15:51:29 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/11/28-rdf-wg-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/11/28-rdf-wg-irc ←
15:51:31 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
15:51:33 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 73394 ←
15:51:34 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
15:51:34 <trackbot> Date: 28 November 2012
15:51:35 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes ←
15:59:01 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started ←
15:59:22 <Zakim> +MHausenblas
Zakim IRC Bot: +MHausenblas ←
15:59:24 <cygri> zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me ←
15:59:25 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri; got it ←
15:59:31 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
15:59:40 <pchampin> zakim, ??P121is me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, ??P121is me ←
15:59:40 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P121is me', pchampin
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '??P121is me', pchampin ←
15:59:43 <pchampin> zakim, ??P121 is me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, ??P121 is me ←
15:59:43 <Zakim> sorry, pchampin, I do not recognize a party named '??P121'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, pchampin, I do not recognize a party named '??P121' ←
15:59:51 <pchampin> zakim, ??P12 is me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, ??P12 is me ←
15:59:51 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pchampin; got it ←
16:00:28 <Zakim> +davidwood
Zakim IRC Bot: +davidwood ←
16:00:29 <cygri> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.11.28
16:00:37 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
16:00:48 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
16:00:48 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
16:00:49 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
16:00:49 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
16:00:54 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
16:00:56 <davidwood1> Chair: David Wood
16:00:58 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P18
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, I am ??P18 ←
16:00:58 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +gkellogg; got it ←
16:00:59 <Zakim> + +1.408.992.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.408.992.aaaa ←
16:01:02 <davidwood1> Zakim, who is here?
David Wood: Zakim, who is here? ←
16:01:02 <Zakim> On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa ←
16:01:04 <Zakim> On IRC I see AZ, Arnaud, pchampin, cygri, tbaker, Zakim, RRSAgent, gkellogg, MacTed, gavinc, davidwood1, yvesr, manu, manu1, mischat, trackbot, sandro, ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see AZ, Arnaud, pchampin, cygri, tbaker, Zakim, RRSAgent, gkellogg, MacTed, gavinc, davidwood1, yvesr, manu, manu1, mischat, trackbot, sandro, ericP ←
16:01:11 <MacTed> MacTed has changed the topic to: RDF-WG -- http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/ -- current agenda http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.11.28
Ted Thibodeau: MacTed has changed the topic to: RDF-WG -- http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/ -- current agenda http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.11.28 ←
16:01:14 <Zakim> +Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud ←
16:01:32 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
16:01:57 <Zakim> +GavinC
Zakim IRC Bot: +GavinC ←
16:02:15 <Zakim> +AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: +AZ ←
16:02:34 <gkellogg> scribenick: gkellogg
(Scribe set to Gregg Kellogg)
16:03:00 <davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 21 Nov telecon:
David Wood: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 21 Nov telecon: ←
16:03:00 <davidwood>
16:03:00 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-11-21
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-11-21 ←
16:03:06 <Zakim> +??P26
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P26 ←
16:03:15 <Zakim> +Tom_Baker (was ??P26)
Zakim IRC Bot: +Tom_Baker (was ??P26) ←
16:03:26 <davidwood> RESOLVED to accept the minutes of the 21 Nov telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-11-21
David Wood: RESOLVED to accept the minutes of the 21 Nov telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-11-21 ←
16:03:45 <Arnaud> zakim, mute me
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, mute me ←
16:03:45 <Zakim> Arnaud should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Arnaud should now be muted ←
16:03:53 <MacTed> Zakim, who's noisy?
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's noisy? ←
16:04:04 <Zakim> MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: davidwood (20%), Tom_Baker (28%)
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: davidwood (20%), Tom_Baker (28%) ←
16:04:08 <tbaker> zakim, please mute me
Thomas Baker: zakim, please mute me ←
16:04:09 <Zakim> sorry, tbaker, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, tbaker, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
16:04:12 <MacTed> Zakim, mute Tom_Baker
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute Tom_Baker ←
16:04:12 <Zakim> Tom_Baker should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Tom_Baker should now be muted ←
16:04:24 <MacTed> already fixed...
Ted Thibodeau: already fixed... ←
16:04:29 <tbaker> zakim, I am tbaker
Thomas Baker: zakim, I am tbaker ←
16:04:29 <Zakim> sorry, tbaker, I do not see a party named 'tbaker'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, tbaker, I do not see a party named 'tbaker' ←
16:04:34 <davidwood> Review of action items
David Wood: Review of action items ←
16:04:34 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview ←
16:04:34 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open ←
16:04:39 <MacTed> Zakim, Tom_Baker is tbaker
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, Tom_Baker is tbaker ←
16:04:39 <Zakim> +tbaker; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +tbaker; got it ←
16:04:52 <gkellogg> topic: Action Items
16:05:10 <davidwood> CLOSE ACTION-208
David Wood: CLOSE ACTION-208 ←
16:05:11 <trackbot> ACTION-208 Provide draft of Concepts for WG review closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-208 Provide draft of Concepts for WG review closed ←
16:05:24 <AZ> q+
Antoine Zimmermann: q+ ←
16:05:30 <Zakim> + +1.707.874.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.707.874.aabb ←
16:05:39 <cgreer> zakim, aabb is me
Charles Greer: zakim, aabb is me ←
16:05:39 <Zakim> +cgreer; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cgreer; got it ←
16:05:41 <gkellogg> CLOSE ACTION-213
CLOSE ACTION-213 ←
16:05:41 <trackbot> ACTION-213 Contact dajobe about Turtle and test suites closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-213 Contact dajobe about Turtle and test suites closed ←
16:05:41 <davidwood> CLOSE ACTION-213
David Wood: CLOSE ACTION-213 ←
16:05:41 <trackbot> ACTION-213 Contact dajobe about Turtle and test suites closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-213 Contact dajobe about Turtle and test suites closed ←
16:06:05 <davidwood> ack AZ
David Wood: ack AZ ←
16:06:07 <gkellogg> I contacted dajobe about Turtle, but haven't heard back yet.
