03:11:16 AndyS has joined #dawg 03:33:03 DanC_ has joined #dawg 10:01:49 DaveB has joined #dawg 10:35:24 JanneS has joined #dawg 10:47:24 Good Morning US, Europe goes for lunch 11:17:30 Zakim has left #dawg 12:12:44 DanC_ has joined #dawg 12:37:07 good morning 12:45:15 good morning janne 12:52:25 hi eric 13:30:55 Zakim has joined #dawg 13:31:45 called in minute ago - I'm the 1st participant it appears 13:32:54 zakim, who's here? 13:32:54 sorry, JanneS, I don't know what conference this is 13:32:55 On IRC I see JanneS, DaveB, RRSAgent, ericP, DanC 13:34:43 I will call again once Boston wakes up 13:36:41 DanC_ has joined #dawg 13:36:47 RRSAgent, pointer? 13:36:47 See http://www.w3.org/2005/03/01-dawg-irc#T13-36-47 13:36:54 Zakim, this is dawg 13:36:54 DanC_, I see SW_DAWG(TP)8:30AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be dawg". 13:37:00 Zakim, this will be dawg 13:37:00 ok, DanC_; I see SW_DAWG(TP)8:30AM scheduled to start 7 minutes ago 13:37:16 Zakim, call OlympiaC 13:37:16 ok, DanC_; the call is being made 13:37:17 SW_DAWG(TP)8:30AM has now started 13:37:18 +OlympiaC 13:37:36 kendall has joined #dawg 13:37:55 agenda + nestedOptionals 13:38:13 HiroyukiS has joined #DAWG 13:38:13 agenda + issue: fromUnionQuery 13:38:22 agenda + issue: protocolRootReferent (ACTION KendallC) 13:38:29 agenda + Service Descriptions 13:38:39 agenda + protocol walk-thru 13:38:51 agenda + Plan for last call 13:39:18 JosD has joined #dawg 13:39:34 Zakim, OlympiaC holds Jos, AndyS, KendallC, Yoshio, HiroyukiS, EricP, Jack, SteveH, DanC 13:39:34 +Jos, AndyS, KendallC, Yoshio, HiroyukiS, EricP, Jack, SteveH, DanC; got it 13:40:53 AndyS has joined #dawg 13:41:04 Yoshio has joined #dawg 13:41:13 Morning all 13:41:25 Topic: introductions 13:43:21 Zakim, who's on the phone? 13:43:21 On the phone I see OlympiaC 13:43:22 OlympiaC has Jos, AndyS, KendallC, Yoshio, HiroyukiS, EricP, Jack, SteveH, DanC 13:43:30 JacekK has joined #dawg 13:43:32 Zakim, who's on the phone? 13:43:32 On the phone I see OlympiaC 13:43:33 OlympiaC has Jos, AndyS, KendallC, Yoshio, HiroyukiS, EricP, Jack, SteveH, DanC 13:43:50 SteveH has joined #dawg 13:43:56 zakim, OlympiaC also has BijanP, JordiA 13:43:56 +BijanP, JordiA; got it 13:44:00 Elias, Lee, Jordie -- all from IBM 13:44:08 zakim, OlympiaC also has Lee 13:44:08 +Lee; got it 13:45:01 agenda? 13:45:54 Zakim, take up item 1 13:45:54 agendum 1. "nestedOptionals" taken up [from DanC_] 13:46:23 +[IPcaller] 13:46:37 Zakim, +[IPcaller] is JanneS 13:46:37 sorry, JanneS, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller]' 13:46:41 OPTIONS: nested optionals as per http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20050217/ 13:46:52 Zakim, IPcaller is JanneS 13:46:52 +JanneS; got it 13:47:11 Lee has joined #dawg 13:47:23 OPTIONS: nested optionals as per http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20050217/ , prohibit nested optionals by side-condition on grammar 13:47:40 discussion overflown from yesterday 13:48:02 DanC: Straw poll, then I'll pick a winner 13:48:12 as per wD: 2 to 3 13:49:26 side condition: 3ish 13:50:17 side condition means: nested optionals are not allowed in the language 13:50:37 +1 to side conditions Yoshio 13:50:45 EliasT has joined #dawg 13:50:59 zakim, OlympiaC also has BalajiP 13:50:59 +BalajiP; got it 13:51:01 I'll weakly vote to do less coding, i.e. no nested optionals 13:51:53 MitÃ¤ kuuluu, Janne, (JÃ¤nee?) 13:52:47 Hyvää, kiitos! 