19:47:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdw
19:47:47 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/01/13-sdw-irc
19:47:49 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
19:47:49 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdw
19:47:51 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
19:47:51 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
19:47:52 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
19:47:52 <trackbot> Date: 13 January 2016
19:48:28 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160113
19:48:35 <phila> regrets+ Bart, Alejandro
19:48:51 <phila> regrets+ Josh
19:50:36 <eparsons> eparsons has joined #sdw
19:50:47 <phila> chair: Kerry
19:51:09 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #sdw
19:52:41 <eparsons> Evening all !
19:55:20 <frans> frans has joined #sdw
19:55:51 <eparsons> trackbot, start meeting
19:55:53 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
19:55:55 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
19:55:56 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
19:55:56 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
19:55:57 <trackbot> Date: 13 January 2016
19:56:14 <eparsons> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:58:01 <frans> present+ frans
19:58:16 <eparsons> present+ eparsons
19:58:32 <jtandy> present+ jtandy
19:58:34 <phila> present+ phila, kerry
19:58:40 <phila> agenda?
19:58:51 <Payam> Payam has joined #sdw
19:58:53 <RaulGarciaCastro> RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdw
19:58:54 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160113
19:59:10 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #sdw
19:59:45 <phila> scribe: phila
20:00:43 <ClemensPortele> ClemensPortele has joined #sdw
20:01:13 <AndreaPerego> AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
20:01:17 <phila> Topic: Preliminaries
20:01:20 <ScottSimmons> ScottSimmons has joined #sdw
20:01:20 <billroberts> billroberts has joined #sdw
20:01:34 <ClemensPortele> present+ ClemensPortele
20:02:29 <ClausStadler> ClausStadler has joined #sdw
20:02:39 <phila> regrets+ Rachel, Antoine
20:02:52 <ScottSimmons> present+ ScottSimmons
20:02:54 <phila> regrets- Rachel
20:03:03 <Payam> present+ Payam
20:03:13 <Linda> Linda has joined #sdw
20:03:13 <billroberts> present+ billroberts
20:03:24 <Linda> present+ Linda
20:03:47 <ClausStadler> present+ ClausStadler
20:03:58 <phila> PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes
20:04:06 <kerry> https://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes.html
20:04:09 <RaulGarciaCastro> Hi, which is the meeting password for WebEx?
20:04:17 <frans> +1
20:04:21 <jtandy> v4qtEh56
20:04:27 <kerry> +1
20:04:29 <jtandy> ... is the password
20:04:31 <eparsons> +1 for minutes
20:04:31 <jtandy> +1
20:04:33 <phila> +1
20:04:35 <ClemensPortele> +1
20:04:43 <phila> RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes
20:04:43 <Linda> +0 was absent
20:04:51 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sdw
20:04:57 <RaulGarciaCastro> thanks jtandy
20:05:04 <phila> Patent Call https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
20:05:57 <MattPerry> present+ MattPerry
20:06:37 <kerry> topic: Best Practice: Resolve to publish FPWD
20:06:50 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call Editors' Draft of the BP Doc
20:06:54 <LarsG> LarsG has joined #sdw
20:07:01 <phila> kerry: Invites editors to introduce the topic
20:07:06 <RaulGarciaCastro> present+ RaulGarciaCastro
20:07:19 <phila> jtandy: happy to introduce the topic
20:07:28 <phila> jtandy: Since creating last week's more or less stable version.
20:07:40 <phila> ... I;ve had comments from people who have read the doc from end to end.
20:07:54 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #sdw
20:08:04 <phila> ... I am still processing Rachel's comments, plus Clemens, Frans and ??
20:08:05 <SimonCox> present+ SimonCox
20:08:07 <kerry> q?
20:08:14 <kerry> present+ Kerry
20:08:16 <ClemensPortele> s/??/Bill/
20:08:19 <LarsG> present+ LarsG
20:08:21 <phila> jtandy: Last week we talked about getting a better connection between the BP doc and the charter
20:08:22 <robin_> robin_ has joined #sdw
20:08:32 <phila> jtandy: You'll see in section 3 that there are now references to the charter
20:08:38 <robin_> robin_ has joined #sdw
20:08:53 <KJanowicz> KJanowicz has joined #sdw
20:08:55 <phila> jtandy: What I've been doing mostly... If I;ve had a suggestion for a literal change, I've almost always just taken that nad used it.
