12:58:53 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dwbp
12:58:53 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/15-dwbp-irc
12:58:55 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs 351
12:58:55 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #dwbp
12:58:57 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be DWBP
12:58:57 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
12:58:58 <trackbot> Meeting: Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
12:58:58 <trackbot> Date: 15 July 2016
13:00:02 <phila> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:00:11 <phila> present+ phila
13:01:15 <yaso> yaso has joined #dwbp
13:02:15 <RiccardoAlbertoni> present+ RiccardoAlbertoni
13:02:40 <PWinstanley> PWinstanley has joined #dwbp
13:03:01 <PWinstanley> present+ PWinstanley
13:04:21 <antoine> antoine has joined #dwbp
13:04:34 <deirdrelee> deirdrelee has joined #dwbp
13:04:51 <SumitPurohit> SumitPurohit has joined #DWBP
13:04:54 <phila> chair: yaso
13:04:55 <yaso_> yaso_ has joined #dwbp
13:05:13 <SumitPurohit> present+
13:05:14 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160715
13:05:20 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
13:05:37 <deirdrelee> present+ deirdrelee
13:05:41 <newton> present+ newton
13:05:47 <ericstephan> ericstephan has joined #dwbp
13:05:56 <ericstephan> present+ ericstephan
13:06:06 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dwbp
13:06:34 <ericstephan> I apologize being late
13:06:55 <yaso_> no probem, eric
13:07:22 <hadleybeeman> present+ hadleybeeman
13:07:30 <yaso_> Scribe?
13:07:43 <hadleybeeman> zakim, pick a victim
13:07:43 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose deirdrelee
13:08:10 <hadleybeeman> zakim, pick a victim
13:08:10 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose phila
13:08:15 <hadleybeeman> zakim, pick a victim
13:08:15 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose RiccardoAlbertoni
13:08:36 <yaso_> Sorry, I'll have to dial again
13:09:12 <annette_g> present+ annette_g
13:09:17 <Caroline_> Caroline_ has joined #DWBP
13:09:25 <hadleybeeman> hadleybeeman has changed the topic to: agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160715
13:09:34 <yaso_> +1
13:10:12 <SumitPurohit> present+ SumitPurohit
13:10:13 <yaso_> https://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-dwbp-minutes
13:10:27 <RiccardoAlbertoni> propose  approve the last meeting   minutes   https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160715
13:10:33 <hadleybeeman> http://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes
13:10:52 <phila> PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes
13:10:55 <hadleybeeman> +1
13:10:59 <yaso_> +1
13:10:59 <annette_g> +1
13:11:03 <Caroline_> Present+ Caroline_
13:11:03 <newton> +1
13:11:06 <Caroline_> +1
13:11:07 <ericstephan> +1
13:11:12 <phila> +1
13:11:13 <SumitPurohit> 0
13:11:13 <RiccardoAlbertoni> 0 ( i was not there)
13:11:23 <phila> REOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes
13:11:27 <phila> REsOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes
13:11:30 <deirdrelee> +1
13:11:57 <phila> Topic: CR delay
13:12:02 <phila> -> http://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes
13:12:12 <phila> -> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2016JulSep/0009.html I18N Objection
13:12:15 <deirdrelee> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:12:28 <deirdrelee> zakim, generate minutes
13:12:28 <Zakim> I don't understand 'generate minutes', deirdrelee
13:12:55 <deirdrelee> rrsagent, generate minutes
13:12:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/15-dwbp-minutes.html deirdrelee
13:13:25 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila: you suppose to ask review to the I18N, but they did not get the time to reply
13:14:31 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phil is not sure to be in the next call with the director , which will be delayed,
13:15:13 <RiccardoAlbertoni> .. we are not going to have the CR before the middle of august, as we have to wait for I18N and other stuff
13:15:16 <Caroline_> q+
13:15:16 <EricKauz> EricKauz has joined #DWBP
13:15:28 <yaso_> ack Caroline
13:15:38 <EricKauz> present+ EricKauz
13:15:49 <yaso_> q?
