generally, what are the specific actions you asosciate with different ratings?

15:24:28 [Luc]

ack gk

15:24:28 [Zakim]

GK, you wanted to ask if you are looking for additional help to build more definite links with lower star ratings; more generally, what are the specific actions you asosciate with

15:24:31 [Zakim]

... different ratings?

15:25:05 [Yogesh]

GK: are you looking to strengthen the connections for low stars?

15:25:21 [smiles]

q+

15:25:57 [Zakim]

-??P25

15:26:11 [Yogesh]

ericstephan: stars are access to community. Completed the report after F2F but this is living doc that will add connections and increase stars.

15:26:28 [Zakim]

+??P25

15:26:32 [jorn]

zakim, ??p25 is me

15:26:32 [Zakim]

+jorn; got it

15:26:51 [Luc]

q?

15:26:55 [Yogesh]

Kai has been collaborating to get info

15:28:12 [Yogesh]

eGovenment group has an interest in provenance.

15:28:55 [Yogesh]

stephen: have been on their conference call. They are interested in recommending an approach.

15:29:56 [Luc]

ack smiles

15:30:05 [Zakim]

-Yogesh

15:30:14 [Zakim]

+Yogesh

15:31:50 [Luc]

q?

15:32:13 [Zakim]

+??P40

15:32:31 [Paolo]

zakim, ??P40 is me

15:32:31 [Zakim]

+Paolo; got it

15:32:39 [Yogesh]

Yogesh has joined #prov

15:32:58 [Zakim]

- +1.512.524.aadd

15:33:23 [Yogesh]

sorry, my IRC has been giving problems

15:33:54 [Luc]

q?

15:34:12 [Luc]

Topic: primer

15:34:32 [Yogesh]

Simon: put the skeleton together

15:34:37 [smiles]

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html

15:34:53 [Yogesh]

looking for comments. Yolanda will coedit the primer. Will be talking tomorrow.

15:35:11 [Yogesh]

...Yolanda suggested starting points for people from different perspectives.

15:35:36 [Yogesh]

...Others can volunteer next week to contribute to primer.

15:35:47 [Yogesh]

...Will set out well defined actvities for them.

15:36:05 [GK]

@smiles: might want to copy overview diagram from the model doc? I think it bears repeating :)

15:36:06 [Yogesh]

..Expect a primer by end of Oct as a draft for WG to consider.

15:36:12 [Luc]

q?

15:36:16 [Yogesh]

Luc: Will have primer agenda for next week.

15:36:39 [Yogesh]

Simaon: May not be able to make it next week. Will check if Yolanda can make it. Will send email.

15:36:39 [Luc]

q?

15:36:50 [Yogesh]

Yolanda: will be able to join next week.

15:36:56 [Luc]

topic: formal model document

15:37:04 [satya]

I guess the current structure of the Primer is initial version - so will comment later

15:37:59 [Yogesh]

satya: had feedback. Luc raised an issue. satya has 2 sections to look into: extension section and formal semantics

15:38:23 [Yogesh]

...will send email on Monday for WG to review

15:38:26 [Luc]

q?

15:39:36 [Yogesh]

satya: Will try to release a first version that may change based on feedback

15:40:13 [dgarijo]

+q

15:40:30 [Yogesh]

...Discusssions on provenance container and entity and subclasses has led to changes. But cant provide a timeline for fixed ontology till a formal conceptual model is in place.

15:40:33 [Luc]

ack d

15:40:34 [GK]

q+ to ask if there's a criterion for deciding what subclasses to define

15:40:56 [Yogesh]

Daniel: Converging to stablility. Testing usecases.

15:41:00 [Luc]

ack gk

15:41:00 [Zakim]

GK, you wanted to ask if there's a criterion for deciding what subclasses to define

15:41:55 [Zakim]

-jorn

15:42:05 [Zakim]

+??P25

15:42:21 [Luc]

yogesh, are you still here?

15:42:32 [Yogesh]

satya: agrees with GK. If we do not assert subclass of relationship, then we have limit entailments. Tradeoff.

15:42:45 [Luc]

q?

15:42:46 [Yogesh]

...We can keep all of them for now without asserting subclass of relationship.