13:53:31 jordi_ has joined #dawg 13:53:36 AndyS: with the syntax we were talking about yesterday, it'd be harder to put the condition in the grammar 13:54:17 editors' preference: as specified, with deference for allowing things to go forward 13:55:33 DanC: summary of the discussion on optionals: 5.5 Nested optional blocks, there are reasons to disallow them 13:56:05 SteveH: nested optionals makes it harder to implement, you have to have code to handle them 13:56:22 q+ 13:57:23 SteveH: it's tricky to implement 13:57:25 q- 13:58:08 OPTIONAL { ( ?x vcard:N ?vc ) 13:58:08 ( ?vc vcard:Given ?gname ) 13:58:08 OPTIONAL ( ?vc vcard:Family ?fname ) } 13:58:17 13:58:20 OPTIONAL { ( ?x vcard:N ?vc ) 13:58:20 ( ?vc vcard:Given ?gname ) } 13:58:20 OPTIONAL { ( ?x vcard:N ?vc ) 13:58:20 ( ?vc vcard:Given ?gname ) 13:58:22 ( ?vc vcard:Family ?fname ) } 13:58:32 13:58:38 q+ 13:58:39 SELECT FROM T as T0 13:58:39 OUTER JOIN T as T1 ON (T1.s=T0.s AND T1.p=vcard:N) 13:58:39 OUTER JOIN T as T2 ON (T2.s=T1.o AND T1.p=vcard:Given) 13:58:39 OUTER JOIN T as T3 ON (T3.s=T1.o AND T1.p=vcard:Family) 13:58:39 WHERE T0.p=foaf:name 13:58:45 ericP: we currently don't have dependency on ordering 13:59:08 I don't believe that - near optionals I think we do. 13:59:31 ack andy 13:59:40 DanC: when we get rid of the optionals, can we end up with illegal query? 13:59:58 AndyS: with optionals we already have ordering issues 14:00:16 AndyS: there's examples on the comments list 14:00:18 bijan has joined #dawg 14:00:42 ericP: SQL mapping might be harder if you force ppl to separate them out 14:00:52 PROPOSED: nested optionals as per http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20050217/ 14:01:11 SteveH: flattened optionals must be supported anyway 14:01:33 abstaining: Jos, UMD, Steve 14:01:37 so RESOLVED 14:01:49 dave, do you want to vote? I'm not sure you can 14:02:03 that's up to you 14:02:07 I abstrain 14:02:09 Can we rephrase EricP's point that there are SQL mappings that are much harder from the normal form that might be significanly better, more optimized, etc. 14:02:17 very well. dajobe abstaining 14:02:21 Zakim, who is on the phone? 14:02:21 On the phone I see OlympiaC, JanneS 14:02:23 OlympiaC has Jos, AndyS, KendallC, Yoshio, HiroyukiS, EricP, Jack, SteveH, DanC, BijanP, JordiA, Lee, BalajiP 14:02:37 Dave, the question of whether you can vote is a question of whether you want to be considered present. 14:02:41 but it doesn't matter much. 14:02:46 Zakim, close this agendum 14:02:46 agendum 1 closed 14:02:47 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 14:02:48 2. issue: fromUnionQuery [from DanC_] 14:03:23 DanC: if you say from URI1, URI2 is that the union, the merge or what? 14:03:25 DanC: I'm not feeling focused enough here to be considered preent. 14:03:29 present 14:06:04 AndyS: the FROM accepts list but we don't say how 14:06:06 roger, dave 14:06:40 DanC: in Helsinki we had three groups of options 14:07:29 DanC: the URIs were only hints in the first version 14:07:48 DanC: then: drop FROM/WITH and leave it to the system 14:08:15 DanC: later: specify what the keywords do 14:08:44 for me, sparql would be significantly work if it can't get docs from the web. like how document() in xslt is very handy. otherwise it's just a static query language and that's boring 14:08:48 s/work/wose/ 14:08:53 worse 14:08:55 AndyS: the test cases need to specify the graph 14:09:03 +1 daveb 14:09:51 kendall: without pulling stuff from the web the language would not be so interesting 14:10:16 kendall: I don't care much, grabbing bits is a protocol issue 14:10:54 kendall: so maybe we could put this in the protocol only, not in the quey lang 14:11:04 AndyS: sometimes we don't have the protocol 14:11:11 SteveH: there's always some API 14:11:13 let's look at this again after some protocol discussion 14:11:15 Zakim, agenda? 