IRC log of rdf-wg on 2012-09-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:55:35 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg
14:55:35 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/26-rdf-wg-irc
14:55:37 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:55:37 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #rdf-wg
14:55:39 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 73394
14:55:39 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
14:55:40 [trackbot]
Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:55:40 [trackbot]
Date: 26 September 2012
14:56:00 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
14:56:00 [Zakim]
SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, Guus
14:56:01 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, Guus, gkellogg, AndyS, tbaker, ivan, MacTed, mischat, gavinc, davidwood, manu1, manu, yvesr, ericP, trackbot, sandro
14:56:55 [Arnaud]
Arnaud has joined #rdf-wg
14:59:06 [AZ]
AZ has joined #rdf-wg
14:59:40 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-home
14:59:40 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:59:49 [ivan]
zakim, drop me
14:59:49 [Zakim]
sorry, ivan, I don't know what conference this is
14:59:58 [sandro]
wtf zakim
15:00:08 [sandro]
Zakim, this is RDF
15:00:08 [Zakim]
ok, sandro; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM
15:00:22 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
15:00:22 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
15:00:24 [Zakim]
+Ivan
15:00:26 [AndyS]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:00:26 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P3, Guus, Sandro, EricP, Ivan (muted), ??P6, Ivan (muted)
15:00:37 [AndyS]
zakim, ??P6 is me
15:00:37 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
15:00:38 [Zakim]
+Arnaud
15:00:42 [yvesr]
Zakim, ??P3 is me
15:00:42 [Zakim]
+yvesr; got it
15:00:45 [Zakim]
+??P10
15:00:47 [pchampin]
pchampin has joined #rdf-wg
15:00:55 [AZ]
Zakim, ??P10 is me
15:00:55 [Zakim]
+AZ; got it
15:01:00 [pfps]
pfps has joined #rdf-wg
15:01:16 [Zakim]
+??P13
15:01:24 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
15:01:24 [Zakim]
On the phone I see yvesr, Guus, Sandro, EricP, Ivan, AndyS, Ivan, Arnaud, AZ, ??P13
15:01:26 [Zakim]
On IRC I see pfps, pchampin, AZ, Arnaud, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, gkellogg, AndyS, tbaker, ivan, MacTed, mischat, gavinc, davidwood, manu1, manu, yvesr, ericP, trackbot, sandro
15:01:28 [pchampin]
zakim, ??P13 is me
15:01:28 [Zakim]
+pchampin; got it
15:01:29 [Zakim]
+gavinc
15:01:34 [ivan]
zakim, drop ivan
15:01:35 [Zakim]
'ivan' is ambiguous, ivan
15:01:50 [cygri]
cygri has joined #rdf-wg
15:02:00 [Zakim]
-Ivan
15:02:05 [ivan]
zakim, who is here?
15:02:05 [Zakim]
On the phone I see yvesr, Guus, Sandro, EricP, Ivan, AndyS, Arnaud, AZ, pchampin, gavinc
15:02:06 [sandro]
zakim, drop ivan
15:02:08 [Zakim]
On IRC I see cygri, pfps, pchampin, AZ, Arnaud, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, gkellogg, AndyS, tbaker, ivan, MacTed, mischat, gavinc, davidwood, manu1, manu, yvesr, ericP, trackbot,
15:02:08 [Zakim]
... sandro
15:02:08 [Zakim]
Ivan is being disconnected
15:02:08 [Zakim]
-Ivan
15:02:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.992.aaaa
15:02:14 [ivan]
zakim, who is here?
15:02:14 [Zakim]
+mhausenblas
15:02:20 [Zakim]
On the phone I see yvesr, Guus, Sandro, EricP, AndyS, Arnaud, AZ, pchampin, gavinc, +1.408.992.aaaa, mhausenblas
15:02:23 [Zakim]
On IRC I see cygri, pfps, pchampin, AZ, Arnaud, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, gkellogg, AndyS, tbaker, ivan, MacTed, mischat, gavinc, davidwood, manu1, manu, yvesr, ericP, trackbot,
15:02:26 [pfps]
zakim, aaaa is me
15:02:26 [cygri]
zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me
15:02:28 [Zakim]
... sandro
15:02:30 [Zakim]
+??P18
15:02:32 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
15:02:33 [gkellogg]
zakim, I am ??P18
15:02:34 [Zakim]
+davidwood
15:02:37 [Zakim]
+pfps; got it
15:02:38 [Zakim]
+cygri; got it
15:02:44 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
15:02:48 [Zakim]
+Ivan
15:02:50 [Zakim]
+gkellogg; got it
15:03:53 [gavinc]
scribe: gavinc
15:04:00 [davidwood]
gavinc insists on scribing; WG agrees reluctantly.