I contacted dajobe about Turtle, but haven't heard back yet. ←
16:06:30 <gkellogg> az: I performed my review of RDF Concepts.
Antoine Zimmermann: I performed my review of RDF Concepts. ←
16:06:44 <davidwood> CLOSE ACTION-209
David Wood: CLOSE ACTION-209 ←
16:06:44 <trackbot> ACTION-209 Write a WG Note on RDF dataset semantics closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-209 Write a WG Note on RDF dataset semantics closed ←
16:06:57 <AZ> it's 211
Antoine Zimmermann: it's 211 ←
16:07:01 <gavinc> OPEN ACTION-209
Gavin Carothers: OPEN ACTION-209 ←
16:07:12 <davidwood> CLOSE ACTION-211
David Wood: CLOSE ACTION-211 ←
16:07:12 <trackbot> ACTION-211 Review RDF-Concepts ED http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-211 Review RDF-Concepts ED http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html closed ←
16:07:15 <gkellogg> CLOSE ACTION-211
CLOSE ACTION-211 ←
16:07:15 <trackbot> ACTION-211 Review RDF-Concepts ED http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-211 Review RDF-Concepts ED http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html closed ←
16:07:42 <gkellogg> topic: Turtle status
16:07:56 <gkellogg> gavinc: haven't heard back from people we asked from.
Gavin Carothers: haven't heard back from people we asked from. ←
16:08:10 <Zakim> +PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH ←
16:08:12 <gkellogg> sandro: how long have we given internationalization working group?
Sandro Hawke: how long have we given internationalization working group? ←
16:08:33 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
16:08:43 <gkellogg> gavinc: timbl's had a couple of months, everyone else about a month.
Gavin Carothers: timbl's had a couple of months, everyone else about a month. ←
16:08:54 <Guus> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Guus Schreiber: zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
16:08:54 <Zakim> +Guus; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Guus; got it ←
16:09:04 <gkellogg> david: we should send a friendly email suggesting that the come back in a week or two.
David Wood: we should send a friendly email suggesting that the come back in a week or two. ←
16:09:13 <gkellogg> … gavinc, please re-ping.
… gavinc, please re-ping. ←
16:09:40 <gkellogg> sandro: we should ping all outstanding commenters. (TimBL)
Sandro Hawke: we should ping all outstanding commenters. (TimBL) ←
16:10:11 <gkellogg> gavinc: still need to figure out escaping section for Turtle in HTML.
Gavin Carothers: still need to figure out escaping section for Turtle in HTML. ←
16:10:15 <sandro> (with a deadline of one week)
Sandro Hawke: (with a deadline of one week) ←
16:10:34 <gkellogg> chair: guus
16:10:38 <davidwood> Chair: Guus Schreiber
16:10:39 <cygri> zakim, who is on the phone?
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
16:10:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa, Arnaud (muted), Sandro, GavinC, AZ, tbaker (muted), cgreer, PatH, Guus
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa, Arnaud (muted), Sandro, GavinC, AZ, tbaker (muted), cgreer, PatH, Guus ←
16:10:54 <gkellogg> guus: richard has a new proposal for bnode definition.
Guus Schreiber: richard has a new proposal for bnode definition. ←
16:11:15 <gkellogg> … message in the agenda, and there were followups
… message in the agenda, and there were followups ←
16:11:19 <AZ> q+
Antoine Zimmermann: q+ ←
16:11:25 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/User:Rcygania2/B-Scopes
Richard Cyganiak: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/User:Rcygania2/B-Scopes ←
16:11:33 <gkellogg> cygri: there have been 2 1/2 different proposals so far.
Richard Cyganiak: there have been 2 1/2 different proposals so far. ←
16:11:48 <gkellogg> … scope as bijection, classic, and previous-draft (outdated)
… scope as bijection, classic, and previous-draft (outdated) ←
16:12:29 <gkellogg> … each have proponents and detractors
… each have proponents and detractors ←
16:12:36 <Zakim> +??P33
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P33 ←
16:12:50 <Zakim> + +1.650.265.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.650.265.aacc ←
16:13:04 <zwu2> zakim, +1.650.265.aacc is me
Zhe Wu: zakim, +1.650.265.aacc is me ←
16:13:04 <Zakim> +zwu2; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +zwu2; got it ←
16:13:09 <gkellogg> … the classic was my first attempt at phrasing things for the spec, but I changed a couple of ideas from the original version.
… the classic was my first attempt at phrasing things for the spec, but I changed a couple of ideas from the original version. ←
16:13:10 <zwu2> zakim, mute me
16:13:10 <Zakim> zwu2 should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: zwu2 should now be muted ←
16:13:33 <gkellogg> … Based an AZ's (negative) feedback, I worked on the bijection version, but that has also received negative comments.