20:09:06 <phila> jtandy: Where people have raised more of a question, I have raised an issue
20:09:15 <phila> ... each issue is linked to the issue discussion in GH
20:09:32 <phila> ... discussion is all in GH, we can make a resolutiona nd close it with a Pull request
20:09:48 <phila> ... Readers will see that this work isn't finshed yet.
20:10:02 <phila> jtandy: Suggsted changes have been focussed on making thre wording correct, cf. large changes
20:10:22 <phila> ... A couple of changes, eg one from Ed, re Geospatisl custodian cf. expert
20:10:36 <phila> ... that would ripple throuhg the doc so I haven't made that change
20:10:44 <robin_> present+
20:10:53 <phila> jtandy: Rachel suggests that the BP on sensor data flows isn't really in scope.
20:11:23 <phila> jtandy: A quick read through Clemens' comments suggest that some of our BPs don't have a particular spatial theme.
20:11:36 <phila> ... Whetehr we want to make those changes ahead of FPWD is up to the WG.
20:11:36 <frans> I think the thoroughness of processing the commments is impressive. Well done!
20:11:40 <kerry> q+
20:11:45 <phila> jtandy: Most comments seem to suggest that we are in a good place for a FPWD.
20:12:00 <phila> jtandy: Any particular things you want me to brinbg out ahead of the vote, chairs?
20:12:23 <phila> kerry: I'd like to respond to your way of handling hte comments coming in late.
20:12:34 <jtandy> s/brinbg/bring/
20:12:45 <phila> kerry: What to do about those issues that are outstanding - none of them seem very substantive
20:12:46 <LarsG> s/hte/the/
20:13:08 <phila> kerry: I'd like to  resolve that we accept the doc as it is, recognising that there is more to do, which the doc does
20:13:20 <phila> ... So I'd liket o vote on the doc in its current form without any conditions
20:13:39 <frans> s/liket o/like to/
20:13:47 <phila> Linda: Nothing from me, pls go ahead
20:13:50 <phila> Payam: Or me
20:14:07 <kerry> q?
20:14:13 <phila> eparsons: I agree with kerry. Those comments are in the doc
20:14:32 <phila> ... So I'm happy with the doc as it is. It's the FPWD so the expectation is thatb there will be a list of issues.
20:14:47 <phila> jtandy: I did manage to close an issue (and open 40
20:15:01 <frans> s/thatb/that/
20:15:01 <phila> ... You said that we don't need to resolve the issues before we publish the FPWD
20:15:26 <phila> jtandy: I think kerry was saying that she doesn't need to see the comments still being worked on before we vote.
20:15:39 <billroberts> q+
20:15:39 <phila> eparsons: I think we're voting on the doc as it is now, without the last minute editorial changes
20:15:47 <SimonCox> After all its just a First Working Draft!
20:15:49 <kerry> ack kerry
20:15:50 <phila> q+
20:15:53 <kerry> ack billroberts
20:16:07 <AndreaPerego> present+ AndreaPerego
20:16:12 <phila> jtandy: It may be that I can make those non-substantive changes before we vote
20:16:16 <phila> ack billroberts
20:16:29 <phila> billroberts: I don't think my edits are substantive, so I;m OK with it as it stands
20:16:40 <kerry> ack
20:16:48 <kerry> ack next
20:16:50 <phila> ... I don't think it makes much odds whether it's included before or after FPWD
20:17:38 <phila> phila: Asks for clarity on whether comments currently in hand will be made before or after FPWD
20:17:45 <phila> jtandy: Is asking the WG to decide that
20:17:49 <ClemensPortele> I am ok both ways, i.e. I have no problems with processing my comments after the FPWD!