13:16:05 <RiccardoAlbertoni> Caroline_: so we do not know when the call wth director will be reschedule.
13:16:19 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila:  yes,
13:16:50 <laufer> laufer has joined #dwbp
13:17:02 <RiccardoAlbertoni> yaso: what about the summer vacation?
13:17:35 <laufer> present+ laufer
13:18:07 <ericstephan> q+
13:18:11 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phil: we will possibly have to have the call before  september but we will find out
13:18:38 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phil: we will ask for an extension for covering the delay
13:18:50 <yaso_> q?
13:18:54 <ericstephan> +1 yes extra time is useful to DUV
13:19:01 <RiccardoAlbertoni> and that will give also some extra time for the vocabularies
13:19:08 <yaso_> ack eric
13:19:37 <antoine> +1
13:19:46 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/#ReuseVocabularies reuse vocabs
13:20:12 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: i cannot  imagine the kind  of feedback from i18m, could you provide an example..
13:20:28 <hadleybeeman> q?
13:20:44 <hadleybeeman> s/i18m/i18n
13:20:52 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phil:probably issues about multilingualism, url etc
13:21:21 <RiccardoAlbertoni> hadleybeeman: all the things they care about we care too
13:21:33 <RiccardoAlbertoni> since we are people from different part of the world
13:21:42 <yaso_> q?
13:21:48 <RiccardoAlbertoni> hadleybeeman: but we need to see what they have to say ..
13:22:09 <RiccardoAlbertoni> yahoo: other questions about the process ?
13:22:16 <yaso_> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/open
13:22:16 <RiccardoAlbertoni> topic: DQV
13:22:18 <hadleybeeman> s/yahoo/yaso
13:22:19 <phila> Topic: Open issues on vocabularies
13:22:31 <RiccardoAlbertoni> q+
13:22:45 <yaso_> ack RiccardoAlbertoni
13:22:47 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: About the open issue re DQV, we have already discussed this.
13:22:51 <phila> issue-221?
13:22:51 <trackbot> issue-221 -- What is the importance of the alignment between hcls-dataset and dqv/duv? -- open
13:22:51 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/221
13:22:59 <phila> issue-223?
13:22:59 <trackbot> issue-223 -- Parameters for metrics -- open
13:22:59 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/223
13:23:24 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: re issue 223, we have added a section explaining how parameters can be addressed with DQV.
13:23:35 <hadleybeeman> ...but we haven't found a solution, and it's probably out of scope for our work.
13:23:47 <hadleybeeman> ...So Antoine and I have decided to mark this as 'postponed'.
13:23:59 <hadleybeeman> ...Hopefully the commenter will find that okay.
13:24:18 <hadleybeeman> ...The same approach is followed for issue 221.
13:24:22 <antoine> I'd want to create two issues
13:24:26 <antoine> ... from 221
13:24:33 <yaso_> q?
13:24:35 <antoine> s/221/223
13:24:46 <antoine> ... one we close, and one we postponed
13:25:04 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: in the future, we'd have to target specialised profiles of dcat according to special domains. But we think that is out of scope for this group.
13:25:33 <yaso_> q?
13:25:34 <hadleybeeman> ...I know Antoine wants to wait to the end, to mark this issue as 'postponed' — maybe the people from stanford who raised this issue will have an update.
13:26:16 <hadleybeeman> ...The point is, we have plenty of feedback from some people outside of the group. We are trying to address these comments.  We welcome the idea of an extension for the group.
13:26:49 <hadleybeeman> ...In the email, the commenters have sent a pull request on github, and we're not sure that a PR from someone outside the group can be merged.
13:26:59 <hadleybeeman> ...From a procedural point of view, is that acceptable
13:27:06 <hadleybeeman> s/acceptable/acceptable?
13:27:24 <hadleybeeman> phila: Yes, as long as the group approves.  If they write the text, we have to worry that it comes with their intellectual property.
