13:29:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rd
13:29:30 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/09/11-rd-irc
13:29:32 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:29:32 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rd
13:29:34 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7394
13:29:34 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_RDWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
13:29:35 <trackbot> Meeting: Research and Development Working Group Teleconference
13:29:35 <trackbot> Date: 11 September 2013
13:29:42 <shadi> zakim, this is rdwg
13:29:43 <Zakim> ok, shadi; that matches WAI_RDWG()9:30AM
13:29:54 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
13:29:54 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:29:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller], [IPcaller.a]
13:30:18 <Vivienne> zakim, IPcaller is me
13:30:18 <Zakim> +Vivienne; got it
13:30:21 <Justin> Justin has joined #rd
13:30:34 <shadi> Agenda+ Introduction of topic and explanation of format - Simon (format)
13:30:34 <shadi> and then Vivienne (topic) - 5 mins max
13:30:34 <shadi> Agenda+ Historical perspective - 10 mins
13:30:34 <shadi> Agenda+ Current practices - 30 mins
13:30:34 <shadi> Agenda+ design - 10 mins
13:30:34 <shadi> Agenda+ limitations - 10 mins
13:30:36 <shadi> Agenda+ benefits - 10 mins
13:30:38 <shadi> Agenda+ Future practice considerations - 10 mins
13:30:40 <shadi> Agenda+ wrap-up - 5 mins.
13:30:41 <Zakim> +??P13
13:30:44 <Justin> zakim, ipcaller.a
13:30:44 <Zakim> I don't understand 'ipcaller.a', Justin
13:30:49 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
13:30:59 <Zakim> +??P30
13:31:09 <Zakim> +??P31
13:31:11 <markel> zakim, ??P30 is markel
13:31:11 <Zakim> +markel; got it
13:31:19 <Zakim> +Shadi
13:31:24 <davidsloan> zakim, ipcaller is me
13:31:24 <Zakim> +davidsloan; got it
13:31:53 <annika> zakim, ??31 is me
13:31:53 <Zakim> sorry, annika, I do not recognize a party named '??31'
13:32:03 <annika> zakim, ??P31 is me
13:32:03 <Zakim> +annika; got it
13:32:04 <christos> christos has joined #rd
13:32:05 <sharper> sharper has joined #rd
13:32:18 <Justin> zakim, ipcaller.a is me
13:32:19 <Zakim> +Justin; got it
13:32:19 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:32:20 <Zakim> On the phone I see Vivienne, Justin, ??P13, davidsloan, markel, annika, Shadi
13:32:23 <davidsloan> zakim, mute me
13:32:23 <Zakim> davidsloan should now be muted
13:32:31 <Zakim> +??P33
13:32:32 <annika> zakim. mute me
13:32:38 <annika> zakim, mute me
13:32:38 <Zakim> annika should now be muted
13:32:40 <christos> zakim, ??P33 is me
13:32:40 <Zakim> +christos; got it
13:32:44 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
13:32:45 <Zakim> +Yehya
13:32:46 <mhakkinen> mhakkinen has joined #rd
13:32:55 <christos> zakim, mute me
13:32:55 <Zakim> christos should now be muted
13:32:56 <yeliz> yeliz has joined #rd
13:33:02 <Zakim> +??P36
13:33:11 <yeliz> zakim, ??P36 is yeliz
13:33:11 <Zakim> +yeliz; got it
13:33:12 <klaus> klaus has joined #rd
13:33:26 <sharper> zakim, ??P13 is sharper
13:33:26 <Zakim> +sharper; got it
13:33:29 <yeliz> zakim, mute me
13:33:29 <Zakim> yeliz should now be muted
13:33:42 <shadi> scribe: shadi
13:33:46 <shadi> zakim, mute me
13:33:46 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
13:34:05 <Zakim> +Mark_Hakkinen
13:34:42 <silvia> silvia has joined #rd
13:34:44 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
13:35:02 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
13:35:08 <silvia> zakim, IPcaller is me
13:35:08 <Zakim> +silvia; got it
13:35:18 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:35:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see Vivienne, Justin, sharper, davidsloan (muted), markel, annika (muted), Shadi (muted), christos (muted), Yehya, yeliz (muted), Mark_Hakkinen, silvia
13:35:22 <markel> Hi it's Giorgio and Markel here
13:35:24 <sharper> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Accreditation_Methods
13:35:30 <silvia> zakim, mute me
13:35:30 <Zakim> silvia should now be muted
13:35:53 <shadi> agenda?