… Based an AZ's (negative) feedback, I worked on the bijection version, but that has also received negative comments. ←
16:13:53 <gkellogg> … The ball is in my (cygri's) court to resolve now.
… The ball is in my (cygri's) court to resolve now. ←
16:14:30 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
16:14:45 <Guus> ack AZ
Guus Schreiber: ack AZ ←
16:14:50 <PatH> +q
Patrick Hayes: +q ←
16:14:52 <gkellogg> AZ: I think the ball is actually on my side; I haven't yet responded to your last email.
Antoine Zimmermann: I think the ball is actually on my side; I haven't yet responded to your last email. ←
16:14:54 <Zakim> +FabGandon
Zakim IRC Bot: +FabGandon ←
16:15:06 <gkellogg> … your last email clarified a lot of things, and is going in the right direction.
… your last email clarified a lot of things, and is going in the right direction. ←
16:15:23 <Guus> ack PatH
Guus Schreiber: ack PatH ←
16:16:04 <gkellogg> PatH: speaking as semantics editor, the original version, has all the advantages.
Patrick Hayes: speaking as semantics editor, the original version, has all the advantages. ←
16:16:20 <gkellogg> … it's simplest and mathematically cleanest, and easiest to attach semantics to.
… it's simplest and mathematically cleanest, and easiest to attach semantics to. ←
16:16:32 <AZ> q+
Antoine Zimmermann: q+ ←
16:16:38 <gkellogg> … I think it's way superior to bijections and other recent attempts.
… I think it's way superior to bijections and other recent attempts. ←
16:17:21 <gkellogg> cygri: the first one was written to describe a possible direction, not as spec text.
Richard Cyganiak: the first one was written to describe a possible direction, not as spec text. ←
16:17:48 <gkellogg> … it would need to be written a little bit differently, to define terms and distribute among sub-sections.
… it would need to be written a little bit differently, to define terms and distribute among sub-sections. ←
16:18:16 <gkellogg> … as far as the technical design works well.
… as far as the technical design works well. ←
16:18:45 <gkellogg> … I changed it based on feedback from AZ and AndyS
… I changed it based on feedback from AZ and AndyS ←
16:19:04 <gkellogg> david: to be clear, the one marked as outdated.
Guus Schreiber: to be clear, the one marked as outdated. ←
16:19:12 <gkellogg> … The semantics need to be aligned.
… The semantics need to be aligned. ←
16:19:24 <davidwood> s/david/guus/
16:19:30 <Guus> zakim, who is here?
Guus Schreiber: zakim, who is here? ←
16:19:30 <Zakim> On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa, Arnaud (muted), Sandro, GavinC, AZ, tbaker (muted), cgreer, PatH, Guus, markus, zwu2
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa, Arnaud (muted), Sandro, GavinC, AZ, tbaker (muted), cgreer, PatH, Guus, markus, zwu2 ←
16:19:30 <gkellogg> AZ: I wanted to answer PatH's comments.
Antoine Zimmermann: I wanted to answer PatH's comments. ←
16:19:34 <Zakim> ... (muted), FabGandon
Zakim IRC Bot: ... (muted), FabGandon ←
16:19:34 <Zakim> On IRC I see FabGandon, zwu2, markus, Guus, pfps, PatH, AlexHall, cgreer, AZ, Arnaud, pchampin, cygri, tbaker, Zakim, RRSAgent, gkellogg, MacTed, gavinc, davidwood, yvesr, manu,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see FabGandon, zwu2, markus, Guus, pfps, PatH, AlexHall, cgreer, AZ, Arnaud, pchampin, cygri, tbaker, Zakim, RRSAgent, gkellogg, MacTed, gavinc, davidwood, yvesr, manu, ←
16:19:34 <Zakim> ... manu1, mischat, trackbot, sandro, ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: ... manu1, mischat, trackbot, sandro, ericP ←
16:19:48 <gkellogg> … I think scopes shouldn't be part of the abstract syntax.
… I think scopes shouldn't be part of the abstract syntax. ←
16:20:02 <gkellogg> … The scope should be defined as the context in which the variable appears.
… The scope should be defined as the context in which the variable appears. ←
16:20:21 <gkellogg> … I don't want to see something such as <ID,Scope>, as the scope depends on the context.
… I don't want to see something such as <ID,Scope>, as the scope depends on the context. ←
16:20:30 <gkellogg> PatH: the scope is the context.
Patrick Hayes: the scope is the context. ←
16:20:41 <gkellogg> AZ: the same BNode could exist in separate contexts
Antoine Zimmermann: the same BNode could exist in separate contexts ←
16:20:48 <gkellogg> PatH: no, that's what causes the problems.
Patrick Hayes: no, that's what causes the problems. ←
16:21:03 <gkellogg> guus: as a non-expert, scope as context would be my understanding too.
Guus Schreiber: as a non-expert, scope as context would be my understanding too. ←
16:21:20 <gkellogg> AZ: I also have to answer PatH's email.
Antoine Zimmermann: I also have to answer PatH's email. ←
16:21:21 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
16:21:31 <gkellogg> ack AZ
ack AZ ←
16:21:46 <gkellogg> guus: i'd like to get text in revised WD.
Guus Schreiber: i'd like to get text in revised WD. ←
16:21:59 <gkellogg> … Do we need this text for a revised WD? I think yes.