14:11:15 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda: 14:11:16 2. issue: fromUnionQuery [from DanC_] 14:11:17 3. issue: protocolRootReferent (ACTION KendallC) [from DanC_] 14:11:19 4. Service Descriptions [from DanC_] 14:11:20 5. protocol walk-thru [from DanC_] 14:11:22 6. Plan for last call [from DanC_] 14:11:24 dont' have a network or don't hae a protocol? don't you sorta always have loopback? 14:11:57 kendall: propose to close the issue in the issues list 14:12:11 Alberto proposed: s/WITH/FROM/ ; s/FROM/FROM NAMED/ on the comments list and elsewhere 14:12:18 DanC: let's consider that later 14:12:21 Zakim, take up agendum 4 14:12:21 agendum 4. "Service Descriptions" taken up [from DanC_] 14:12:29 I prefered NAMED and I think suggested something like that last year 14:12:46 ack DaveB 14:13:08 looking at Kendall's proposal 14:13:41 DanC: how many ppl have read this over? Came out Saturday Ken's time 14:13:42 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/#saddle 14:15:01 kendall: did some changes to naming, added invocableOperations ... 14:15:25 kendall: added saddle:operationTarget to tell me which graphs I can interact with 14:16:00 kendall: added acceptSerializationFormat 14:16:59 should include the supported extended functions (&ex:myFunc(?x)) 14:17:08 kendall: this is about data format, not query language serialization 14:17:39 kendall: nervous about acceptSerializationFormat, redundant to content negotiation 14:18:02 kendall: another issue - how do you identify the various subsets of OWL 14:18:49 kendall: invocableOps can contain IDs of the ops in our protocol 14:19:25 kendall: can vary according to graphs, can choose not to support GetGraph on a huge graph 14:20:29 SteveH: I had in mind something where you wouldn't have to repeat the properties shared between services 14:21:44 DanC: we can always add extension properties 14:22:02 DanC: so I'd only keep those where two people can demonstrate interop 14:22:09 q+ to ask if it is just xsd:*** that can be used as the object of "saddle:supportsDatatype" 14:22:34 DanC: we'd find out what interop is as we'd go 14:23:04 DanC: story about operationPoint 14:24:16 kendall: if I know a URI is of type OperationPoint, I can GET it and get the service description 14:24:24 DanC: is that in spec for this type? 14:24:26 kendall: yes 14:24:51 kendall: GetSvcDescription would be a required protocol operation 14:25:03 AndyS: in HTTP, it would be GET 14:25:26 (that was a question to Kendall for clarification) 14:25:52 kendall: story about OpTarget 14:26:13 kendall: on a URI of this type, I'd have to say OPTIONS, not GET because here GET is GetGraph 14:26:26 q+ 14:27:21 DanC: I might need to point from target to service 14:27:58 ack Yoshio 14:28:46 Yoshio: is the object of supportedDatatype an XML Schema thing? Can use add their datatypes? 14:28:59 kendall: it's RDF, put there anything 14:29:30 DanC: you can put whatever datatype you want there 14:30:03 Yoshio: can you also describe the ops on the datatypes? Should it be specified as an ontology thing? 14:30:13 kendall: sounds like a good idea 14:30:27 kendall: my version doesn't have that (yet) 14:30:44 bijan: what's the interaction between supported datatypes and the ontology used? 14:31:24 afs has joined #dawg 14:31:45 DanC: I was thinking of a class OperationPoint, all you know is you can perform SPARQL queries, you cannot get a svc description 14:32:46 bijan: do you want a class that has the QL implicit in it? 14:33:24 kendall: we could put the class in the SPARQL namespace, making the QL implied 14:33:43 bijan: trying to understand the semantics of the class here 14:34:23 bijan: so it would be equivalent to a generic OpPoint with a queryLanguage set to SPARQL 14:35:05 kendall: I want an OpPoint that identifies a SPARQL service 14:35:18 kendall: I'd like GetDescription required 14:36:18 bijan: what does OPTIONS do on OpPoint? Is it the same as GET there? 