13:36:29 <shadi> SH: this is the first one of our core discussion topics
13:36:45 <shadi> ...intended to look at different ones
13:37:19 <shadi> ...outcomes of these discussion is an initial analysis
13:37:34 <shadi> ...possibly have follow-up discussion with external experts if needed
13:37:40 <sharper> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Advice_for_Organisers_of_Catalogue_Topic_Discussions
13:37:52 <shadi> ...to eventually develop a catalog topic item from these discussions
13:38:17 <klaus> zakim, mute me
13:38:17 <Zakim> sorry, klaus, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
13:38:18 <shadi> ...have some advice for organizers that we can evolve
13:38:35 <shadi> ...open discussion intended to collect different perspectives and ideas
13:38:58 <Justin> trying to record :(
13:39:00 <shadi> VC: reminder that i'm recording this session
13:39:15 <shadi> ...so that we can put it up as part of the note
13:39:18 <shadi> q+
13:39:32 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
13:39:43 <shadi> ...talking particularly about 3rd party certification or self-declaration
13:39:51 <shadi> ...wondering what the value of that is
13:40:06 <yeliz_> yeliz_ has joined #rd
13:40:08 <shadi> ...have some background content in the wiki
13:40:22 <shadi> ...thanks for the feedback Markel and David
13:40:43 <shadi> ...thought would start with historical perspectives
13:41:18 <shadi> ...please say your name before you talk
13:41:31 <yeliz_> zakim, who's here?
13:41:31 <Zakim> On the phone I see Vivienne, Justin, sharper, davidsloan (muted), markel, annika (muted), Shadi (muted), christos (muted), Yehya, yeliz (muted), Mark_Hakkinen, silvia (muted),
13:41:35 <Zakim> ... [IPcaller]
13:41:35 <Zakim> On IRC I see yeliz_, silvia, klaus, mhakkinen, sharper, christos, Justin, Zakim, RRSAgent, davidsloan, markel, annika, Yehya, Vivienne, shadi, Mate, nonge_, trackbot
13:41:38 <shadi> zakim, take up next
13:41:39 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Introduction of topic and explanation of format - Simon (format)" taken up [from shadi]
13:41:47 <shadi> zakim, close agendum 1
13:41:47 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, shadi
13:41:55 <markel> q+
13:41:56 <davidsloan> q+
13:41:57 <yeliz_> zakim, [IPcaller] is yeliz
13:41:58 <Zakim> +yeliz; got it
13:42:03 <yeliz_> zakim, mute me
13:42:03 <Zakim> sorry, yeliz_, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
13:42:15 <shadi> ack me
13:42:22 <yeliz_> zakim, yeliz_ is yeliz
13:42:22 <Zakim> sorry, yeliz_, I do not recognize a party named 'yeliz_'
13:42:26 <Yehya> many people used bobby just imitating others or using templates that included the bobby logo
13:42:28 <yeliz_> zakim, mute me
13:42:28 <Zakim> sorry, yeliz_, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
13:42:46 <yeliz_> zakim, who's here?
13:42:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see Vivienne, Justin, sharper, davidsloan (muted), markel, annika (muted), Shadi, christos (muted), Yehya, yeliz (muted), Mark_Hakkinen, silvia (muted), yeliz.a
13:42:50 <Zakim> On IRC I see yeliz_, silvia, klaus, mhakkinen, sharper, christos, Justin, Zakim, RRSAgent, davidsloan, markel, annika, Yehya, Vivienne, shadi, Mate, nonge_, trackbot
13:43:22 <shadi> SAZ: are the recordings publicly available or for your own use?
