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