15:43:40 [Yogesh]

satya: Have been discussing the use of roles. Associating qualifiers wth relationships, or with Process executions was discussed.

15:44:32 [Yogesh]

...For now, agreed to use roles until there are clear cases highlighting its shortcomings.

15:44:54 [Yogesh]

...Similarly, time of process start and stop are assertions or qualifiers on the process entities, not relationships.

15:45:29 [Yogesh]

luc: Someone mentioned usecases being built. Is there a catalog? All cant go into fomal doc but may be useful to test interop.

15:45:47 [Yogesh]

sayta: Using crime scene scenario and the one stain has done.

15:45:51 [tlebo]

+q

15:46:18 [Yogesh]

Luc: Is there something even smaller? Entity between two process executions with roles

15:46:35 [Luc]

q?

15:46:36 [tlebo]

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/ontology/components is collecting the individual OWL axioms and collects examples

15:46:40 [Luc]

ack tl

15:46:43 [khalidbelhajjame]

Stian has already encode the workflow provenance example.

15:46:43 [Yogesh]

satya: Corolla car example would be useful

15:46:48 [khalidbelhajjame]

It is in the mercurial

15:47:02 [Luc]

q?

15:47:33 [Yogesh]

Luc: can you put this link in the top level page?

15:47:37 [GK]

I can see the readme

15:47:40 [Luc]

q?

15:48:12 [Yogesh]

Luc: postponed discussions on accounts?

15:48:36 [Yogesh]

satya: Still some discussion between account, provenance collections and containers.

15:48:50 [Yogesh]

...Can definitely model container right now. Are accounts distinct?

15:48:56 [Yogesh]

Luc: Yes, in the conceptual model.

15:49:28 [Paolo]

Accounts can be nested, for example

15:49:38 [dgarijo]

I saw accounts as something more specific than a prov container.

15:49:43 [Yogesh]

satya: can we rename container as something else?

15:50:03 [dgarijo]

so a container could, for instance, contain several accounts

15:50:21 [Yogesh]

Luc: named graphs are scoping construct for triples with metadata associated. But construct is not there is OWL.

15:50:26 [tlebo]

named graphs can be described in OWL using http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-service-description#

15:50:35 [khalidbelhajjame]

I would suggest to keep them separate, while ProvenanceContainer is a (Random) bundle of assertions, accounts should be used when there is scoping. So, although structurally they are similar, semantically they are not.

15:50:43 [Yogesh]

...How can we express accounts without named graphs in OWL?

15:50:52 [Yogesh]

satya: we'll need a class for that in OWL.

15:50:54 [dgarijo]

@khalid: +1

15:51:11 [Yogesh]

...Containers are similar to scoping in named graphs.

15:51:34 [dgarijo]

@khalid: but they are not disjoint. A container can be an account.

15:51:40 [GK]

I think it will depend very much on how the RDF group introduce named graphs...

15:51:42 [Yogesh]

...Containers bundle assertions and we can associate metadata with the cotainers.

15:51:48 [khalidbelhajjame]

@daniel, yes

15:51:56 [tlebo]

q+

15:52:10 [Luc]

q?

15:52:13 [Yogesh]

Luc: How will container class be instantiated into named graphs in RDF?

15:52:15 [tlebo]

http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-service-description describes named graphs

15:52:18 [GK]

... is as literals, then they can appear ibn OWL datatype properties, but the embedded RDF semantics may be opaque

15:52:38 [tlebo]

naming named graphs within a SPARQL endpoint (an approach): https://github.com/timrdf/csv2rdf4lod-automation/wiki/Naming-sparql-service-description%27s-sd%3ANamedGraph

15:52:46 [dgarijo]

we can allways avoid usinog named graphs in owl: create class account and a relationship of containment to each of the other concepts.

15:53:00 [GK]

... if datasets (ala SPARQL) then I'm not sure how that would carry over.

15:53:29 [dgarijo]

+q

15:53:32 [Luc]

q?

15:53:33 [Yogesh]

satya: no construct for provenance assertion in model. Should we model it in ontology?

15:53:40 [Luc]

ack tl

15:54:01 [khalidbelhajjame]

Ok, I see your point Satya. In that case, we can just explain that in the HTML document without adding explicit classes in the OWL ontology

15:54:03 [GK]

Yes: "Provenance assertion" is an ASN construct; representation in RDF is just an RDF assertion, I think.