13:43:31 <shadi> VC: for my own use internally
13:43:36 <shadi> queue=
13:43:43 <shadi> zakim, take up next
13:43:43 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Historical perspective - 10 mins" taken up [from shadi]
13:43:48 <shadi> q+ davidsloan
13:44:04 <shadi> MV: have Giorgio with me today!
13:44:23 <shadi> GB: lots of the previous labels like "bobby" did not work
13:44:43 <shadi> ...because of difficulty of determining accessibility barriers
13:44:50 <shadi> zakim, who is making noise?
13:45:02 <Zakim> shadi, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: markel (90%), yeliz.a (84%)
13:45:15 <shadi> ...assessment of true quality is challenged by such labels
13:45:34 <shadi> ...because people might be mislead by results
13:45:44 <shadi> ...this applies to any accreditation scheme
13:45:57 <shadi> VC: have you seen any that had value?
13:46:10 <shadi> GB: no
13:46:16 <shadi> ...good one would be focused on the process
13:46:26 <shadi> ...what process did you follow to ensure accessibility
13:46:47 <Yehya> Accreditation of websites will be credible only if the website allows users to provide their experience with the website. So an accreditation stamp should provide a feedback form, which allows users to submit identified accessibility issues to the website owner. The accreditation stamp should indicate a time frame when will be resolve the identified accessibility issues. A statistic about raised accessibility issues, resolved and pending will be as well helpful in t
13:46:47 <shadi> ...that would likely better indicate the quality
13:46:53 <davidsloan> zakime, ack me
13:46:58 <davidsloan> zakim, ack me
13:46:58 <Zakim> unmuting davidsloan
13:46:59 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
13:47:16 <shadi> DS: slightly disagree with Giorgio
13:47:28 <shadi> ...previous schemes contributed to raising awareness
13:47:38 <shadi> ...maybe success in that perspective
13:47:48 <shadi> q+
13:48:15 <shadi> ...these earlier schemes helped people understand the importance of accessibility
13:48:43 <shadi> ...they may not have lead to accessibility of the website but they made aware of an aspect of website quality
13:49:06 <davidsloan> zakim, mute me
13:49:06 <Zakim> davidsloan should now be muted
13:49:15 <shadi> VC: what about value of self-certification schemes?
13:49:24 <shadi> ack me
13:50:51 <Yehya> q+
13:51:17 <yeliz_> zakim, mute me
13:51:17 <Zakim> sorry, yeliz_, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
13:51:55 <shadi> SAZ: agree with Giorgio about importance of process quality rather than post-development evaluation only
13:52:34 <yeliz_> zakim, yeliz.a is yeliz
13:52:34 <Zakim> +yeliz; got it
13:52:38 <yeliz_> zakim, mute me
13:52:38 <Zakim> sorry, yeliz_, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
13:52:55 <shadi> ...also agree that most previous logos were developed for awareness raising and do not follow the requirements of "self-declaration of conformity (SDoC)"
13:53:07 <klaus> q+
13:53:16 <shadi> ack yehy
13:53:29 <shadi> YM: only by involving the end-user in the process
13:53:39 <shadi> ...you can make sense of the accreditation
13:54:00 <shadi> ...but this would also be part of a process
13:54:15 <shadi> ...had such discussions with many customers
13:54:31 <shadi> ...use a feedback form along with the statements
13:54:43 <shadi> ...that have timeline for when the owner can fix issues
13:55:00 <shadi> VC: yes, seeing more of these feedback forms in Australia
13:55:10 <shadi> YM: yes, useful approach for accessibilit
13:55:21 <shadi> s/accessibilit/accessibility
13:55:25 <shadi> ack kl
13:55:27 <klaus> zakim unmute me
13:55:38 <shadi> zakim, unmute klaus
13:55:38 <Zakim> sorry, shadi, I do not know which phone connection belongs to klaus