14:36:37 q- 14:36:42 q- 14:36:48 DanC: we may have to go back to the protocol stuff 14:37:33 kendall: is the "keeping stuff if we get interoperable pairs" dropped? 14:37:42 DanC: tried one, got into a lot of issues... 14:38:18 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/prot26 14:38:31 DanC: moving to protocol description 14:38:41 for the record, i thought it was working fine. :> 14:38:46 DanC: my proposal: took example from UCs and Reqs 14:39:23 DanC: querying for a weblog of whoever 14:39:35 DanC: then I describe to the encoding 14:40:25 DanC: touched FROM/WITH slightly 14:41:09 DanC: warnings can go in Warning header 14:41:24 kendall: that header is apparently only about caching 14:41:53 kendall: maybe we could define a specific warning code 14:42:17 i didn't say that. :> 14:42:22 DanC: and concluding with limiting the results 14:43:22 bijan: fujitsu labs won't do DAWG without SOAP 14:43:41 bijan: your document, if it replaces the current protocol, doesn't say anything about SOAP 14:43:57 http://www.w3.org/2005/02/25-SPARQL-Prototocol/SPARQL-P.wsdl 14:43:58 bijan: the current protocol doc specifies an abstract protocol 14:44:37 ericP: a WSDL description could take advantage of the WSDL mechanism for putting things in query 14:45:13 DanC: the WSDL has been out there for a bit, it describes a GET, not a POST, right? 14:45:30 DanC: in SOAP, would it be SOAP response or would be SOAP req/resp? 14:46:12 DanC: can you show me the HTTP that comes out of the fujitsu's binding? 14:46:37 ericP: it would have POST 14:46:44 DanC: it's important to have a GET binding 14:46:48 interface='SPARQL' 14:46:48 type='http://www.w3.org/2004/08/wsdl/http'> 14:46:48 whttp:method="GET" > 14:46:51 14:46:53 14:46:56 vs 14:47:12 interface='SPARQL' 14:47:12 type='http://www.w3.org/2004/08/wsdl/http'> 14:47:12 soap:method="@@@" > 14:47:15 14:47:17 14:47:33 DanC: we don't have a requirement to give a SOAP interface 14:48:18 bijan: I'd still like to make it easy to hook in the SOAP binding 14:48:36 bijan: a normative WSDL would work for me (with HTTP binding) because I can add a SOAP binding easily 14:49:14 q+ to ask about protocol *requirements* 14:49:51 DanC: the request for WSDL has come from a number of places, begins to look like a requirement 14:50:36 bijan: story why WSDL is useful: fujitsu does large-scale integration, their middleware uses RDF & OWL, they have a protocol that allows querying 14:50:57 bijan: they want to interoperate with everything that uses Web services 14:51:08 bijan: all the MS Office operations now support SOAP 14:51:32 bijan: so they want to be able to call uniformly SPARQL or Word 14:51:43 q? 14:52:00 jordi_: doing HTTP methods is less supported than arbitrary WSDL operations 14:52:08 OPTIONS for stuff to add to UC&R: new requirement: WSDL specification of SPARQL protocol. new use case 14:52:40 bijan: it's the abstract WSDL that's important to them 14:53:03 DanC: I'm confident about adding this requirement 14:53:13 DanC: anybody objects? 14:53:23 DanC: any volunteers? 