13:27:37 <yaso_> q?
13:27:42 <hadleybeeman> ...If they are endorsing or creating an opportunity for their technologies, we are in trouble.
13:27:57 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: No, I think they are just pointing out a simple fix.  I don't see the problem you are mentioning here.
13:27:58 <phila> q+
13:28:03 <antoine> it's mostly editorial changes, I think
13:28:06 <yaso_> ack phila
13:28:10 <phila> ack me
13:28:27 <hadleybeeman> phila: If I understand correctly, I think we can safely close issue 223?
13:28:42 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: We'd like to mark them as 'postponed'
13:29:04 <hadleybeeman> ...In another group's CR, they had marked a pending issue as 'postponed' because it was out of scope.
13:29:14 <antoine> q+ see my remark above
13:29:18 <hadleybeeman> phila: 223 is postponed to a group that doesn't exist and isn't planned to exist.
13:29:39 <hadleybeeman> ...the other one... We can mark it as 'postponed' and point specifically to the Vocabularies workshop in Amsterdam at the end of the year.
13:29:49 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/2016/11/sdsvoc/ Postpone 221 to that workshop
13:30:08 <antoine> q?
13:30:13 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: Okay.
13:30:37 <hadleybeeman> ...223 is postponed in principle? In the future when someone modifies DCAT might come up...
13:30:56 <antoine> q+
13:31:05 <hadleybeeman> phila: if you think the DCAT workshop can handle it as well,  we can pass a resolution here to say that both these issues are closed for this workshop but may be useful in future work.
13:31:11 <hadleybeeman> ...I'm trying to tidy things up.
13:31:35 <hadleybeeman> hadleybeeman: Does 'postponed' not mean it's still open?
13:31:47 <hadleybeeman> phila: I think it means 'postponed within the lifetime of the working group'
13:31:57 <yaso_> q?
13:32:02 <phila> ack a
13:32:08 <yaso_> ack antoine
13:32:17 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: Antoine is not on the phone.
13:32:18 <antoine> I have to do it by typing
13:32:21 <antoine> we did partly fix 223
13:32:22 <hadleybeeman> yaso: Antoine, if you can type,..
13:32:25 <yaso_> ok
13:32:36 <antoine> the solution was to split 223 in two issues
13:32:45 <antoine> one that we close, one that we postpone
13:33:03 <antoine> we postpone like other WGs postponed, like OWL
13:33:14 <antoine> I've sent an email about it.
13:33:18 <hadleybeeman> @antoine, what are the two issues you proposed?
13:33:37 <antoine> I can do the splitting, once the WG tells it's ok in principle
13:33:44 <phila> PROPOSAL: Noting the partial fix for Issue-223 and the forthcoming SDSVoc workshop that will tackle both Issue 221 and 223, the WG should close those two issues, noting these on the WG homepage for future reference
13:34:11 <antoine> sounds good
13:34:16 <hadleybeeman> phila: That's my understanding of how you postpone something
13:34:23 <hadleybeeman> hadleybeeman: Sounds good to me
13:34:27 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Main_Page#Wish_List Wish list
13:34:27 <hadleybeeman> +1
13:34:29 <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1
13:34:32 <EricKauz> +1
13:34:33 <yaso_> +1
13:34:35 <annette_g> +1
13:34:38 <newton> +1
13:34:39 <antoine> +1
13:34:39 <ericstephan> +1
13:34:42 <phila> +1
13:34:42 <laufer> +1
13:34:52 <phila> RESOLUTION: Noting the partial fix for Issue-223 and the forthcoming SDSVoc workshop that will tackle both Issue 221 and 223, the WG should close those two issues, noting these on the WG homepage for future reference
13:34:54 <hadleybeeman> phila: We're not burying it or pretending it doesn't exist; we're putting it somewhere we can come back to it.
13:35:01 <annette_g> I think it needs to say PROPOSED and RESOLVED, though, no?
