11:26:19 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #csvw
11:26:19 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/09/24-csvw-irc
11:26:21 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
11:26:21 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #csvw
11:26:23 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be CSVW
11:26:24 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see DATA_CSVWG()8:00AM scheduled to start in 34 minutes
11:26:24 <trackbot> Meeting: CSV on the Web Working Group Teleconference
11:26:24 <trackbot> Date: 24 September 2014
11:26:43 <ivan> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/Meeting_Agenda_2014-09-24
11:26:58 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: meeting agenda 2014-02-24: https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/Meeting_Agenda_2014-09-24
11:27:08 <ivan> Chair: Jeni
11:27:14 <ivan> Scribe: danbri
11:31:55 <JeniT> JeniT has joined #csvw
11:57:15 <danbri> danbri has joined #csvw
11:57:51 <danbri> hi
11:58:20 <bill_ingram> bill_ingram has joined #csvw
11:58:49 <JeniT> hi
11:59:26 <Zakim> DATA_CSVWG()8:00AM has now started
11:59:33 <Zakim> + +44.207.346.aaaa
12:00:33 <danbri> scribenick: danbri
12:01:00 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-aix
12:01:00 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
12:01:00 <Zakim> +Ivan
12:02:59 <Zakim> + +1.509.554.aabb
12:03:06 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
12:03:25 <danbri> zakim, who is speaking
12:03:25 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is speaking', danbri
12:03:27 <danbri> zakim, who is speaking?
12:03:28 <ivan> zakim, aabb is Eric
12:03:29 <Zakim> +Eric; got it
12:03:37 <Zakim> danbri, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
12:04:40 <JeniT> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/Meeting_Agenda_2014-09-24
12:06:02 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #csvw
12:06:36 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
12:06:45 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me
12:06:45 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
12:06:54 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone
12:06:54 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone', AndyS
12:07:28 <danbri> jenit: 2 items on agenda
12:07:33 <danbri> informal discussion as not quorat
12:07:48 <Zakim> +bill_ingram
12:07:55 <danbri> 1st is templating; 2nd is use of schema.org, dublin core or other metadata vocab, and building them into recognised terms within the metadata vocab
12:08:01 <danbri> topic: templating
12:08:09 <danbri> jeni: following on last week's discussion
12:08:12 <JeniT> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-csv-wg/2014Sep/0072.html
12:08:28 <danbri> if you count some weeks twice
12:09:06 <danbri> jeni: from our discussion last week, we pulled out some of the issues
12:09:10 <danbri> took a straw poll on options
12:09:31 <danbri> Jeni: three lessons for me - 1st of all, the probable need to point to multiple templating languages *anyway*
12:09:37 <danbri> ... to have some some extensibility there
12:09:58 <danbri> 2nd - andy's suggestion that perhaps creation of templ lang could be begun in a Community Group, or (re)chartered later
12:10:03 <danbri> 3rd - question of who would do the work
12:10:19 <danbri> fact that we have limited numbers of people in the WG and stepping up to edit specs, which limits what we can take on as a group
12:10:22 <danbri> thoughts on these?
12:10:59 <danbri> ivan: In your mail you also referred to ... templating, not clear what we mean by it. Complete vs minimalistic.
12:11:05 <danbri> ... refs to others would be the most complete ones
12:11:12 <danbri> ... in some sense, that also directs the possible ways fwd
12:11:49 <danbri> ivan: I had impression that having a complete template language, and by complete I mean a lang that can solve all our usecases, ... I think it is absolutely unrealistic. And the no. of people on today's call provides another argument against that.
12:12:04 <danbri> ... when you speak of a templating language, what level exactly do you have in mind?
12:12:32 <JeniT> danbri: some question about whether a templating language might be able to take on basic default mappings
12:12:41 <JeniT> … ie a default template for a boring/mechanistic mapping
12:12:46 <danbri> ivan: default in sense of conceptual mapping
12:12:55 <danbri> (does it need to be expressible in a templ lang, or built-in)
12:13:05 <danbri> ivan: should be minimal level that a templ lang should have.
12:13:16 <danbri> ... q is whether we have capacity to do even that minimal one. That's the real issue.