… Do we need this text for a revised WD? I think yes. ←
16:22:12 <gkellogg> … Can we go with the proposal?
… Can we go with the proposal? ←
16:22:34 <gkellogg> cygri: I was working under the understanding that 107 doesn't need to be resolved to publish.
Richard Cyganiak: I was working under the understanding that 107 doesn't need to be resolved to publish. ←
16:22:59 <gkellogg> … Since there will still be an LC draft, I think it would be fine to publish what we have now with minor editorial changes
… Since there will still be an LC draft, I think it would be fine to publish what we have now with minor editorial changes ←
16:23:11 <gkellogg> … We can then revisit ISSUE-107 until afterwards.
… We can then revisit ISSUE-107 until afterwards. ←
16:23:36 <AZ> +1 for a new public WD quickly, and solve remaining issues for a Last Call version
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 for a new public WD quickly, and solve remaining issues for a Last Call version ←
16:23:58 <gkellogg> … Regarding ISSUE-107, the crucial thing is that a BNode can only appear in some local scope, and not anywhere else.
… Regarding ISSUE-107, the crucial thing is that a BNode can only appear in some local scope, and not anywhere else. ←
16:24:00 <davidwood> +1 to Richard - publish a WD after AZ's editorial comments are in and address ISSUE-107 in the LC.
David Wood: +1 to Richard - publish a WD after AZ's editorial comments are in and address ISSUE-107 in the LC. ←
16:24:27 <gkellogg> … If we can make this work, it would resolve the odd situation which would imply that the same BNode can appear in multiple places.
… If we can make this work, it would resolve the odd situation which would imply that the same BNode can appear in multiple places. ←
16:24:44 <PatH> In order to write the semantics of bnodes rationally, I need the notion of the scope/context that the bnodes in a given graph are all in. I would prefer to use the phrasing that "the graph is in the scope".
Patrick Hayes: In order to write the semantics of bnodes rationally, I need the notion of the scope/context that the bnodes in a given graph are all in. I would prefer to use the phrasing that "the graph is in the scope". ←
16:24:56 <gkellogg> … The semantics suggests that if you get the graph from someplace else, you may get the same BNode which would overlap.
… The semantics suggests that if you get the graph from someplace else, you may get the same BNode which would overlap. ←
16:25:12 <PatH> +1 to wha richard is saying.
Patrick Hayes: +1 to wha richard is saying. ←
16:25:17 <davidwood> +1 to Richard (again). Let's get rid of blank nodes that transit scopes.
David Wood: +1 to Richard (again). Let's get rid of blank nodes that transit scopes. ←
16:25:20 <gkellogg> … This is why we need to clarify in the abstract syntax that BNodes exist only in a given scope.
… This is why we need to clarify in the abstract syntax that BNodes exist only in a given scope. ←
16:25:30 <gkellogg> … This addresses graph union use cases.
… This addresses graph union use cases. ←
16:25:44 <gkellogg> … This is the main way we can improve on the current situation.
… This is the main way we can improve on the current situation. ←
16:25:57 <davidwood> q?
David Wood: q? ←
16:26:00 <AZ> to PatH, "graph in a scope" is fine, not bnode in a scope
Antoine Zimmermann: to PatH, "graph in a scope" is fine, not bnode in a scope ←
16:26:10 <davidwood> ack cygri
David Wood: ack cygri ←
16:26:24 <gkellogg> guus: Let's move to publication of WD.
Guus Schreiber: Let's move to publication of WD. ←
16:26:42 <gkellogg> … Let's leave inclusion of ISSUE-107 to editor's discretion.
… Let's leave inclusion of ISSUE-107 to editor's discretion. ←
16:27:02 <gkellogg> cygri: fine, I'd like to get the WD out ASAP, and it's not on the critical path.
Richard Cyganiak: fine, I'd like to get the WD out ASAP, and it's not on the critical path. ←
16:27:21 <PatH> Az, you have not given any reason for your objection, so I can't take it seriously. The nodes are the things that the scopes are needed for.
Patrick Hayes: Az, you have not given any reason for your objection, so I can't take it seriously. The nodes are the things that the scopes are needed for. ←
16:27:48 <gkellogg> pfps: my review in progress.
Peter Patel-Schneider: my review in progress. ←
16:28:10 <gkellogg> … I don't expect anything too big.
… I don't expect anything too big. ←
16:28:19 <gkellogg> … There are some required wording changes.
… There are some required wording changes. ←
16:29:12 <cygri> status of Concepts: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Nov/0317.html
Richard Cyganiak: status of Concepts: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Nov/0317.html ←
16:29:36 <gkellogg> cygri: the link is for all open issues that can wait until after LC.
Richard Cyganiak: the link is for all open issues that can wait until before LC. ←
16:29:48 <gkellogg> s/after/before/
16:30:21 <gkellogg> guus: I'd like to take a provisional decision to publish depending on pfps' review.
Guus Schreiber: I'd like to take a provisional decision to publish depending on pfps' review. ←
16:30:41 <gkellogg> cygri: i'll address AZ and pfps' comments before publishing.
Richard Cyganiak: i'll address AZ and pfps' comments before publishing. ←
16:30:59 <AZ> I see no reason, from my side, that there would be any troublesome changes
Antoine Zimmermann: I see no reason, from my side, that there would be any troublesome changes ←
16:32:11 <gkellogg> PROPOSAL: publish revised WD of RDF Concepts
PROPOSED: publish revised WD of RDF Concepts ←
16:32:27 <gkellogg> … under the condition that editors reach agreement with reviewers.