15:04:03 [gavinc]
Topic: Admin
15:04:08 [zwu2]
zwu2 has joined #rdf-wg
15:04:38 [gavinc]
Guus: No formated version of minutes yet
15:04:57 [gavinc]
... maybe someone can format them during the telecon
15:05:18 [gavinc]
... people happy to accept as they are?
15:05:46 [Zakim]
+zwu2
15:05:50 [sandro]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-09-19
15:06:24 [gavinc]
sandro: there are some errors
15:06:35 [gavinc]
Guus: I propose to accept the minutes as they are
15:06:40 [sandro]
names "tlr" and "marcus" are not resolved.
15:06:41 [gavinc]
PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 19 September:
15:06:55 [gavinc]
Subtopic: Action Items
15:07:56 [gavinc]
Subtopic: Telecon time
15:08:07 [gavinc]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Sep/0213.html
15:08:23 [AlexHall]
AlexHall has joined #rdf-wg
15:08:28 [gavinc]
Guus: 12:00-12:30 EST is very busy
15:08:31 [Zakim]
+ +1.443.212.aabb
15:08:38 [gavinc]
... no change unless something can be done w/o problems for active WG members
15:08:58 [gavinc]
gavinc: Yes, I'd have some trouble getting here 30 minutes sooner
15:09:36 [gavinc]
Guus: Has someone (sandro) figured out some other solution?
15:09:42 [gkellogg]
minutes fixed: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-09-19
15:09:43 [gavinc]
sandro: No, I haven't
15:10:18 [gavinc]
Guus: Postpone decision till...?
15:10:39 [gavinc]
sandro: will convey that we don't just want to change
15:11:03 [cygri]
davidwood++
15:11:10 [gavinc]
davidwood: at this point it's hard to change. Perhaps we could change at some point in the future? Perhaps if we go into an extension of our charter.
15:11:15 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
15:11:16 [Zakim]
On the phone I see yvesr, Guus, Sandro, EricP, AndyS, Ivan, Arnaud (muted), AZ, pchampin, gavinc, pfps, cygri, gkellogg, davidwood, zwu2, AlexHall
15:11:17 [Zakim]
On IRC I see AlexHall, zwu2, cygri, pfps, pchampin, AZ, Arnaud, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, gkellogg, AndyS, tbaker, ivan, MacTed, mischat, gavinc, davidwood, manu1, manu, yvesr, ericP,
15:11:19 [Zakim]
... trackbot, sandro
15:11:58 [gavinc]
subtopic: Next Meeting
15:12:05 [gavinc]
Guus: Next week
15:12:12 [gavinc]
subtopic: Next F2F
15:12:19 [gavinc]
Guus: Will start on agenda
15:12:29 [gavinc]
Guus: Have a number of requests for observers
15:12:42 [gavinc]
Topic: Provenance Constraints Review
15:13:11 [gavinc]
Guus: LC period has already ended. Last week.