13:55:48 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:55:48 <Zakim> On the phone I see Vivienne, Justin, sharper, davidsloan (muted), markel, annika (muted), Shadi, christos (muted), Yehya, yeliz (muted), Mark_Hakkinen, silvia (muted), yeliz.aa
13:55:52 <Zakim> ... (muted)
13:56:22 <shadi> zakim, unmute yeliz
13:56:22 <Zakim> yeliz should no longer be muted
13:56:33 <shadi> zakim, unmute yeliz.aa
13:56:33 <Zakim> yeliz.aa should no longer be muted
13:56:43 <shadi> zakim, mute yeliz
13:56:43 <Zakim> yeliz should now be muted
13:56:46 <shadi> zakim, unmute yeliz
13:56:46 <Zakim> yeliz should no longer be muted
13:56:53 <shadi> zakim, mute yeliz.aa
13:56:53 <Zakim> yeliz.aa should now be muted
13:57:02 <shadi> zakim, yeliz is klaus
13:57:02 <Zakim> +klaus; got it
13:57:15 <shadi> zakim, yeliz.aa is yeliz
13:57:15 <Zakim> +yeliz; got it
13:57:22 <shadi> KM: agree with previous speakers
13:57:51 <shadi> ...need to outline the process of how the result was achieved
13:58:03 <shadi> ...together with feedback form
13:58:21 <shadi> VC: so accessibility statements?
13:58:50 <shadi> KM: or stored on a server for large scale accreditation
13:59:16 <shadi> VC: need to black-box the website at the time of accreditation?
13:59:22 <shadi> KM: yes, this might need to happen
13:59:53 <shadi> ...also need to communicate if the check was self-declared, expert, group of experts, end-users, etc
14:00:13 <klaus> zakim, mute me
14:00:13 <Zakim> klaus should now be muted
14:00:18 <shadi> ...also important to consider the level of complexity and if the process would be feasible in practice
14:00:30 <shadi> zakim, take up next
14:00:30 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Current practices - 30 mins" taken up [from shadi]
14:00:54 <markel> q+
14:01:00 <shadi> VC: how do you see 3rd party certification schemes working in practice?
14:01:04 <davidsloan> q+
14:01:04 <annika> q+
14:01:23 <shadi> MV: haven't seen the track-keeping thing in the accreditation domain
14:01:39 <shadi> ...but research papers about accessibility performance over time
14:01:54 <shadi> ...one mechanism they used is archive.org
14:02:15 <Yehya> q+
14:02:16 <shadi> ...which has snapshot of websites
14:02:46 <shadi> ...agree with Klaus that we should keep track of how things evolve
14:02:55 <shadi> ...but difficult as websites change frequently
14:03:08 <davidsloan> zakim, ack me
14:03:09 <Zakim> unmuting davidsloan
14:03:09 <Zakim> I see markel, annika, Yehya on the speaker queue
14:03:15 <shadi> VC: do large organizations keep copies of their website?
14:03:51 <shadi> DS: coming from research to consultancy
14:04:10 <shadi> ...asked to assess websites, often in a legal context
14:04:13 <markel> Web accessibility guidelines - A lesson from the evolving Web_http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11280-011-0130-8
14:04:24 <shadi> ...raises the question of re-testing an remediation
14:04:51 <shadi> ...maybe not written in a standard or policy
14:04:56 <markel> Evolution of web site design patterns: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1095872.1095876
14:05:16 <shadi> ...but need to have at regular intervals
14:05:29 <markel> Progress on Website Accessibility?: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2435215.2435217
14:05:31 <shadi> ...should be part of the accreditation scheme
14:05:43 <shadi> VC: aware of scheme that is valid for only 1 year
14:05:44 <markel> these were papers of how we can keep track of accessibility or usability
14:05:55 <shadi> ...but website can change within 5 minutes
14:06:18 <shadi> DS: things like VPAT do not seem to consider this
14:06:27 <davidsloan> zakim, mute me
14:06:27 <Zakim> davidsloan should now be muted
14:06:31 <annika> zakim, ack me
14:06:31 <Zakim> unmuting annika
14:06:33 <shadi> q?