20:17:58 <phila> kerry: Everyone so far has said publish as it is now
20:18:29 <phila> eparsons: That's my understanding too. We need to vote on it as it is now, even if changes are made in an hour's time
20:18:48 <frans> Very well to publish the doc as it is. Main thing is the issues are recorded.
20:19:01 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:19:17 <phila> ScottSimmons: No comments from me, I'm ready to publish too.
20:19:21 <ScottSimmons> +1
20:20:27 <phila> jtandy: I think the doc shows where we're going. I recognise that there is still a long way from where we are now to a useful guide, but as a first draft, it's OK
20:20:47 <phila> kerry: Any more comments? Editors?
20:21:07 <phila> Linda: I agree with jtandy. Still a lot of work to do before it becomes useful, but as it is, it shows what we want to write down.
20:21:09 <frans> To the editors: do let the other members do some work too.
20:21:18 <jtandy> [we hope to be able to talk to real practitioners at the F2F meeting in the Nederlands next month]
20:21:23 <phila> Linda: And I'd like to thank all the people who have reviewed the doc in the last week. V helpful
20:21:41 <phila> s/I;m/I'm
20:22:02 <phila> PROPOSED: That the BP document at http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/ be published as it is now as a W3C FPWD/OGC discussion paper
20:22:07 <SimonCox> +1
20:22:10 <ClemensPortele> +1
20:22:11 <jtandy> +1
20:22:12 <frans> +1
20:22:13 <eparsons> +1
20:22:13 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
20:22:14 <LarsG> +1
20:22:15 <MattPerry> +1
20:22:16 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:22:16 <Payam> +1
20:22:16 <Linda> +1
20:22:18 <billroberts> +1
20:22:27 <kerry> +1
20:22:34 <ScottSimmons> +1
20:22:42 <ahaller2> +1
20:22:49 <robin_> +1
20:22:53 <kJanowicz> kJanowicz has joined #sdw
20:23:21 <phila> RESOLUTION: That the BP document at http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/ be published as it is now as a W3C FPWD/OGC discussion paper
20:23:31 <eparsons> Thx Eds !!!!
20:23:37 <phila> PROPOSED: Vote of thanks to the editors
20:23:39 <phila> +1
20:23:44 <LarsG> +1
20:23:49 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:23:50 <kerry> +1
20:23:50 <ClemensPortele> +1
20:23:50 <billroberts> +1
20:23:53 <MattPerry> +1
20:23:54 <frans> +3
20:23:56 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
20:23:57 <phila> RESOLUTION: Vote of thanks to the editors
20:24:00 <phila> q+
20:24:19 <kerry> ack phila
20:25:08 <SimonCox> U+1F44F/U+E41F
20:25:14 <kerry> scott: we should do a press release for public comment?
20:25:28 <SimonCox> (Emoji for round of applause)
20:25:29 <kerry> phila: on home page, not a press releease
20:25:51 <kerry> scott: will put on our home page too -- talk furter about more publicity
20:26:18 <kerry> phila: no more edits today -- can you make a snapshot so I know I have the right one please?
20:26:25 <kerry> jtandy: will do
20:26:40 <kerry> phila: will not yet be linked; will send link to scott
20:26:59 <phila> q+ to ask one more thing
20:27:00 <frans> Is it possible for the public to post the same comments that we already have? If yes, should we prevent that?
20:27:12 <phila> eparsons: I think we need to communicate that this is a work in progress.
20:27:24 <phila> ... we need to make it clear that this isn't finished, it's some way away from where we're heading
20:27:36 <phila> ... So we need to set expectations
20:27:44 <kerry> ack phila
20:27:44 <Zakim> phila, you wanted to ask one more thing
20:27:55 <phila> phila: Are you all OK with /TR/sdw-bp as the short URI
20:28:06 <jtandy> is ok with me
20:28:12 <kerry> +1
20:28:13 <Linda> +1
20:28:14 <eparsons> +1
20:28:15 <frans> Would Eds remark constitute a change in the doc?