15:13:30 [gavinc]
ericP: Haven't done it yet, didn't know there was such time pressure
15:13:49 [gavinc]
cygri: Constraints LC is October 10th
15:14:08 [gavinc]
davidwood: There were a number of documents
15:14:29 [gavinc]
ivan: surprised that the Constraints document needs RDF WG review
15:14:45 [gavinc]
cygri: Been working threw the documents, expect to finish in the next few days
15:14:55 [gavinc]
Guus: Thanks for doing it quick
15:15:01 [gavinc]
ericP: I won't be done by then
15:15:30 [gavinc]
Topic: Turtle
15:16:00 [cygri]
i can scribe
15:16:22 [cygri]
ericP: we have pretty clear plans for going forward
15:16:34 [cygri]
... we decided not to do the inverse property thing
15:16:38 [gkellogg]
scribenick cygri
15:16:43 [cygri]
... everything else editorial
15:17:10 [cygri]
gavinc: there was one more feature request for unsetting base/prefix
15:17:40 [cygri]
... a somewhat odd feature
15:17:44 [ivan]
q+
15:17:49 [AndyS]
ack ivan
15:17:52 [cygri]
ivan: i have not seen much request for things like that
15:17:54 [ivan]
ack ivan
15:18:19 [cygri]
q+
15:18:40 [ivan]
ack cygri
15:19:37 [AndyS]
concatenating turtle files has other problems - reused bnode labels.
15:20:07 [cygri]
cygri: the issue was that concatenating turtle files can change the triples
15:20:18 [danbri]
danbri has joined #rdf-wg
15:21:02 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
15:21:02 [Zakim]
On the phone I see yvesr, Guus, Sandro, EricP, AndyS, Ivan, Arnaud (muted), AZ, pchampin, gavinc, pfps, cygri, gkellogg, davidwood, zwu2, AlexHall
15:21:04 [Zakim]
On IRC I see danbri, AlexHall, zwu2, cygri, pfps, pchampin, AZ, Arnaud, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, gkellogg, AndyS, tbaker, ivan, MacTed, mischat, gavinc, davidwood, manu1, manu,
15:21:04 [Zakim]
... yvesr, ericP, trackbot, sandro
15:21:11 [cygri]
... so there are a number of reasons why concatenating turtle files is a bad idea
15:21:55 [cygri]
gavinc: i will get to LC responses next week
15:22:10 [cygri]
guus: would be nice to have proposed draft resolutions
15:22:14 [cygri]
topic: JSON-LD
15:23:13 [gavinc]
gkellogg: committed to getting all the comments done to have the JSON-LD syntax ready for review by Monday
15:23:36 [gavinc]
Guus: Can you say a few words on planning?
15:23:39 [PatH]
PatH has joined #rdf-wg
15:24:07 [PatH]
sorry im late, medicals took more time than planned.
15:24:22 [gavinc]
gkellogg: we have agreement in principle, they are open as we don't have the spec updated. All of the open issues have resolutions but they don't have spec text yet.
15:24:40 [gavinc]
.. one of them was an update on the alignment between RDF Concepts and JSON-LD
15:25:02 [Zakim]
+PatH
15:25:26 [gavinc]
gkellogg: Most of the work from Drupul feedback will be in the API document, not the syntax document
15:25:46 [gavinc]
gkellogg: one of the issues is the compacting and round tripping
15:26:13 [gavinc]
Guus: Next Monday, 1 October for JSON-LD review?
15:26:31 [gavinc]
gkellogg: Yes, will send out notification that the document is ready for review
15:26:51 [ivan]
q+
15:26:52 [gavinc]
davidwood: Could get to CR before end of charter?
15:27:12 [gavinc]
gkellogg: Yes, I think we can for the Syntax document. The API document is less on track.
15:27:41 [gavinc]
ivan: API document will need to check if the RDF WG is going to publish the API document as well
15:28:04 [gavinc]
gkellogg: My recollection is that both Syntax and API are both to be published by the RDF WG
15:28:05 [Guus]
ack ivan
15:28:22 [gavinc]
ivan: It is possible to move to PR and jump over CR
15:28:36 [gavinc]
... if there is enough test suites and implementations
15:28:45 [gavinc]
... not saying we should talk about that today
15:28:49 [davidwood]
+1 to Ivan. Plenty of implementations exist.
15:28:53 [gavinc]
... but we should consider it.