14:06:33 <Zakim> I see markel, Yehya on the speaker queue
14:07:00 <shadi> AN: experience with monitoring of websites in regular intervals
14:07:15 <shadi> ...approaches in the Netherlands and also in Norway
14:07:39 <shadi> ...review by experts once a year and automatic checks monthly in between
14:07:53 <shadi> ...this would indicate major changes such as a relaunch
14:08:05 <shadi> VC: is that documented somewhere?
14:08:19 <markel> q-
14:08:26 <shadi> AN: eGovMon may have some description about the process
14:08:40 <annika> zakim, mute me
14:08:40 <Zakim> annika should now be muted
14:09:01 <shadi> YM: also implemented observatory
14:09:15 <shadi> ...in which the website is copied into the database
14:09:37 <shadi> ...and compared during rechecking to only check pages that changed
14:09:57 <shadi> ...then report improvements and failures in these changes
14:10:03 <shadi> agenda?
14:10:21 <davidsloan> q+
14:10:33 <shadi> ack yeh
14:10:38 <davidsloan> zakim, ack me
14:10:38 <Zakim> unmuting davidsloan
14:10:39 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
14:10:50 <shadi> zakim, take up next
14:10:50 <Zakim> agendum 4. "design - 10 mins" taken up [from shadi]
14:11:16 <shadi> VC: what aspects do accrediation schemes need to consider?
14:11:53 <shadi> DS: need robust scheme that is usable for the owner
14:12:15 <shadi> ...also that ensures a quality assurance process
14:12:22 <annika> Regular monitoring of web sites by eGovMon project: http://accessibility.egovmon.no/en/benchmarking2.0/
14:13:12 <shadi> ...also need to think about technical aspects vs experiential aspects as well
14:13:53 <shadi> VC: agree that benefit for the owner is necessary
14:14:16 <shadi> ...and ultimately also should benefit the end-user
14:15:15 <shadi> DS: would be a fantastic research project to collect information about what would most help people report good quality
14:15:36 <markel> In line with what David says
14:15:37 <markel> http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1639642.1639677
14:15:56 <markel> Collaborative web accessibility improvement: challenges and possibilities
14:16:06 <markel> q+
14:16:16 <davidsloan> zakim, mute me
14:16:16 <Zakim> davidsloan should now be muted
14:16:37 <shadi> MV: "social accessibility" by IBM Japan
14:16:57 <markel> q-
14:17:04 <shadi> ...may be reliable and not as sophisticated
14:17:09 <Justin> hiro
14:17:21 <Justin> crowdsoucing
14:17:54 <davidsloan> I think that collaborative identification and fixing of accessibility problems is a great crowd-sourcing initiative, but is complementary to an accreditation system that would identify sites that *don't* have such problems
14:18:26 <shadi> agenda?
14:18:27 <klaus> sorry, have to leave ... bye
14:18:40 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 6
14:18:40 <Zakim> agendum 6. "benefits - 10 mins" taken up [from shadi]
14:18:46 <sharper> q+
14:18:50 <annika> In the Netherlands, they use a combination of monitoring (http://versie1.webrichtlijnen.nl/monitor/) and accessiblity label "drempelvrij" (http://www.accessibility.nl/ondersteuning/het-inspectieproces).
14:18:52 <shadi> VC: benefits for users from accredited websites?