20:28:16 <Payam> +1
20:28:19 <LarsG> +1
20:28:19 <SimonCox> +1
20:28:25 <ClemensPortele> +1
20:28:37 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:28:54 <kerry> phila: how do we track comments:
20:28:56 <phila> phila: How did you track comments in CSVW
20:29:51 <kerry> jtandy: use the email list and create a github issue to track dialogue
20:30:18 <kerry> jtandy: repond to wg email list when closed through the github tracker
20:30:34 <phila> jtandy: We ask people to write to the public list. We say we've created the GH issue and link to it. We then ask commentator to indicate to the public list that they are happy with the resolution.
20:30:50 <phila> jtandy: Content, not necessarily happy
20:31:09 <frans> Will there be a link to the github issues in the heading of the document?
20:31:17 <kerry> phila: what about ogc members -- would they be left out?
20:31:33 <phila> ScottSimmons: It would be easier if we disuaded people from using our comment system. If they do, I'll monitor and push them to your system
20:32:01 <phila> kerry: Any more to say?
20:32:13 <kerry> F2F meeting Netherlands 8-10 February https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings#Amsterdam
20:32:19 <kerry> topic: F2F meeting Netherlands 8-10 February https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings#Amsterdam
20:32:37 <phila> kerry: We have brought this to peoplke's attention but we haven't discussed it here.
20:32:59 <jtandy> s/peoplke's/people's/
20:33:06 <phila> kerry: The dates are 8-10 Feb. The wiki shows a small list of people planning to attend. If you haven't done so, please recotrd your intention to participate
20:33:22 <phila> ... Let's open up the discussion about what to discuss there?
20:33:38 <AndreaPerego> s/recotrd/record/
20:33:51 <phila> Linda: First off - the first 2 days, 8-9, are regular WG meetings and the third day is a conference of the Platform Linked Data Nederland
20:34:08 <phila> ... They will all be in the conference, plus so EU projects and SDR??
20:34:32 <phila> ... WE have a short session in the plenary discussion what we're doing and there's a session in the afternoon when people can discuss what we're doing
20:34:53 <phila> ... So we should discuss what we do in the afternoon on Wednesday and what we do in the Wg meeting
20:34:58 <phila> kerry: Let's do the last first.
20:35:22 <jtandy> my suggestions were:
20:35:25 <jtandy> find out what problems make it difficult for them to publish spatial data
20:35:27 <jtandy> seek confirmation that the best practices we are curating are appropriate
20:35:27 <jtandy> ask for pointers to real examples 'in the wild' that we can reference
20:35:27 <jtandy> ask how the SDW BP can be made [more] useful to practitioners; what do they need, how should it be organised etc.
20:35:34 <phila> Linda: I discussed it a little with Jeremy. In the plenary meeting we should use our time to introduce our work
20:35:40 <phila> -> http://www.pilod.nl/wiki/Geodata_on_The_Web_Event_10_February_2016 Event URL (EN)
20:35:59 <eparsons> +1 for focus on BP
20:36:24 <AndreaPerego> +1 also from me
20:36:25 <phila> Linda: Also in the larger session, I'd like a focus on the BPs. As a BP editor of course I'd like that. We need to find out what problems people have with publishing spatial data. are our BPs useful?
20:36:30 <phila> ... Real examples would be useful
20:36:32 <phila> q+
20:36:45 <ClemensPortele> s/SDR??/EuroSDR/
20:36:47 <phila> Linda: Anything they think is useful input to our work
20:37:12 <phila> Linda: I've talked before about the Geonovum test bed. I'm hoping a lot of the participants in the test bed will be there
20:37:22 <phila> ack me
20:37:28 <kerry> ack phila
20:37:37 <phila> phila: It sounds as if some questions might lead to more use cases - are we open to that?
20:37:39 <eparsons> q+
20:37:52 <kerry> ack next
20:38:04 <phila> Linda: If we have new ones with new requirements, that would be interesting. We don't want to be buried by new work but we don't want to miss important stuff
20:38:17 <phila> Linda: It's pointers to examples of work done we're after
20:38:54 <phila> eparsons: It's good timing. We can test how well the structure works, are we helping. A lot of the audience there will bou our intended audience, people who have invested in SDIs now looking at LD now
20:39:09 <frans> q+
20:39:11 <phila> eparsons: If there are changes to be made, it's the perect timing
20:39:35 <phila> kerry: BP editors - would it be appropriate to pick on some issues that we're having toruble with and highlight them?