12:13:45 <danbri> Jeni: I had a bit of a tinker last weekend, looking into what an XML version of the data from uc-4 might be, and how that shows up w.r.t. mapping rules.
12:14:32 <ivan> q+
12:14:32 <danbri> ... in doing that exercise, it highlights some of the issues. For example, looking in particular at URL generation stuff that Andy was talking about last week. For the example I tried, it was clear that you need some level of regex processing. Replacement, lowercasing, basic string manipulation, to create URLs.
12:14:41 <danbri> ... which is a basic thing that we do need to support.
12:14:50 <danbri> (Asks AndyS re url gen)
12:15:12 <danbri> AndyS: I haven't done any concrete experimentation, looking at what others here have been doing to create URLs.
12:15:35 <danbri> But agree, broadly. ... People do seem to care quite a lot about presentation of URLs, ...
12:15:44 <ivan> q+
12:15:50 <danbri> so point about regexs, cleanup etc to avoid nasty-looking urls, uc/lcase etc.
12:15:50 <danbri> q?
12:16:00 <danbri> ... going from DB IDs that might have - or : etc in them, etc.
12:16:11 <JeniT> ack ivan
12:16:29 <danbri> ivan: we discusses this a little a few weeks ago
12:16:31 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/tree/filtered-templates/experiments/simple-templates-jquery
12:16:39 <danbri> I went ahead and played with what a minimal template should be [link]
12:16:55 <danbri> this essentially takes Andy's filtering mechanism discussion, ...
12:17:01 <danbri> ... this is something still relatively simple
12:17:16 <danbri> ivan: I'm sure there are corner cases, but that stuff covers a lot of what you're saying
12:17:29 <AndyS> UC-4 -- http://www.w3.org/TR/csvw-ucr/#UC-OrganogramData
12:17:31 <danbri> q+ to note that normal Web sites have URL requirements too; any evidence from Mustache etc world?
12:17:41 <danbri> ... note that there are no conditionals, variables etc.
12:18:14 <danbri> ... that is there as a kind of a proposal but that's why I come back to the same issue. There in a rough level, needs packing, taking care of, ... all the escaping mechanisms, ... put into REC form etc.
12:18:24 <danbri> even with that simple level like this one, there's a lot of work to be done
12:18:24 <JeniT> q+ to make the point that templating URLs is a smaller problem than templating full mapping to other formats
12:18:42 <JeniT> ack danbri
12:18:42 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to note that normal Web sites have URL requirements too; any evidence from Mustache etc world?
12:18:45 <danbri> ... I can definitely NOT take the responsibility to turn (something like) this into a fullblown REC all by myself - just not on the books
12:19:22 <AndyS> q+
12:19:30 <ivan> q+
12:19:57 <danbri> danbri: suspect there's a hunger out there in mustache etc world for url cleaning functions
12:20:14 <danbri> ivan: having looked at mustache, ... we can't consider it simple. Complexity level is way beyond what we can do.
12:20:24 <danbri> ivan: for us to spec something it would need to be smaller
12:20:41 <JeniT> ack AndyS
12:20:41 <danbri> (I'd be happy with extensibility mechanism and a few conventions on top of non-w3c mustache, for now)
12:20:55 <danbri> andys: for mustache, you build a map of values prior to templating
12:21:10 <danbri> so that's where the mustache pipeline would put the work
12:21:18 <JeniT> ack JeniT
12:21:18 <Zakim> JeniT, you wanted to make the point that templating URLs is a smaller problem than templating full mapping to other formats
12:21:26 <JeniT> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6570
12:21:27 <ivan> ack iva
12:21:53 <danbri> Jeni: agree with that. IF oyu look at the URI template RFC, ... then it doesn't have any of that manip stuff at all, ... assumes those variables are set prior
12:22:10 <danbri> ... generation of urls is in some ways a diff problem, subset of, from generation of the entire data in a different format e.g. vcard
12:22:27 <danbri> so i think we're likely to run into wanting to template URLs even if we decide not to go the full hog on the templating language
12:22:37 <ivan> q+
12:22:40 <JeniT> ack ivan
12:22:54 <danbri> ivan: If I have a template, ...