15:29:03 [gavinc]
+q
15:29:07 [davidwood]
The W3C Process also calls CR a "Call for Implementations"
15:29:11 [Arnaud]
I believe technically it's not jumping over CR, it's just going through instantaneously by satisfying the requirement for implementations
15:29:25 [davidwood]
Arnaud, right
15:29:26 [gavinc]
sandro: should include language in LC if skipping CR
15:29:35 [Zakim]
+OpenLink_Software
15:29:40 [gavinc]
gkellogg: yes there are implementations, but we have test suites
15:29:41 [MacTed]
Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:29:41 [Zakim]
+MacTed; got it
15:29:43 [MacTed]
Zakim, mute me
15:29:43 [Zakim]
MacTed should now be muted
15:29:43 [gavinc]
-q
15:30:14 [gavinc]
Topic: Graphs
15:31:00 [gavinc]
Guus: Constrained by charter expires 1 Feb 2013
15:31:12 [gavinc]
... only possible if documents are in Last Call
15:31:45 [gavinc]
... what can we do in the next 3 months?
15:33:23 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:33:23 [Zakim]
On the phone I see yvesr, Guus, Sandro, EricP, AndyS, Ivan, Arnaud (muted), AZ, pchampin, gavinc, pfps, cygri, gkellogg, davidwood, zwu2, AlexHall, PatH, MacTed (muted)
15:33:26 [gavinc]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/Minimal-dataset-semantics
15:34:06 [gavinc]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Sep/0220.html is this the version that Pat and Peter both agree with?
15:35:08 [gavinc]
pfps: there are two kinds of differences, if the default graph is inconsistent then the whole set is inconsistent. Mine doesn't have that.
15:36:06 [gavinc]
pfps: In mine you do entailment on the graphs in side the dataset, in the other datasets have interpretations and entailment takes place between them
15:36:06 [AZ]
should we even call that last notion of entailment "entailment"?
15:37:05 [AndyS]
Please everyone respond to Sandro's email on "Dataset Syntax - checking for consensus" so we can get an overview of what people's current positions are. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Sep/0249.html -- low cost : respond with +1/0/-1 a few times
15:39:03 [cygri]
q+
15:39:06 [gavinc]
PatH: It sounds like sandro is saying that Dataset semantics doesn't make sense. And PatH and pfps agree with you.
15:39:13 [ivan]
+1 to what Pat says, it is fairly clear
15:39:22 [AZ]
it's not RDF 2004 semantics
15:39:37 [gavinc]
PatH: It's not no semantics, it's just RDF 2004 semantics
15:39:53 [gavinc]
Zakim, who is talking?
15:40:05 [Zakim]
gavinc, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus (31%), AZ (54%), gavinc (13%)
15:40:19 [PatH]
@gavin: it does make sense, but its not clear it has a use.
15:40:30 [pfps]
I don't think that the scribe is correct. I would say that sandro was suggesting that entailment in the dataset semantics doesn't make sense or have much use, and Pat and I were more or less agreeing.
15:40:43 [sandro]
I think you'd want the inference labeled with a DIFFERENT BUT RELATED iri.
15:40:56 [pfps]
Now I'm lost.
15:41:13 [sandro]
+1 pfps on scribing.
15:41:48 [PatH]
Q
15:41:50 [PatH]
q
15:41:55 [ericP]
q?
15:41:55 [sandro]
q?
15:41:57 [PatH]
q+
15:42:08 [Guus]
ack cygri
15:42:28 [gavinc]
cygri: Why do this over saying nothing?
15:42:35 [AZ]
+1 cygri
15:42:52 [Guus]
ack PatH
15:43:02 [AZ]
oh no not +1, I misunderstood I think
15:43:25 [PatH]
Antoine: need to keep the graph label associated with entailments of named graph as it might indicate a context of truth such as time.
15:43:48 [gavinc]
pfps: I would prefer no symantics, but there was push back. So this is a fall back position that doesn't preclude doing things that people want.
15:44:00 [AZ]
q+
15:44:10 [gavinc]
... there are so many things that people want to do with named graphs that it's hard to come up with a symantics that covers all of them
15:44:46 [ivan]
q+
15:44:50 [gavinc]
pfps: I think there need to be caviots put around it. If you want to use entailments then this is the way to getting at it.
15:44:57 [PatH]
caveat
15:45:04 [PatH]
+q
15:45:05 [Guus]
ack AZ
15:45:10 [gavinc]
s/caviots/caveats
15:45:41 [pchampin]
q+
15:45:48 [gavinc]
AZ: if you don't need to do entailments, then you can just work with data structure. The symantics doesn't do anything to the dataset. I don't see where the damage is.