15:54:10 [Yogesh]

tlebo: Variety of work is in draft, like sparql endpoint

15:54:21 [Yogesh]

...We can extend this vocabulary.

15:54:46 [Yogesh]

Luc: will you have a proposal on accounts and containers by the time the doc is released as FPWD?

15:54:54 [satya]

@Khalid, GK: +1

15:54:55 [Luc]

q?

15:55:01 [Yogesh]

tleb: Will have a first draft on it.

15:55:02 [Luc]

ack dg

15:55:22 [tlebo]

daniel: make prov:Account (don't use named graphs)

15:55:46 [Luc]

q?

15:55:57 [Yogesh]

Daniel: Named graphs are not yet standarized. Not helpful to reply on it.

15:56:06 [tlebo]

sd:NamedGraph will need to be a subclass prov:Account - since accounts can be sitting elsewhere.

15:56:10 [tlebo]

q+

15:56:52 [GK]

Ah... with named graphs, can use owl:import?

15:56:55 [satya]

q+

15:57:00 [tlebo]

q-

15:57:01 [Luc]

ack tl

15:57:21 [Yogesh]

satya: defers to ntology telecon, but what does sitting "elsewhere" mean?

15:57:33 [Zakim]

-??P25

15:57:50 [Luc]

q?

15:57:55 [Luc]

ack saty

15:57:58 [tlebo]

satya: can you capture your question?

15:58:57 [Yogesh]

Luc: Will be good to see a proposal for named graphs and go to RDF group and ask if they can support this

15:59:08 [Luc]

q?

15:59:28 [Zakim]

-Satya_Sahoo

15:59:28 [Yogesh]

list attendees

15:59:29 [Zakim]

- +1.315.330.aacc

15:59:29 [Zakim]

-Yolanda

15:59:30 [Zakim]

-??P46

15:59:31 [Zakim]

-dgarijo

15:59:32 [Zakim]

-Paolo

15:59:32 [Zakim]

- +1.509.967.aabb

15:59:33 [Zakim]

-jcheney

15:59:40 [satya]

Tm, What is the construct that we can use for set of provenance assertions other than named graphs

15:59:42 [Luc]

yogesh, i ll do the necessary incantations from here

15:59:47 [Yogesh]

thanks luc

15:59:49 [satya]

s/Tm/tim

15:59:51 [Zakim]

-Vinh

15:59:53 [Zakim]

-Curt_Tilmes

15:59:55 [Zakim]

-Sandro

15:59:56 [Zakim]

-khalidbelhajjame

15:59:59 [Zakim]

-??P8

16:00:00 [Zakim]

-Luc

16:00:01 [Luc]

rrsagent, set log public

16:00:07 [Luc]

thanks for scribing, yogesh

16:00:14 [Luc]

rrsagent, draft minutes

16:00:14 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/29-prov-minutes.html Luc

16:00:14 [Yogesh]

zakim, part

16:00:17 [Yogesh]

Yogesh has left #prov

16:00:19 [Zakim]

-??P4

16:00:25 [Zakim]

leaving. As of this point the attendees were Vinh, Yogesh, Curt_Tilmes, dgarijo, Luc, +1.509.967.aabb, +1.315.330.aacc, Satya_Sahoo, Sandro, khalidbelhajjame, jcheney, Yolanda,

16:00:28 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #prov

16:00:30 [Zakim]

... +1.512.524.aadd, jorn, Paolo

16:00:30 [Luc]

trackbot, end telcon

16:00:46 [GK]

GK has left #prov

16:03:33 [stain]

uhm.. I'm in a wrong time zone :-((

16:03:42 [sandro]

d'oh!

16:03:44 [stain]

that's what insurance company does to your head

16:03:53 [stain]

I've spent the morning on the phone with them..

16:04:10 [stain]

ok, I hope everyting was decided now then :)

16:19:41 [trackbot]

trackbot has joined #prov

17:01:33 [khalidbelhajjame]

khalidbelhajjame has joined #prov

18:01:32 [MacTed]

MacTed has joined #prov