12:23:00 <danbri> [rummages for template]
12:23:05 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/blob/filtered-templates/experiments/simple-templates-jquery/tree-ops/tree-ops-turtle.tmpl
12:23:12 <danbri> ... I took your example and I turn it into a template in the version I have
12:23:17 <danbri> which does include things about URIs
12:23:24 <danbri> some of these things are part of the template
12:23:45 <danbri> ivan: you relaly have to have templates in one specific case, for one specific value... other part can be put textually into template
12:24:08 <danbri> ... if you have a function (in my lang I call it a filter) which has simple ops, eg. encoding for %20 etc., I think on the templating level this is all you need
12:24:19 <danbri> you don't build the whole thing from pure templating
12:24:39 <danbri> ivan: so you'd need a number of simple filters, e.g. the various filters defining SPARQL
12:24:51 <danbri> ... you have to take part of those, they're relatively well spec'd
12:24:58 <JeniT> q?
12:24:59 <danbri> ... which gives us more or less what you need.
12:25:11 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/blob/gh-pages/examples/tests/scenarios/uc-4/attempts/attempt-3/gov.uk/schema.json
12:25:22 <danbri> jeni: kind of thing that I was working on, to demonstrate diff approach :---/^
12:25:37 <danbri> ... a metadata spec where I have a thing for creating some XML that looks like:
12:25:43 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/blob/gh-pages/examples/tests/scenarios/uc-4/attempts/attempt-3/output/output.xml
12:26:09 <JeniT> "rowURL": "http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/department/{lowercase(acronym)}",
12:26:40 <danbri> ivan: apart from syntax, it's quite similar
12:26:51 <danbri> jeni: it's different in that there's not template file that does whole thing
12:26:57 <danbri> ivan: yes, its all in the metadata here
12:26:58 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/blob/filtered-templates/experiments/simple-templates-jquery/tree-ops/tree-ops-turtle.tmpl
12:27:27 <ivan> @id.lower
12:27:42 <danbri> ivan: I think we're talking pretty much about same things
12:27:45 <danbri> jeni: I don't!
12:28:17 <danbri> ... my point is that if mapping is done from metadata file, we might want basic URI templates like this, without full templating
12:28:36 <danbri> ivan: if we're having a default mapping, then everything else is outside of the mapping
12:28:38 <AndyS> +1 to URI templates in metadata.
12:28:45 <JeniT> ack AndyS
12:28:56 <danbri> ivan: pushing things into the metadata file is opening the floodgates
12:29:07 <danbri> AndyS: [muted?]
12:29:21 <danbri> AndyS: Agreeing with point about URI templates in metadata
12:29:40 <danbri> AndyS: A speculative idea. That the WG just looks at URI templating for a while. Puts aside shaping the data. Just to address a smaller problem.
12:29:50 <danbri> That will also get us all used to the capabilities of templating in general.
12:29:58 <danbri> ...then come back to wider solutions
12:30:13 <danbri> AndyS: Just floating the idea, not advocating for it.
12:30:24 <danbri> Jeni: I'd be v happy moving fwd in that way
12:30:26 <danbri> q+
12:30:43 <danbri> ivan: still not sure. then we have to have a separate def, regardless of the uri tempalting, of what the default mapping is
12:30:47 <danbri> ... and we don't have that
12:30:55 <danbri> ... we have to define the default mapping in general terms
12:31:03 <danbri> and then we try to fold into this some kind of uri mapping
12:31:14 <JeniT> q+ JeniT to say that we need a default mapping anyway, not least to determine the basic requirements from the templating language
12:31:28 <JeniT> ack danbri
12:31:28 <danbri> my own idea, if we had a v simple language for templating, then it's something i can describe at least conceptually even if an impl doesn't do it that way
12:31:35 <danbri> q-
12:31:44 <JeniT> ack JeniT
12:31:44 <Zakim> JeniT, you wanted to say that we need a default mapping anyway, not least to determine the basic requirements from the templating language
12:31:56 <danbri> jeni: my opinion, that we need to define those default mappings anyway
12:32:01 <danbri> not least to gain an understanding anyway
12:32:24 <danbri> so it seems to me that this is work that we need to do, that we're chartered to do, ...
12:32:28 <danbri> need to do it anyway
12:32:36 <danbri> need some kind of def of what happens if you don't have a template
12:32:45 <danbri> q?