15:46:27 [gavinc]
... there is no symantics that can cover all the use cases, and I agree. The minimal symantics doesn't cover all the use cases, it's supposed to be the min comment points between the use cases
15:46:29 [pfps]
that's NOT at all what I said. I said, and said VERY explicitly, that I don't see a semantics that covers even a good fraction of the use cases.
15:48:15 [gkellogg]
q?
15:48:21 [gavinc]
ack PatH
15:48:37 [gavinc]
PatH: Trying to pick up on a point that AZ made...
15:49:57 [manu]
manu has joined #rdf-wg
15:50:06 [AZ]
Yes it is
15:50:18 [sandro]
+1 PatH channeling AZ that it's important to keep "name" when doing entailment
15:50:25 [Guus]
q+ to suggest we have dad enough discussions on this and I'd give the token to the RDF Semantics to make proposal for resolving this
15:50:55 [Guus]
s/RDF Semantics/RDF Semantics editors
15:50:58 [gavinc]
AZ: Yes, I want entailment attached to the graph name.
15:51:11 [gavinc]
... it's not really a semantics...
15:51:25 [gavinc]
... it defines entailments in line with what I would require ...
15:51:43 [cygri]
q+
15:52:06 [cygri]
q+ to suggest strawpoll "say nothing about the semantics of datasets"
15:52:07 [Guus]
ack ivan
15:52:48 [pfps]
but then where do other main use cases for named graphs sit? provenance, quoting, etc., all depend on the exact graph, not on equivalent graphs
15:53:24 [PatH]
Suggestion: extend notion of graph entailment to "named graphs", ie <N, G> pairs, which is <N G> entials <N' G'> just when N=N' and G entails G'. Ie entailment but keep the name fixed.
15:53:32 [pchampin]
q-
15:54:04 [AZ]
For the sake of advancing on these issues, I'd accept such a compromise, however disappointing it is to me
15:54:34 [Guus]
ack Guus
15:54:34 [Zakim]
Guus, you wanted to suggest we have dad enough discussions on this and I'd give the token to the RDF Semantics to make proposal for resolving this
15:54:42 [PatH]
Then we get the preservation of contexts without needing to define a new interpretation for some thing as large as a dataset, and do not risk prematurely fixing relationships between default and named grpahs in ways that might harm other users.
15:55:07 [Guus]
ack cygri
15:55:07 [Zakim]
cygri, you wanted to suggest strawpoll "say nothing about the semantics of datasets"
15:55:35 [PatH]
And users can say whether they are using graph entailment (ignore names) or named graph entailment (preserve names)
15:56:06 [PatH]
And (fonally) iondeed we do not give a sematnics for *datasets*.
15:56:22 [PatH]
fonally/finally
15:56:28 [MacTed]
s/a/as a/
15:56:44 [ivan]
I can live with a note
15:56:51 [Guus]
richard: are you suggesting a separate note?
15:57:04 [PatH]
q+
15:57:12 [Zakim]
-PatH
15:57:19 [sandro]
STRAWPOLL: Have no Dataset Semantics (in the lifetime of this WG)
15:57:41 [sandro]
+1 (as long as there is a metadata mechanism)
15:57:53 [cygri]
+0.5
15:57:56 [gavinc]
0
15:57:58 [pfps]
+1
15:57:58 [AndyS]
abstain
15:57:59 [zwu2]
+1
15:58:00 [gkellogg]
0
15:58:01 [Arnaud]
0
15:58:02 [yvesr]
+1 (same as sandro, mitigated by the fact i still find all that horribly confusing)
15:58:05 [Zakim]
+PatH
15:58:09 [davidwood]
+0.5
15:58:14 [AZ]
-0
15:58:21 [ericP]
+0.5
15:58:23 [AlexHall]
+0.5
15:58:27 [tbaker]
0 (but think I agree with Sandro's point re: metadata mechanism)
15:58:27 [MacTed]
+0
15:59:00 [PatH]
+1 but do have named graph semantics
15:59:06 [sandro]
(keeping it out of the Rec)
15:59:13 [ivan]
+1 (but I do not understand sandro's point)
15:59:24 [AndyS]
note(s)/fine if it does not take WG-TC time.