20:39:36 <jtandy> s/perect/perfect/
20:39:42 <phila> kerry: maybe you won't know what those are until we ask
20:39:55 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:39:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/13-sdw-minutes.html phila
20:40:04 <LarsG> s/toruble/trouble/
20:40:10 <phila> jtandy: Rather than identify things upfront, we could perhaps do a straw poll and see what is most useful
20:40:31 <phila> kerry: So are you happy to do it at the F2F which means they're not on the programme?
20:40:37 <phila> q+
20:40:57 <phila> kerry: Open comments on the doc can be solicited.
20:41:07 <phila> ack frans
20:41:08 <kerry> ack next
20:41:22 <phila> frans: Would it be an idea to have a demo at the F2F?
20:41:36 <phila> ... a demo of a model publication of a small sample dataset?
20:41:54 <phila> ... The Bp doc will contain examples, perhaps we could have a real working example in the doc.
20:42:12 <phila> ... Such a model dataset could be a centre of discussion?
20:42:33 <phila> jtandy: The meeting is less than 4 weeks away. I wouldn't be able to contribute any time to creating demos and examples
20:42:58 <phila> ... One of the things I hope to achieve in the first couple fo days woujld be to bring examples with them so that we can collect evidence of where these Bps are being used in the wild
20:43:21 <phila> ... Which might tie in with what you're saying, frans. BP16: here is is being used/followed.
20:43:23 <phila> q-
20:43:41 <phila> Linda: I think the test bed people will have something to show
20:43:48 <phila> kerry: SO it won't be toally theoretical
20:43:51 <AndreaPerego> In case, the GeoDCAT-AP API could be used for a demo on publishing geo metadata as RDF / on the Web: http://geodcat-ap.semic.eu:8890/api/
20:43:53 <phila> Linda: No.
20:43:53 <kerry> ack next
20:44:08 <phila> Linda: Is everyone OK with dedicating the third day to BP entirely?
20:44:19 <phila> kerry: There may be use cases but for me, yes
20:44:23 <jtandy> +1
20:44:24 <frans> maybe just introduce the time, sensor and coverage topics?
20:44:29 <phila> q+
20:44:33 <phila> ack me
20:44:35 <kerry> ack phila
20:45:19 <billroberts> q+
20:45:41 <kerry> ack bill
20:45:50 <phila> billroberts: On the third day, yes, focus on the BPs
20:46:03 <phila> ... and I agree with Frans that we should introduce the others
20:46:44 <phila> billroberts: I've (been) volunteered to edit the Coverages one and being in the room with people who have done deliverables before will be very valuable
20:46:59 <phila> kerry: So moving on to the first 2 days.
20:47:13 <phila> ... I would expect at least half a day on BP, and half a day on Time.
20:47:26 <phila> ... ANd I'm keen to spend as much as a full day on SSN
20:47:35 <eparsons> q+
20:47:48 <phila> ... But Bill you're obviously keen to talk about it so we should try and do a bit of everything
20:47:58 <phila> ... Which is why it's important to know who will be there/online
20:48:23 <phila> kerry: As an aside, I'm hoping to look at SSN next week on this call
20:48:29 <phila> ... Sound OK?
20:49:07 <phila> eparsons: I agree with that. It will be so dependent on who is there. From the list we have now we could clearly spend all the time on BPs, but if we're to look at others, we'll need to manage the people/groups who will be there.
20:49:08 <billroberts> q+
20:49:12 <phila> ack e
20:49:16 <AndreaPerego> I would suggest: 1 day on BP, half day on Time and half day on SSN
20:49:38 <phila> eparsons: We need to get ourselves together and work out the agenda before hand, knowing who will be there and when.