12:32:47 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone?
12:32:47 <Zakim> On the phone I see danbri, Ivan, Eric, JeniT, AndyS, bill_ingram
12:32:53 <ericstephan> ericstephan has joined #csvw
12:32:54 <ivan> q+
12:32:59 <JeniT> ack ivan
12:33:31 <danbri> ivan: agree it has to be done. Would go one step beyond, ... let's do a 1st draft of the 3 default mappings without the URI story.
12:33:35 <danbri> then we can look at it again
12:33:49 <danbri> q+ to ask AndyS et al if there's impl feedback from http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-json-res/ that's relevant here
12:33:54 <JeniT> ack danbri
12:33:54 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to ask AndyS et al if there's impl feedback from http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-json-res/ that's relevant here
12:34:29 <danbri> AndyS: ... it also has the goal of being able to transfer rdf terms
12:34:39 <danbri> ... so doesn't hae the json-friendliness of json-ld
12:34:46 <danbri> speculating, it is the most common sparql results format
12:34:53 <danbri> typically fed into rdf-sparql-json
12:35:01 <danbri> faster parsing can matter for large resultsets
12:35:21 <danbri> layering in xml, everyone finds consistently impacts clientside, across langauges
12:35:32 <danbri> ... some people use csv too
12:36:05 <danbri> jenit: concrete suggestions: initially use default mapping extremely basic for target formats
12:36:12 <danbri> i tink we have some of that in wiki form in various places
12:36:20 <danbri> ... matter of pulling that together
12:36:30 <ivan> q+
12:36:31 <danbri> ... look at then URL templating, and fuller language templating requirements
12:36:34 <JeniT> ack ivan
12:36:38 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/blob/rdfconversion-ivan/csv2rdf/index.html
12:36:44 <danbri> ivan: a long time ago I did this --//^^
12:37:06 <danbri> ... back in may. It was an attempt to document a default transformation to RDF as a model
12:37:24 <danbri> ... could be out-dated since metadata changed since
12:37:52 <danbri> ... available if anyone wants to pick it up.
12:38:16 <danbri> ivan: It was such that a version of this adapted to XML or JSON would be relatively easy, except that you can get into long existential debates on attrib vs element in XML
12:38:41 <danbri> Jeni: Any objections to next step being v strawman version going into, and coming out of, the f2f?
12:38:43 <danbri> +1
12:38:47 <danbri> ivan: yes, good 1st step
12:38:49 <ericstephan> +1
12:39:05 <danbri> jeni: 2nd q: is there anybody who feels able to take on strawman for RDF
12:39:11 <danbri> ivan: [?]
12:39:18 <danbri> ivan: the one I did is the rdf default mapping
12:39:24 <danbri> jeni: ... volunteering to take that fwd?
12:40:04 <danbri> ... we can bring this to the f2f, or give it a look over to update for latest metadata etc specs
12:40:06 <danbri> ivan: i can do that
12:40:16 <JeniT> ACTION: ivan to bring RDF mapping up to date with other specs, for discussion at F2F
12:40:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-30 - Bring rdf mapping up to date with other specs, for discussion at f2f [on Ivan Herman - due 2014-10-01].
12:40:34 <danbri> jeni: any volunteers for a v rough json strawman?
12:40:59 <danbri> ivan: the doc I wrote was fairly general, so that it could be easily adapted to json and xml
12:41:09 <danbri> ... having somebody doing it in parallel might lead to duplication
12:41:20 <danbri> ... so probably should be done once there's an rdf strawman
12:41:28 <danbri> ivan: and then look at it that way
12:41:41 <danbri> jeni: OK, can you do something this week, to give others a chance to build on it pre-f2f?
12:42:04 <danbri> q+ to note that TPAC hotels are filling up, apparently
12:42:25 <danbri> jeni: re spec, in gh-pages you get github.io pages
12:42:33 <JeniT> ack danbri
12:42:33 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to note that TPAC hotels are filling up, apparently
12:43:14 <JeniT> q?
12:43:16 <danbri> topic: Metadata vocabs: DC, Schema.org etc.
12:43:29 <danbri> jeni: metadata vocabs - which to use?