14:18:57 <Zakim> -klaus
14:19:02 <davidsloan> I'd like to see researchers gather more details from disabled web users on how they assess quality of web sites in terms of accessibility and user experience; and their views on accreditation schemes
14:19:36 <shadi> SH: quite some work done confirming that website that meet standards are often built better
14:19:44 <shadi> ...and meet better quality attributes
14:19:49 <markel> q+
14:20:16 <shadi> ...so maybe not immediate but would contribute to improvement
14:20:30 <sharper> q-
14:20:33 <shadi> ...would help promote websites that are better made
14:20:54 <shadi> MV: agree that benefits may not be direct
14:21:09 <davidsloan> any accreditation scheme must be trustworthy, and as soon as trust is lost (e.g. because it isn't sufficiently rigorous and marks a site as accessible when it isn't), then the accreditation scheme fails for people with disabilities
14:21:15 <shadi> ...but also helps set expectation
14:21:22 <shadi> ...also side-effects of that
14:21:37 <davidsloan> q+
14:21:48 <shadi> q- markel
14:22:12 <shadi> VC: agree with David's comment on importance of trustworthyness
14:22:24 <shadi> q+
14:22:30 <davidsloan> zakim, ack me
14:22:30 <Zakim> unmuting davidsloan
14:22:32 <Zakim> I see shadi on the speaker queue
14:22:55 <shadi> DS: opens discussion on involving 3rd-party
14:23:41 <shadi> ...for example fixtheweb process had a volunteer between someone who percieves an issue and the website owner
14:24:04 <shadi> ...because also the role of people in accreditation is important
14:24:24 <shadi> ...but brings the challenge of the skills and capabilities of users
14:24:34 <shadi> ack me
14:24:49 <davidsloan> zakim, mute me
14:24:49 <Zakim> davidsloan should now be muted
14:25:46 <Vivienne> SA: strongly agrees with David, trustworthiness is crucial
14:25:56 <davidsloan> +1 to shadi's point that trustworthiness affects the underlying standard the accreditation scheme purports to support
14:26:01 <shadi> SAZ: agree with David on trustworthyness
14:26:25 <shadi> ...also that unreliable schemes could undo much of the work we've been doing on accessibility
14:26:30 <markel> guys, I must leave: we should have more of these! bye!
14:26:33 <markel> markel has left #rd
14:27:00 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 7
14:27:00 <Zakim> agendum 7. "Future practice considerations - 10 mins" taken up [from shadi]
14:27:20 <shadi> VC: how to ensure that someone has the ability to say that a website is accessible
14:27:46 <shadi> ...Giogrio wrote about the aspect of the role of expertise
14:27:56 <davidsloan> q+
14:28:11 <davidsloan> zakim, ack me
14:28:11 <Zakim> unmuting davidsloan
14:28:12 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
14:28:31 <davidsloan> http://www.hassellinclusion.com/2013/01/accessibility-accreditation-value/
14:29:20 <shadi> DS: Jonathan Hassel posted something about selecting acreditation providers
14:29:27 <shadi> VC: in the wiki
14:29:44 <shadi> ...also paper by Suzette Keith about overclaiming in logos
14:30:32 <shadi> DS: discussion about need for professional acreditation
14:30:41 <Zakim> -yeliz
14:30:52 <Zakim> -Yehya
14:30:59 <shadi> ...also discussion about an international Association of Web Accessibility Professionals
14:31:13 <shadi> VC: also discussion about W3C's role in this
14:32:23 <Vivienne> SA: Process is paramount, important - open and not closed to a particular group
14:32:31 <Vivienne> SA: who can make a claim?
14:32:35 <Zakim> -sharper
14:33:32 <Vivienne> SA: is a need for self-certification and they have a QA process in place, others need help (technical perhaps), both can and should co-exist.  Skill is importnat - training and materials - but needs to be and remain open.
14:34:16 <silvia> you are very welcome! Very interesting discussion
14:34:20 <christos> goodbye
14:34:20 <davidsloan> bye!
14:34:22 <Zakim> -Mark_Hakkinen
14:34:24 <silvia> bye
14:34:24 <Zakim> -christos
14:34:25 <shadi> trackbot, end meeting
14:34:25 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
14:34:25 <annika> thanks and bye
14:34:25 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Vivienne, markel, Shadi, davidsloan, annika, Justin, christos, Yehya, sharper, Mark_Hakkinen, silvia, klaus, yeliz
14:34:29 <Zakim> -davidsloan
14:34:31 <Zakim> -annika
14:34:33 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:34:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/09/11-rd-minutes.html trackbot
14:34:34 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
14:34:34 <RRSAgent> I see no action items