… under the condition that editors reach agreement with reviewers. ←
16:32:34 <pfps> +1
16:32:35 <gkellogg> +1
+1 ←
16:32:37 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
16:32:38 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
16:32:39 <pchampin> +1
16:32:40 <FabGandon> +1
Fabien Gandon: +1 ←
16:32:40 <zwu2> +1
16:32:41 <markus> +1
Markus Lanthaler: +1 ←
16:32:44 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
16:32:47 <PatH> +1
Patrick Hayes: +1 ←
16:32:49 <AZ> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
16:33:02 <gkellogg> RESOLVED: publish revised WD of RDF Concepts under the condition that editors reach agreement with reviewers
RESOLVED: publish revised WD of RDF Concepts under the condition that editors reach agreement with reviewers ←
16:33:13 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
16:33:21 <gkellogg> guus: thanks to reviewers and editors.
Guus Schreiber: thanks to reviewers and editors. ←
16:33:33 <gkellogg> topic: JSON-LD
16:34:38 <davidwood> Zakim, who is on the phone?
David Wood: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
16:34:38 <Zakim> On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa, Arnaud (muted), Sandro, GavinC, AZ, tbaker (muted), cgreer, PatH, Guus, markus, zwu2
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see cygri, pchampin, davidwood, MacTed (muted), gkellogg, +1.408.992.aaaa, Arnaud (muted), Sandro, GavinC, AZ, tbaker (muted), cgreer, PatH, Guus, markus, zwu2 ←
16:34:41 <Zakim> ... (muted), FabGandon
Zakim IRC Bot: ... (muted), FabGandon ←
16:34:47 <cygri> scribe: cygri
(Scribe set to Richard Cyganiak)
16:35:05 <cygri> gkellogg: we're getting through the issue list
Gregg Kellogg: we're getting through the issue list ←
16:35:11 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
16:35:21 <cygri> ... one major thing we're working for is richard's contribution
... one major thing we're working for is richard's contribution ←
16:35:35 <cygri> ... another issue: graphs vs datasets
... another issue: graphs vs datasets ←
16:35:59 <cygri> ... can you content-negotiate between JSON-LD and turtue, and how does the presence of named graphs affect it?
... can you content-negotiate between JSON-LD and turtue, and how does the presence of named graphs affect it? ←
16:36:05 <cygri> ... this seems related to ISSUE-105
... this seems related to ISSUE-105 ←
16:36:29 <cygri> ... what an agent should do if treating the data source as a graph, it should ignore named graphs
... what an agent should do if treating the data source as a graph, it should ignore named graphs ←
16:36:37 <cygri> ... for example in SPARQL FROM
... for example in SPARQL FROM ←
16:36:55 <cygri> ... provenance is an important use case
... provenance is an important use case ←
16:37:47 <PatH> Ugh. Don't like anyone saying how others OUGHT to use dataset structure.
Patrick Hayes: Ugh. Don't like anyone saying how others OUGHT to use dataset structure. ←
16:37:50 <cygri> ... we'd like to put provenance into a named graph and make statements about the default graph
... we'd like to put provenance into a named graph and make statements about the default graph ←
16:37:56 <PatH> +q
Patrick Hayes: +q ←
16:38:11 <gkellogg> q?
Gregg Kellogg: q? ←
16:38:17 <davidwood> ack PatH
David Wood: ack PatH ←
16:38:40 <cygri> PatH: i object to laying down the law on how people ought to use datasets
Patrick Hayes: i object to laying down the law on how people ought to use datasets ←
16:38:56 <cygri> ... some people will use it one way and some in other ways
... some people will use it one way and some in other ways ←
16:39:07 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
16:39:26 <cygri> ... if we knew how they use it, we could have defined a semantics, but we couldn't because of disagreement on use
... if we knew how they use it, we could have defined a semantics, but we couldn't because of disagreement on use ←
16:39:49 <Guus> +1 to PatH; I was planning to make the same comment
Guus Schreiber: +1 to PatH; I was planning to make the same comment ←
16:40:04 <davidwood> q+
David Wood: q+ ←
16:40:15 <cygri> ... a better way would be to put a triple into the default graph that directs attention to a named graph
... a better way would be to put a triple into the default graph that directs attention to a named graph ←
16:40:20 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
16:40:22 <cygri> ... legislating the use of datasets is a bad idea
... legislating the use of datasets is a bad idea ←
16:40:42 <cygri> gkellogg: what is the required behaviour of an agent that receives a dataset when it's looking for a graph?
Gregg Kellogg: what is the required behaviour of an agent that receives a dataset when it's looking for a graph? ←
16:41:07 <cygri> ... options: use only the default graph; use only the named graph corresponding to the document location; or merge the graphs
... options: use only the default graph; use only the named graph corresponding to the document location; or merge the graphs ←
16:41:49 <cygri> ... if i poke an endpoint, i would expect to get just triples
... if i poke an endpoint, i would expect to get just triples ←
16:42:12 <cygri> ... except if the answer is json-ld, then i'd expect to get provenance info as well
... except if the answer is json-ld, then i'd expect to get provenance info as well ←
16:42:23 <cygri> PatH: that's one way but there are other ways
Patrick Hayes: that's one way but there are other ways ←
16:42:26 <Guus> ack davidwood
Guus Schreiber: ack davidwood ←
16:42:40 <PatH> pointer?