20:49:53 <phila> ... The danger is spending all our time doing Bp work.
20:50:11 <kerry> action: kerry to coordinate ssn editors slot at meeting
20:50:11 <trackbot> Created ACTION-131 - Coordinate ssn editors slot at meeting [on Kerry Taylor - due 2016-01-20].
20:50:15 <phila> action: kerry To coordinate the SSN group in terms of what is planned for the F2F meeting
20:50:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-132 - Coordinate the ssn group in terms of what is planned for the f2f meeting [on Kerry Taylor - due 2016-01-20].
20:50:33 <phila> jtandy: We could talk about BP for 2 days but it might be less than communitaire
20:50:54 <phila> jtandy: My preference would be to look at real world examples for BP
20:51:09 <kerry> q?
20:51:13 <phila> ... Looking to Linda and Payam to say yay or nay to focussing on examples
20:51:15 <frans> A general discussion could be about how we can encourage collaboration with people and communinities outside our WG
20:51:25 <phila> Payam: I agree - we don't have may examples now and we need them
20:51:30 <phila> ... They'd be very helpful
20:51:39 <phila> Linda: +1
20:51:50 <AndreaPerego> s/have may examples/have many examples/
20:51:53 <phila> kerry: Can I remind oyu to remind us to bring your examples
20:52:00 <phila> phila: Thinks it sounds like 'Show and Tell'
20:52:15 <phila> kerry: I think the BP editors will be there for the whole meeting
20:52:42 <phila> ... So I'll ask the BP editors to coordinate, as they'll be most flexible. Between half and a full day.
20:52:45 <phila> jtandy: OK, yep
20:53:17 <LarsG> s/oyu/you/
20:53:29 <phila> billroberts: Something like an hour in the schedule would prob be enough for me/Coverages
20:53:33 <jtandy> q+
20:56:27 <phila> billroberts: So I'd welcome geospatial help. I'm more LD-centric
20:56:45 <phila> jtandy: It might be worth you catching up with Jon Blower and Maik Reichert from Reading university
20:56:52 <jtandy> https://github.com/Reading-eScience-Centre
20:57:12 <phila> jtandy: Both of them have extensive knowlegde of spatial
20:57:21 <phila> billroberts: I know Jon a little
20:57:29 <phila> phila: +1
20:57:37 <SimonCox> Is there anyone with a primary interest in time-series involved in the coverages activity?
20:57:52 <AndreaPerego> s/knowlegdeknowlegde/knowledge/
20:58:05 <phila> kerry: I have some mechanisms to contribute
20:58:06 <jtandy> @SimonCox ... not that I know of
20:58:46 <phila> SimonCox: I think Jon might be interested in time series. I'm worried that it'll all be classic remote sensing
20:59:05 <phila> kerry: Those people on the OGC time series work might be interested. Someone from GA?
20:59:13 <phila> SimonCox: John Lowe etc.?
20:59:22 <eparsons> Calling time...
20:59:30 <kerry> s/john/Dom/
20:59:50 <AndreaPerego> s/communinities/communities/
21:00:05 <frans> s/peopel/people/
21:00:08 <SimonCox> *Dom* Lowe
21:00:25 <billroberts> it's easier for me to get to Amersfoort than it is to get to Harwich!
21:00:45 <frans> With luck we will have ice ready for skating
21:00:50 <SimonCox> (East Anglian dude)
21:00:53 <phila> kerry: We didn't really address how to cover time at the meeting but I'll write mail on that.
21:01:04 <eparsons> thanks all - bye
21:01:05 <jtandy> bye
21:01:06 <kJanowicz> bye
21:01:08 <AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye
21:01:08 <billroberts> thanks - bye
21:01:09 <ahaller2> bye
21:01:10 <robin_> bye
21:01:11 <ClemensPortele> bye
21:01:11 <RaulGarciaCastro> bye
21:01:11 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
21:01:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/13-sdw-minutes.html phila
21:01:11 <LarsG> thanks, bye
21:01:13 <Payam> bye
21:01:31 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
21:01:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/13-sdw-minutes.html phila