15:59:39 [PatH]
I was on Q before this poll
15:59:51 [Guus]
ack PatH
16:00:45 [sandro]
+1 Pat investigate/propose more on this
16:02:37 [sandro]
topic: Dataset Syntax
16:02:39 [sandro]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Sep/0249.html Dataset Syntax - checking for consensus
16:02:43 [ivan]
q+
16:02:55 [gavinc]
Guus: Lets review status
16:04:01 [gavinc]
sandro: it seems to me that there is agreement that we do something in the TriG sparql space
16:04:46 [gavinc]
ivan: are you refering to metadata about the dataset or about the named graphs?
16:04:58 [gavinc]
sandro: in my mind metadata is stuff that's asserted
16:05:30 [gavinc]
ivan: I have a dataset defined in TriG file. I want to say something about the dataset as a whole
16:05:40 [ericP]
q+
16:06:02 [gavinc]
ivan: is it metadata about the whole thing or the named graphs?
16:06:28 [ivan]
ack ivan
16:06:51 [ericP]
q-
16:07:31 [gavinc]
NOT REALLY PROPOSED: We will produce a W3C Recommendation for a dataset syntax, similar to TriG and to SPARQL's named graph syntax.
16:07:46 [gavinc]
sandro: yep, everyone seems to agree with this
16:08:11 [gavinc]
NOT REALLY PROPOSED: We'll request a media-type for this syntax which is different from the media-type for Turtle. (That is, we will not consider this language to supplant Turtle and take over the name, becoming the new "Turtle", as was once proposed.)
16:08:22 [gavinc]
Guus: Not sure that we have consus on that one.
16:08:52 [gavinc]
sandro: agree, yeah I'm not sure we have consensus on this
16:09:05 [gavinc]
NOT REALLY PROPOSED: Our dataset syntax will allow for the expression of empty named graphs, whatever their semantics might be (to be decided). The syntax is an empty curly-braces expression, as in "<g> { }".
16:09:20 [gavinc]
sandro: some conversation about what this means
16:11:25 [sandro]
+1 cygri -- if the language turns out rather differnt from TriG, let's give it a differnt name
16:11:28 [sandro]
Tr1G
16:11:29 [cygri]
tr1g
16:11:43 [Arnaud]
LDP has decided to use Turtle as its default/minimum serialization format, I wonder what it means to introduce yet another format
16:11:45 [gkellogg]
Tri4
16:12:54 [cygri]
sandro++
16:14:13 [sandro]
<g> { <a> <b> <c> }
16:14:18 [sandro]
GRAPH <g> { <a> <b> <c> }
16:16:34 [gavinc]
+q to make sure the whole default graph thing gets on the agenda
16:17:19 [Zakim]
-zwu2
16:18:28 [Zakim]
-yvesr
16:18:30 [Zakim]
-Ivan
16:18:31 [Zakim]
-pfps
16:18:32 [Zakim]
-davidwood
16:18:32 [Zakim]
-PatH
16:18:33 [Zakim]
-cygri
16:18:33 [Zakim]
-AlexHall
16:18:35 [Zakim]
-Arnaud
16:18:35 [Zakim]
-Sandro
16:18:36 [Zakim]
-AZ
16:18:38 [Zakim]
-gavinc
16:18:40 [Zakim]
-MacTed
16:18:42 [Zakim]
-gkellogg
16:18:45 [Zakim]
-AndyS
16:18:55 [Guus]
trackbot, end meeting
16:18:55 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:18:55 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Guus, Sandro, EricP, Ivan, AndyS, Arnaud, yvesr, AZ, pchampin, gavinc, +1.408.992.aaaa, davidwood, pfps, cygri, gkellogg, zwu2,
16:18:59 [Zakim]
... +1.443.212.aabb, AlexHall, PatH, MacTed
16:18:59 [Zakim]
-EricP
16:19:03 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:19:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/26-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot
16:19:04 [Zakim]
-pchampin
16:19:04 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:19:04 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items