Patrick Hayes: pointer? ←
16:42:44 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
16:42:48 <cygri> davidwood: LDP-WG had a long thread about "LDP would benefit from being RESTful"
David Wood: LDP-WG had a long thread about "LDP would benefit from being RESTful" ←
16:43:18 <cygri> ... it was felt that LDP creates something on top of REST and perhaps shouldn't
... it was felt that LDP creates something on top of REST and perhaps shouldn't ←
16:43:35 <cygri> ... situation here is similar. don't define something on top of RDF abstract syntax
... situation here is similar. don't define something on top of RDF abstract syntax ←
16:44:50 <cygri> sandro: i'm sympathetic to dave's and pat's points
Sandro Hawke: i'm sympathetic to dave's and pat's points ←
16:44:59 <cygri> ... but i don't know how to solve this
... but i don't know how to solve this ←
16:45:02 <PatH> Join the club :-)
Patrick Hayes: Join the club :-) ←
16:45:25 <cygri> ... if the same syntax can carry graphs and datasets, that's a problem
... if the same syntax can carry graphs and datasets, that's a problem ←
16:45:28 <cygri> q+
q+ ←
16:45:36 <Guus> ack sandro
Guus Schreiber: ack sandro ←
16:46:18 <cygri> ... simply using the default graph when graphifying a dataset seems least problematic
... simply using the default graph when graphifying a dataset seems least problematic ←
16:46:28 <gavinc> This is ONLY for JSON-LD
Gavin Carothers: This is ONLY for JSON-LD ←
16:46:45 <cygri> (scribe can't keep up with crosstalk)
(scribe can't keep up with crosstalk) ←
16:46:50 <gkellogg> no, we need to consider it for any serialization that provides datasets
Gregg Kellogg: no, we need to consider it for any serialization that provides datasets ←
16:46:53 <gkellogg> q+
Gregg Kellogg: q+ ←
16:47:02 <Guus> ack cygri
Guus Schreiber: ack cygri ←
16:47:34 <gkellogg> cygri: we wanted to make a distinction between dataset syntaxes and graph syntaxes.
Richard Cyganiak: we wanted to make a distinction between dataset syntaxes and graph syntaxes. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:47:46 <gkellogg> … This is why TriG is not an extension of Turtle.
Gregg Kellogg: … This is why TriG is not an extension of Turtle. ←
16:48:11 <sandro> actually....... steve might really have a problem with json-ld
Sandro Hawke: actually....... steve might really have a problem with json-ld ←
16:48:19 <gkellogg> … It's really a legacy consideration for Turtle, but it doesn't apply to JSON-LD, as there isn't a large set.
Gregg Kellogg: … It's really a legacy consideration for Turtle, but it doesn't apply to JSON-LD, as there isn't a large set. ←
16:48:40 <gkellogg> … There is still the semantics issue. Are we messing too much with the architecture.
Gregg Kellogg: … There is still the semantics issue. Are we messing too much with the architecture. ←
16:48:59 <sandro> its like con-neg between turtle and trig.
Sandro Hawke: its like con-neg between turtle and trig. ←
16:49:04 <cygri> gkellogg: there are issues with tying this to the syntax
Gregg Kellogg: there are issues with tying this to the syntax ←
16:49:07 <PatH> The same point applies to the future. What is a legacy issue facing backwards becomes a usability issue facing forwards. But what the hell, I'm not going to ever uyse JSON in any case.
Patrick Hayes: The same point applies to the future. What is a legacy issue facing backwards becomes a usability issue facing forwards. But what the hell, I'm not going to ever uyse JSON in any case. ←
16:49:09 <Guus> ack gkellogg
Guus Schreiber: ack gkellogg ←
16:49:12 <cygri> ... consumers do content negotiation
... consumers do content negotiation ←
16:49:29 <cygri> ... and don't know before that they may be dealing specifically with JSON-LD
... and don't know before that they may be dealing specifically with JSON-LD ←
16:49:42 <cygri> ... there were suggestions to add named graphs to RDFa
... there were suggestions to add named graphs to RDFa ←
16:49:52 <cygri> ... so these issues are not tied to a specific syntax
... so these issues are not tied to a specific syntax ←
16:49:58 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
16:50:02 <gavinc> Simple answer, you can't.
Gavin Carothers: Simple answer, you can't. ←
16:50:07 <cygri> ... but to the question how datasets ought to be interpreted in a graph context
... but to the question how datasets ought to be interpreted in a graph context ←
16:50:09 <cygri> q+
q+ ←
16:50:11 <gavinc> I'm a fan of You Can't.
Gavin Carothers: I'm a fan of You Can't. ←
16:50:14 <PatH> +1 tp last speaker.
Patrick Hayes: +1 tp last speaker. ←
16:50:36 <Zakim> -GavinC
Zakim IRC Bot: -GavinC ←
16:50:44 <gavinc> hi?
Gavin Carothers: hi? ←
16:50:49 <gavinc> Hey, the power went out ;)
Gavin Carothers: Hey, the power went out ;) ←
16:50:57 <gkellogg> cygri: Perhaps Sandro's option works: if you can only consume triples, and you're confronted with a dataset, use the default graph and ignore everything else.