13:35:05 <phila> close issue-221
13:35:05 <trackbot> Closed issue-221.
13:35:11 <phila> close issue-223
13:35:11 <trackbot> Closed issue-223.
13:35:26 <ericstephan> Correct annette_g
13:35:30 <yaso_> q?
13:35:31 <antoine> can't we postpone 223?
13:35:41 <antoine> I can do it using the web interface
13:35:47 <RiccardoAlbertoni> yes
13:36:11 <hadleybeeman> @antoine, we think we can only use that 'postpone' within the lifetime of this working group. We need to close our issues to transition further.
13:36:40 <yaso_> q?
13:37:15 <antoine> hadleybeeman: I think we can postpone indefinitely: some OWL issues have been postponed for ages
13:37:24 <antoine> see https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html
13:37:41 <hadleybeeman> @antoine, phila is going to check... but that seems a bit out-of-process in my opinion (and his). We'll find out.
13:38:18 <hadleybeeman> phila: Good to see comments coming in.
13:38:33 <antoine> @hadleybeeman: ok. I don't want to put a lot of more work on the WG. To me it seemed like a simple proposal that I could have implemented myself.
13:38:56 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: We were ready to close everything by next week, but extra time lets us face the things in a positive way.
13:39:22 <hadleybeeman> phila: Yes, we'll have the extension, I think. But I think the purpose of these weekly calls is now to finish these vocabularies. Chairs, stop me if I'm wrong.
13:39:43 <hadleybeeman> ...Once we're into CR for the BP doc, we probably don't need these calls anymore.  We won't need them much longer.
13:39:57 <hadleybeeman> ...The last weekly call could be next week? It's up to the chairs.
13:40:14 <hadleybeeman> ...I suspect it won't be that soon. But fairly soon they'll come to an end, when we run out of things to talk about.
13:40:44 <hadleybeeman> ...When you've closed all the issues, and you're resolving the issues, and we're in CR for the other thing — these calls are here to discuss comments and actions.
13:40:53 <RiccardoAlbertoni> q+
13:41:02 <yaso_> ack RiccardoAlbertoni
13:41:13 <hadleybeeman> ...Dn't see an extension til the end of Nov as meaning we can carry on postponing things till then. We can't. We have to finish this.
13:41:25 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: Okay; sooner is better. But we need a little time and this is a busy period
13:41:30 <hadleybeeman> phila: I'm not at all criticising.
13:41:44 <hadleybeeman> RiccardoAlbertoni: Depends on Antoine's schedule, but we can maybe close in the beginning of August?
13:41:48 <hadleybeeman> phila: thanks
13:42:25 <hadleybeeman> yaso: So extending the group doesn't mean we still have meetings?
13:42:52 <hadleybeeman> phila: All we should be doing now is handling the comments.  We'll get some new ones from I18N, and Open Annotation group commented today, so there is a bit of editing to do on the BP doc --
13:43:07 <hadleybeeman> ...and I hope we'll have time to hear about the DUV.  But I imagine all this will be sorted quickly.
13:43:19 <hadleybeeman> ...At the latest by September -- we'll have resolved everything.
13:43:37 <hadleybeeman> yaso: And if the problems are all sorted before September, and the BP doc goes to CR, then the group is done with the work?
13:43:45 <hadleybeeman> phila: apart from gathering implementation experience.
13:44:10 <hadleybeeman> ...When we're doing that, and the vocabs are done, we don't need to meet every week. Maybe every other week, or every four weeks? We don't need to talk every Friday.
13:44:18 <hadleybeeman> ...Given the state of the docs right now... this is what happens.
13:44:19 <yaso_> q?
13:44:27 <hadleybeeman> yaso_: comments?