12:43:49 <danbri> [/me notes that JSON-LD's capabilities around @context are quite confusing, re mappigns, defaults etc]
12:44:11 <danbri> jenit: DC, schema.org which builds on DCAT/Void etc
12:44:27 <danbri> ... point being that we need a standard way within metadata to say - this is the 'license' for this dataset
12:44:30 <danbri> so that tools can understand
12:44:35 <danbri> and process based on metadata
12:44:51 <danbri> jeni: I'm most interested in license, as that's key for open data,
12:44:56 <ericstephan> q+
12:44:59 <danbri> jeni: any suggestions?
12:45:04 <JeniT> ack ericstephan
12:45:08 <danbri> "should we just adopt schema.org within the metadata?"
12:45:16 <danbri> eric: I've been involved in data on the Web best practices
12:45:24 <danbri> ... seems that shema.org is at least referenced
12:45:35 <danbri> ... wondering if there is a particular approach that the W3C Data Activity advocates
12:45:38 <danbri> ... this WG is under that
12:45:52 <ivan> q+
12:45:55 <JeniT> ack ivan
12:45:57 <danbri> ... any cohesion on these things across Data Activity WGs?
12:46:30 <danbri> ivan: I'm not following that WG directly, but ... if that WG is working on what metadata should be added to diff things on the Web, then yes we should have some coordination/centralization
12:46:38 <danbri> ... which is indep of whether we use schema.org
12:46:47 <danbri> ... expect that WG would say that license is something that's needed
12:46:52 <danbri> ... and we shouldn't do something different.
12:47:08 <danbri> ivan: obvious case for liaison is during TPAC. I see that Phil is also on our WG meeting, so it should be possible.
12:47:16 <danbri> ... so that's an answer to Eric here.
12:47:31 <danbri> jeni: It would be useful to talk to Phil pre-TPAC re direction
12:47:44 <danbri> ... would i be right to say they're probably not citing it normatively
12:48:00 <danbri> ... ie. more like a recommendation rather than bringing it in as a spec
12:48:00 <ivan> q+
12:48:06 <JeniT> ack ivan
12:48:19 <danbri> ivan: so this comes to the other issue that I did raise on the mailing list, and needs realising
12:48:23 <danbri> ... danbri don't take it personal
12:48:43 <danbri> ivan: having a normative ref to schema.org will raise all kinds of discussions and issues that are way more complicated than we think
12:48:48 <JeniT> q+ to suggest that we adopt the schema.org terms but reference the normative terms on which those terms are based
12:48:49 <danbri> ... not sure that this is something that we want to go down
12:49:13 <AndyS> q+
12:49:17 <danbri> ivan: big discussions on public-vocabs
12:49:37 <JeniT> ack JeniT
12:49:37 <Zakim> JeniT, you wanted to suggest that we adopt the schema.org terms but reference the normative terms on which those terms are based
12:50:08 <danbri> jeni: I had a suggestion - squaring that circle - which would be to adopt exactly same set of terms as in current schema.org but have their formal definitions from other sources
12:50:15 <danbri> e.g. license could point to dc:license term definition
12:50:22 <danbri> ... even if named the same
12:50:28 <danbri> ... so the mapping would be an implicit one
12:50:47 <danbri> q+ to say that schema.org could add more equivalentProperty / Class mappings to its master file to support that
12:51:10 <danbri> jeni: spec would say that the metadata terms you could use are catalogues, spatial, etc etc ... i.e. the properties that are defined on schema.org Dataset
12:51:13 <JeniT> http://schema.org/Dataset
12:51:29 <danbri> but instead of defining them by ref to schema.org dataset, it would define them by ref to the orig vocabulary they arose, when there is one
12:51:38 <danbri> so e.g. spatial and temporal are dublin core terms
12:51:46 <danbri> we could say they mean what they refer to
12:51:48 <danbri> in dc
12:52:00 <danbri> ivan: so what would be the purpose to use schema.org here, if we refer to DC?
12:52:17 <danbri> jeni: It would mean we'd be compliant with, consistent with, schema.org Dataset, ... but normatively ref other vocab.
12:52:34 <danbri> ivan: but if json-ld has a context, it would still refer normatively to the URIs in the schema.org vocabulary.