Richard Cyganiak: Perhaps Sandro's option works: if you can only consume triples, and you're confronted with a dataset, use the default graph and ignore everything else. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:51:12 <gkellogg> … It seems like the obvious approach.
Gregg Kellogg: … It seems like the obvious approach. ←
16:52:02 <gkellogg> guus: what about the option where you have a graph named the same as the document?
Guus Schreiber: what about the option where you have a graph named the same as the document? [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:52:20 <gkellogg> sandro: the usual case is where there are no named graphs, just the default graph.
Sandro Hawke: the usual case is where there are no named graphs, just the default graph. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:52:41 <gkellogg> … If you convert Turtle to JSON-LD you have a dataset with a default graph and no named graphs.
Gregg Kellogg: … If you convert Turtle to JSON-LD you have a dataset with a default graph and no named graphs. ←
16:52:55 <Zakim> +GavinC
Zakim IRC Bot: +GavinC ←
16:53:20 <gavinc> Turtle is a single graph.
Gavin Carothers: Turtle is a single graph. ←
16:53:40 <cygri> sandro: if you convert a dataset to JSON-LD, named graphs are intact
Sandro Hawke: if you convert a dataset to JSON-LD, named graphs are intact ←
16:53:45 <gkellogg> sandro: if you turn a dataset into JSON-LD, you get a dataset.
Sandro Hawke: if you turn a dataset into JSON-LD, you get a dataset. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:53:46 <gavinc> JSON-LD can be either a single graph or a dataset
Gavin Carothers: JSON-LD can be either a single graph or a dataset ←
16:53:56 <cygri> davidwood: JSON-LD can serialize datasets. turtle can't.
David Wood: JSON-LD can serialize datasets. turtle can't. ←
16:54:16 <cygri> guus: we might have to get back to this issue later
Guus Schreiber: we might have to get back to this issue later ←
16:54:30 <cygri> ... other issues on JSON-LD?
... other issues on JSON-LD? ←
16:54:34 <cygri> gkellogg: that's what occupied most of the time recently
Gregg Kellogg: that's what occupied most of the time recently ←
16:54:40 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
16:54:43 <cygri> ... the other thing is the RDF alignment
... the other thing is the RDF alignment ←
16:54:45 <cygri> ack me
ack me ←
16:54:49 <Guus> ack cygri
Guus Schreiber: ack cygri ←
16:55:01 <cygri> sandro: when will the documents be ready for review?
Sandro Hawke: when will the documents be ready for review? ←
16:55:32 <cygri> gkellogg: blocked on richard
Gregg Kellogg: blocked on richard ←
16:55:51 <cygri> ... other discussion was on renaming the API document to something focusing more on processors and algorithms
... other discussion was on renaming the API document to something focusing more on processors and algorithms ←
16:56:30 <PatH> David, thnx. I should have said trig :-)
Patrick Hayes: David, thnx. I should have said trig :-) ←
16:56:38 <cygri> ... other discussion was on moving more normative text from Syntax to API, and make the Syntax doc more primer-ish
... other discussion was on moving more normative text from Syntax to API, and make the Syntax doc more primer-ish ←
16:56:48 <gkellogg> markus: there are two opinions, that there should be two documents and there's no value in a primer, and other see the advantage of a single normative document.
Markus Lanthaler: there are two opinions, that there should be two documents and there's no value in a primer, and other see the advantage of a single normative document. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:56:50 <cygri> markus: no consensus on that
Markus Lanthaler: no consensus on that ←
16:57:24 <gkellogg> markus: My opinion is that the syntax should be separate from algorithms, as most people are just interested in the syntax.
Markus Lanthaler: My opinion is that the syntax should be separate from algorithms, as most people are just interested in the syntax. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:58:19 <cygri> gkellogg: some issues have to be resolved with RDF-WG. document renaming would require new TR shortnames for instance
Gregg Kellogg: some issues have to be resolved with RDF-WG. document renaming would require new TR shortnames for instance ←
16:58:34 <cygri> guus: when is next version expected for review?
Guus Schreiber: when is next version expected for review? ←
16:58:36 <cygri> q+
q+ ←
16:58:46 <cygri> gkellogg: mostly waiting for richard
Gregg Kellogg: mostly waiting for richard ←
16:58:58 <PatH> In years to come its a lot easier to find what you want in a document rather than find the right document. (See the OWL specs for example)
Patrick Hayes: In years to come its a lot easier to find what you want in a document rather than find the right document. (See the OWL specs for example) ←
16:59:01 <Guus> ack cygri
Guus Schreiber: ack cygri ←
16:59:17 <gkellogg> cygri: Ive' had this issue for a number of weeks; I've made progress, but it's not complete.
Richard Cyganiak: Ive' had this issue for a number of weeks; I've made progress, but it's not complete. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
16:59:41 <gkellogg> … It's difficult to commit to a specific date, as I've been consumed by RDF concepts for the last couple of weeks, and there's still work to do.
Gregg Kellogg: … It's difficult to commit to a specific date, as I've been consumed by RDF concepts for the last couple of weeks, and there's still work to do. ←
17:00:44 <zwu2> have to go to another meeting. bye!
Zhe Wu: have to go to another meeting. bye! ←
17:00:53 <Zakim> -zwu2
Zakim IRC Bot: -zwu2 ←
17:00:57 <cygri> gkellogg: richard is in a unique position as he has looked at the specs in detail and knows concepts
Gregg Kellogg: richard is in a unique position as he has looked at the specs in detail and knows concepts ←
17:01:29 <gkellogg> cygri: it seems unlikely that I'll be able to finish in the next week.