13:44:44 <newton> q+
13:44:47 <ericstephan> Nope
13:44:53 <ericstephan> :-)
13:45:04 <yaso_> ack Newton
13:45:14 <RiccardoAlbertoni> topic: DUV
13:45:32 <ericstephan> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html
13:45:44 <ericstephan> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/153
13:45:44 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: there are two issues
13:46:02 <RiccardoAlbertoni> one is around form quite a while
13:46:17 <hadleybeeman> s/form/from
13:46:38 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: 153... i do not think it is  in the scope of the dub
13:46:44 <yaso_> q?
13:46:51 <phila> issue-153?
13:46:51 <trackbot> issue-153 -- Should open/closed data be addressed in the Data Usage Vocabulary? -- open
13:46:51 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/153
13:46:59 <RiccardoAlbertoni> If anyone have a specific comment or opinion on that ?
13:47:00 <phila> How should feedback and usage instructions be handled that are either in themselves sensitive or discussing details about data that is closed. How should the model handle personally identifiable information (PII) in feedback. We should also take into account the privacy interest group, are there aspects of usage http://www.w3.org/2012/dnt-ws/report.
13:47:27 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila: i agree I think it is conveniently out of scope
13:48:06 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila: it is not more or less relevant to anything for the web, so i think i agree
13:48:17 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: can we put a proposal to close it?
13:48:21 <phila> PROPOSED: To close issue-153 as this is out of scope for the DUV
13:48:34 <hadleybeeman> +1
13:48:34 <annette_g> +1
13:48:35 <ericstephan> +1
13:48:36 <yaso_> +1
13:48:37 <phila> +1
13:48:37 <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1
13:48:39 <newton> +1
13:48:41 <laufer> +1
13:48:45 <SumitPurohit> +1
13:48:48 <phila> RESOLUTION: To close issue-153 as this is out of scope for the DUV
13:48:52 <phila> close issue-153
13:48:53 <trackbot> Closed issue-153.
13:48:53 <ericstephan> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/234
13:49:01 <phila> issue-234
13:49:01 <trackbot> issue-234 -- Role of Usage Tool -- open
13:49:01 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/234
13:49:09 <Caroline_> +1
13:49:18 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan:  the other issue 234, it is around for a while as well
13:49:18 <ericstephan> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#class-usageTool
13:49:44 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: that was soothing janpaolo pointed out ..
13:49:44 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ..
13:49:57 <hadleybeeman> s/janpaolo/joao-paolo
13:50:17 <RiccardoAlbertoni> .. considering the time extension,  we can try to address this..
13:50:42 <laufer> s/joao-paolo/joão paulo/
13:51:22 <ericstephan> Made considerable editorial alterations (approximately 60 minor edits) to the DUV, clarifying use of language, using code styles to depict classes and property references in code format when mentioned in the text.
13:51:23 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: we are doing some editorial changes, I wonder how the group must be involved in that
13:52:06 <ericstephan> Based on the DQV we expanded discussion of the motivation of the DUV to reference work in the DWBP and  introduce the concept that the DUV is largely a composition of 4 submodels.  http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#intro
13:52:15 <antoine> antoine has joined #dwbp
13:52:51 <RiccardoAlbertoni>  ericstephan: working with antoine we are revising the introduction  tiding the intro to vocabulary test practice the
13:53:13 <ericstephan> In section 2 we discuss why extensive use of other vocabularies was necessary due to the vocabularies inheriitd by other reused vocabularies. http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#namespaces-1
13:54:13 <ericstephan> Section 5 A new section was added and is still a work in progress to discuss Alternative Vocabulary Considerations.  The intent here is that part of the purpose of the DUV is to provide guidance on how to depict usage, citation, and feedback on the web, and in the depiction there are certain parts that are open to different kinds of representation.  http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#relationship_vocabularies
13:54:33 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: .. in section 5 we talked about a introductory section
13:55:04 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan:  providing some guidance  as result of feedback from the Open knowledge foundation..
13:56:00 <ericstephan> Section 6 pictures of the submodels were added to help people look at what parts of the model apply to what submodel. http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#Vocab_Overview
13:56:46 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan:  we needed some pictures, broken down the model to make it clearer
13:57:06 <phila> q+ to ask about splitting the pictures
13:57:50 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila:   breaking the diagram, is a veri good idea but please created three distinct things ..