12:52:50 <JeniT> q?
12:52:51 <danbri> jeni: that's a good question - I don't know whether the json-ld context allows you to point to two things, or to say that they're equivalent.
12:53:08 <Zakim> -JeniT
12:53:20 <danbri> AndyS ... can barely hear you
12:53:42 <JeniT> ergh, wifi problems
12:53:52 <danbri> AndyS: W3C getting itself into knots about using something else that's on the Web,
12:54:00 <danbri> ... a shame that it ends up on this WGs plate
12:54:01 <ivan> q+
12:54:11 <AndyS> ack me
12:54:12 <danbri> ack AndyS
12:54:14 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
12:54:48 <JeniT> ack ivan
12:54:55 <danbri> Ivan: referring to DC is ok
12:54:59 <danbri> [ btw http://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references ]
12:55:26 <danbri> ... referrring to anything outside W3C requires stability around the technology. That there is a clear IPR situation around those terms. That there is a clear process on how those things evolve in time, now and in the future.
12:55:39 <danbri> org is the issue i think - see http://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references#orgs
12:55:51 <danbri> ivan: evolution of discussion around w3c may lead to clarifications
12:55:58 <danbri> today these issues are still subject of lots of discussion
12:56:07 <danbri> and that's why we'll run into those issues as well
12:56:14 <danbri> the way schema.org operates is for many a question
12:56:21 <danbri> witness the discussion going on right now
12:56:28 <danbri> see lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/
12:56:34 <danbri> ... that's the unfortunate fact.
12:56:52 <danbri> ... we saw ... other WGs tried to successfully or not refer normatively to WHATWG docs
12:56:57 <danbri> ... all discussions that came up there
12:57:14 <danbri> WHATWG generated much more discussion than schema.org ever would, hopefully
12:57:30 <danbri> If we all decided that this is what we want, we can try going there, i'm just saying that this is a rocky start
12:57:32 <JeniT> ack danbri
12:57:32 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to say that schema.org could add more equivalentProperty / Class mappings to its master file to support that
12:58:03 <danbri> danbri: [says that.]
12:58:17 <danbri> normative refs spec, please read :)  http://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references#orgs
12:58:43 <danbri> jeni: I think we'll need to return to this on the mailing list, [or] have it as a discussion item at the f2f.
12:58:55 <danbri> ... esp informed by what the other best practice recommendations are
12:59:07 <danbri> ...we'll consult with phil, and try to reach a decision based on that.
12:59:12 <danbri> jenit: AOB?
12:59:45 <danbri> reminder: Please register for TPAC, come to F2F [and book your hotel]. We'll get a phone for dial-in.
12:59:54 <danbri> [or bring a tent]
13:00:10 <danbri> ivan: see website for nearby hotels. don't leave til last minute!
13:00:11 <ericstephan> I have an RV :-)
13:00:14 <danbri> :)
13:00:38 <Zakim> -danbri
13:00:38 <bill_ingram> bill_ingram has left #csvw
13:00:39 <Zakim> -JeniT
13:00:39 <Zakim> -AndyS
13:00:40 <Zakim> -Eric
13:00:43 <Zakim> -Ivan
13:00:45 <Zakim> -bill_ingram
13:00:45 <Zakim> DATA_CSVWG()8:00AM has ended
13:00:45 <Zakim> Attendees were +44.207.346.aaaa, danbri, Ivan, +1.509.554.aabb, JeniT, Eric, AndyS, bill_ingram
13:05:06 <danbri> zakim, please draft minutes
13:05:06 <Zakim> I don't understand 'please draft minutes', danbri
13:05:12 <danbri> rrsagent, please draft minutes
13:05:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/09/24-csvw-minutes.html danbri
13:05:22 <danbri> too many bots :)
13:13:16 <ivan> trackbot, end telcon
13:13:16 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
13:13:16 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
13:13:24 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
13:13:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/09/24-csvw-minutes.html trackbot
13:13:25 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
13:13:25 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2014/09/24-csvw-actions.rdf :
13:13:25 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ivan to bring RDF mapping up to date with other specs, for discussion at F2F [1]
13:13:25 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/09/24-csvw-irc#T12-40-16