Richard Cyganiak: it seems unlikely that I'll be able to finish in the next week. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:02:22 <gkellogg> sandro: To write this, someone needs to know both the RDF model and the JSON-LD model, so I would hope that it could be phrased in those terms easily.
Sandro Hawke: To write this, someone needs to know both the RDF model and the JSON-LD model, so I would hope that it could be phrased in those terms easily. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:02:54 <gkellogg> cygri: from the work I've done, the difficulty has been that the JSON-LD data model isn't explicit enough; It's a simplification that doesn't spell out the details enough.
Richard Cyganiak: from the work I've done, the difficulty has been that the JSON-LD data model isn't explicit enough; It's a simplification that doesn't spell out the details enough. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:03:27 <gkellogg> … It hasn't been designed by defining a data mode and then describe how the data model is expressed in JSON; it needs to be reverse engineered from the algorithms.
Gregg Kellogg: … It hasn't been designed by defining a data mode and then describe how the data model is expressed in JSON; it needs to be reverse engineered from the algorithms. ←
17:04:04 <gkellogg> … The main issue isn't knowledge of concepts, but to know what the data model is, you need to study the algorithms to see what parts survive and what doesn't survive.
Gregg Kellogg: … The main issue isn't knowledge of concepts, but to know what the data model is, you need to study the algorithms to see what parts survive and what doesn't survive. ←
17:04:45 <gkellogg> … what I've been trying is to do through the algorithms and see what survives when you flatten and go back.
Gregg Kellogg: … what I've been trying is to do through the algorithms and see what survives when you flatten and go back. ←
17:05:26 <gkellogg> markus: cygri, do you have a draft available?
Markus Lanthaler: cygri, do you have a draft available? [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:05:34 <gkellogg> cygri: there's a wiki page I started.
Richard Cyganiak: there's a wiki page I started. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:05:55 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/JSON-LD_Data_Model
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/JSON-LD_Data_Model ←
17:06:34 <gkellogg> guus: I suggest that gregg and markus can use this to write up the data model themselves.
Guus Schreiber: I suggest that gregg and markus can use this to write up the data model themselves. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:08:28 <cygri> gkellogg: i won't get to this in the next week. might have time to work on it over christmas.
Gregg Kellogg: i won't get to this in the next week. might have time to work on it over christmas. ←
17:08:44 <gkellogg> markus: I'll try to work on this.
Markus Lanthaler: I'll try to work on this. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:08:46 <cygri> markus: i will try to come up with something till next week. can't promise though
Markus Lanthaler: i will try to come up with something till next week. can't promise though ←
17:09:08 <cygri> sandro: we said at the F2F that we don't want JSON-LD to have a different data model from RDF
Sandro Hawke: we said at the F2F that we don't want JSON-LD to have a different data model from RDF ←
17:09:09 <gkellogg> sandro: I want to remind the group that at the F2F we didn't want to have anything that wasn't in the RDF data model.
Sandro Hawke: I want to remind the group that at the F2F we didn't want to have anything that wasn't in the RDF data model. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:10:01 <gkellogg> guus: a few minutes for RDF Semantics.
Guus Schreiber: a few minutes for RDF Semantics. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:10:02 <cygri> topic: RDF Semantics
17:11:00 <gkellogg> guus: a nice start would be existing draft marked up with issues.
Guus Schreiber: a nice start would be existing draft marked up with issues. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:11:12 <gkellogg> PatH: I can do something like this, but it will be a couple of weeks.
Patrick Hayes: I can do something like this, but it will be a couple of weeks. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:11:33 <gkellogg> guus: The named graph stuff won't change the semantics much, but there are other small issues.
Guus Schreiber: The named graph stuff won't change the semantics much, but there are other small issues. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:12:02 <gkellogg> ACTION: PatH to provide update to RDF semantics within two weeks.
ACTION: PatH to provide update to RDF semantics within two weeks. ←
17:12:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-215 - Provide update to RDF semantics within two weeks. [on Patrick Hayes - due 2012-12-05].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-215 - Provide update to RDF semantics within two weeks. [on Patrick Hayes - due 2012-12-05]. ←
17:12:55 <gkellogg> guus: it would be nice to point to a draft by the end of january where it's clear where we are
Guus Schreiber: it would be nice to point to a draft by the end of january where it's clear where we are [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:13:02 <gkellogg> … Important for extension request.
Gregg Kellogg: … Important for extension request. ←
17:13:31 <gkellogg> … If we can have the draft with issues before christmas, we'll be in good shape.
Gregg Kellogg: … If we can have the draft with issues before christmas, we'll be in good shape. ←
17:13:50 <gkellogg> sandro: holiday schedule?
Sandro Hawke: holiday schedule? [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:14:25 <gkellogg> guus: proposal is 19 December, then two week break.
Guus Schreiber: proposal is 19 December, then two week break. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
17:14:37 <gkellogg> … no telecom on 26 December or 2 January.
Gregg Kellogg: … no telecom on 26 December or 2 January. ←
17:15:02 <gkellogg> … This means we need to do some careful planning, so we're ready for the extension request.
Gregg Kellogg: … This means we need to do some careful planning, so we're ready for the extension request. ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2012-11-28 17:20:07 UTC by 'gkellogg', comments: None