13:58:12 <RiccardoAlbertoni> as in this way I can click on each and see them
13:58:32 <ericstephan> We did receive feedback from Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche who is interested in including the DUV in the OKFN Linked Open Vocabulary. Which has to do with the motivation of expanding section 5. http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#relationship_vocabularies
13:58:50 <phila> q-
13:59:15 <RiccardoAlbertoni> ericstephan: we get some contact with the open knowledge foundation, they want to use DUV for feedback, so we that is why we are making the changes ..
13:59:21 <Caroline_> s/veri/very
13:59:51 <Caroline_> s/we/
14:00:21 <newton> q+ to ask very quickly about the evidences object
14:00:24 <yaso_> q?
14:00:37 <newton> -> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2016Jul/0022.html
14:00:44 <yaso_> ack newton
14:00:44 <Zakim> newton, you wanted to ask very quickly about the evidences object
14:01:07 <deirdrelee> q+
14:01:08 <Caroline_> q+
14:01:11 <RiccardoAlbertoni> newton: my question is to phil.. about the message from max , I can't recall what we decided about
14:01:25 <hadleybeeman> q+ /me has an opinion :)
14:01:31 <hadleybeeman> q+
14:01:50 <RiccardoAlbertoni> .. the adoption of BP from other recommendation
14:01:50 <hadleybeeman> q-
14:01:55 <hadleybeeman> +1 to phila.
14:02:08 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/2013/share-psi/lg/ Localised Guides
14:02:15 <laufer> +1 (the director will accept this as an evidence?)
14:02:32 <annette_g> personally, I think being listed in a guide is stronger evidence that something is a real best practice than that someone is doing it.
14:02:35 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila: they are important, if they are for example from government ..
14:02:40 <hadleybeeman> @laufer -- I think it will help build the case, but I don't think the director will accept them as implementations
14:03:11 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila: they have to show evidence of endorsement ..
14:03:24 <Caroline_> +1 to phila
14:03:29 <deirdrelee> https://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-dwbp-minutes
14:04:03 <hadleybeeman> q+
14:04:04 <RiccardoAlbertoni> deirdrelee: the group decided to not include them..
14:04:05 <annette_g> maybe we can do both
14:04:08 <phila> ack d
14:04:10 <yaso_> ack deirdrelee
14:04:12 <phila> ack c
14:04:15 <yaso_> ack Caroline_
14:04:19 <deirdrelee> https://www.w3.org/2016/06/03-dwbp-minutes
14:04:45 <RiccardoAlbertoni> Caroline_: i remember the resolution we take but i think they should be used as weel
14:04:58 <RiccardoAlbertoni> s/weel/well
14:05:22 <newton> @phila would you mind answering Makx's message?
14:05:26 <laufer> maybe in our report we could separate these two types of evidences...  implementations and endorsments...
14:05:37 <RiccardoAlbertoni> Caroline_: the form for feedbacks is ready .. can we keep going with implementation or we have to wait for I18n
14:05:41 <hadleybeeman> q?
14:05:48 <RiccardoAlbertoni> phila: keep going
14:05:52 <phila> ack h
14:06:44 <yaso_> q?
14:06:45 <RiccardoAlbertoni> hadleybeeman: one reason to show implementation is give evidence that they are not rubbish and can be implemented..
14:07:04 <hadleybeeman> s/one reason/to my mind, the main reason
14:08:32 <phila> RRSAgent, draft miniutes
14:08:32 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft miniutes', phila.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
14:08:34 <RiccardoAlbertoni> bye to all !
14:08:36 <laufer> bye all
14:08:38 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:08:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/15-dwbp-minutes.html phila
14:08:50 <annette_g> bye!
14:08:53 <annette_g> annette_g has left #dwbp
14:52:06 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #dwbp
16:31:38 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dwbp