14:53:53 ack kendall 14:53:53 kendall, you wanted to ask about protocol *requirements* 14:54:06 bijan and ericP 14:54:28 kendall: do we have requirement for HTTP? 14:54:32 DanC: in the charter 14:54:42 kendall: same strength as SOAP 14:56:10 timbl has joined #dawg 14:56:40 AndyS: we have requirement for addressable query results 14:56:52 AFS notes http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-dawg-uc/#d4.10 14:58:15 Dan notes it's an design objective 14:58:18 bijan: I'll take the action to write up the req and UC 14:58:32 PROPOSED: requirement: A WSDL description shall be included in the protocol specification 14:59:44 DanC: we need a good story for this requirement 15:00:05 nobody opposed to adding the req, two abstentions 15:00:20 abstain: AFS, JosD 15:00:26 so RESOLVED. 15:00:59 ACTION Bijan: propose text (story? etc.) to support WSDL requirement 15:01:36 ACTION EricP: review WSDL text proposal 15:02:46 Bijan: should the story mention or not mention specific companies? 15:02:54 DanC: small leaning toward specifics... 15:03:03 Kendall: other stories are "sanitized" 15:03:13 DanC: if you mention one company, there's some obligation to mention others 15:04:12 Fujistu WSDL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0224.html 15:04:18 ericP: explains the current WSDL description 15:04:25 (It's WSDL 1.1/what ever MS uses at the moment) 15:04:41 ericP: it's only for query operation 15:04:48 ericP: adding SOAP binding would be trivial 15:05:15 ericP: we could get SOAP over email, SOAP over JMS 15:05:46 e.g. http://java.sun.com/products/jms/ 15:06:14 bijan: fujitsu doesn't need to expose the services externally, but internally they have all sorts of different protocols 15:06:14 http://www.w3.org/2005/02/25-SPARQL-Prototocol/ 15:06:49 ericP: I wrote up a description of the probocol based on the WSDL 15:07:08 ericP: also explained it to people who don't speak WSDL 15:07:37 ericP: the URI encoding is like CGI parameters 15:07:53 q+ to mention that SOAP interoperability is not a given.. 15:08:06 ericP: the goal was to have WSDL but also an easy description for ppl who don't use WSDL 15:08:33 ericP: it doesn't have an abstract protocol, only on the level of WSDL 15:09:00 ericP: it has parameters and normative binding to HTTP 15:09:23 DanC: it seems it has an abstract protocol specified in WSDL interface 15:10:27 bijan: the document is confusing to me because the textual version is not about the abstract protocol but about the binding 15:11:20 q+ to aks if there are any non-WSDL cases we need to allow for 15:11:25 DanC: if we took this document and added it to kendall's doc, would it replace the abstract notation? 15:11:31 DanC: would the abstract notation go away? 15:12:23 bijan chairing until break 15:12:28 chair declares break 15:13:20 reconvening at 10:30 15:36:34 q+ to ask a general/off the discource question about privacy and security: would it be possible to add such information with current framework? 15:36:54 q- 15:37:43 timbl has joined #dawg 15:38:43 (break seems to be extending to 10:40) 15:40:49 chair back to DanC 15:41:44 DanC: going through kendall's draft of protocol 15:42:08 DanC: skipping types, we'll get that from WSDL 15:42:34 DanC: let's go through the operations 15:42:43 DanC: query 15:45:07 danC shows the WSDL in his emacs 15:46:48 Lee has left #dawg 15:46:50 q+ to ask if it is possible to add optional (OP-dependant) argument,? 15:47:01 Lee has joined #dawg 15:47:41 ericP: I didn't meen to supercede kendall's WSDL 15:47:49 kendall: mine's more minimal 15:50:35 danc editing the WSDL on screen 15:54:00 bijan: operation point is WSDL endpoint 15:55:39 discussion where operation target is - query language or protocol 15:55:50 AndyS: I like it in the query language for scripting purposes 15:56:08 AndyS: have no problem with duplication 15:56:32 kendall: problem with clashes if it's in both places 15:56:51 patH has joined #dawg 15:57:15 DanC: let's start with how to do this in the protocol 15:59:12 bijan: we could have the target in an attribute 15:59:25 JacekK: probably not because the operation follows the WSDL URI operation style 16:06:33 DanC: why do we have getGraph? 16:06:52 kendall: for retreival operation over a different protocol than HTTP 16:11:38 kendall: getGraph is an equivalent of the HTTP GET for when you aren't on HTTP 16:11:53 AndyS: this seems very useful but not tied to SPARQL 16:12:49 AndyS: this is "get the whole thing" which is in no sense specific to SPARQL 16:13:22 JacekK: we have WS-Transfer for a GET operation 16:13:51 AndyS: so I don't want this in this particular namespace of working group 16:13:59 s/of/or/ 16:14:39 DanC: getGraph doesn't have critical mass of support 16:15:02 kendall: we need an example in the ql for getting the full graph 16:15:06 CONSTRUCT * WHERE GRAPH (?x ?y ?z) 16:15:44 Not quite 16:16:04 ACTION AndyS: explain how to get a whole graph with CONSTRUCT * and GRAPH. 16:16:14 No need for GRAPH (always) because it may be where it was sent. 16:16:22 ACTION KendallC: refer to "get the whole graph" explanation from protocol spec 16:16:40 Alos - no clear (:-) that is what CONSTRUCT * ... GRAPH means in general 16:16:43 DanC: getServiceDescription 16:17:37 ericP: looks like the namespace document problem 16:19:10 JacekK: discovery is already handled in the protocols (HTTP OPTIONS, SOAP WS-MetadataExchange) 16:19:23 bijan: my users like to have this in the protocol 16:19:52 AndyS: two views: 1) it's not a requirement, nothing to do with us, 2) we'd like to have that 16:20:11 AndyS: if we do in fact do it, people who we don't satisfy might go away 16:20:58 Isn't it of some value if we get the result (WSD) in a RDF graph? 16:21:01 bijan: on behalf of my users, can I ever push a potentially useful thing that "might drive ppl away"? 16:22:51 DanC: adding interface SPARQLDiscovery 16:24:19 DanC: we could at this point make a WG decision and action ppl to figure out the details 16:26:07 DanC: I'd rather not talk about faults now, it can be figured out by the ppl figuring out the details 16:26:36 PROPOSED: that the SPARQL WSDL description shall have 2 interfaces (SPARQLQuery and SPARQLDiscovery), each with one operation 16:27:35 steve, http://www.w3.org/2005/02/25-SPARQL-Prototocol/#introduction 16:27:47 chair detects insufficient support just yet 16:27:51 SteveH: I may support this if somebody explains it to me and I implement it 16:28:34 ACTION KendallC: add WSDL description of protocol to editor's draft, propose to WG 16:28:37 tlr has joined #dawg 16:29:00 DanC: can we conclude this discussion at this moment? 16:29:25 See http://www.w3.org/2005/03/01-dawg-irc#T16-29-00 16:29:33 remind me of the zakim dial-in code for this session? Ta. 16:29:37 AndyS: is getServiceDescription mandatory for conformance with SPARQL? 16:29:42 zakim, code? 16:29:42 the conference code is 3294 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), tlr 16:30:18 agenda? 16:30:51 apparetnly the conference is restricted at this time. Did you guys go over the time limit?? 16:31:00 jordi_: I expect that we would have a normative SOAP binding, too 16:31:31 jordi_: but optional 16:32:08 Zakim, passcode? 16:32:08 the conference code is 3294 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), DanC_ 16:32:39 Zakim, room for 3? 16:32:40 ok, DanC_; conference Team_(dawg)16:32Z scheduled with code 83261 (TEAM1) for 60 minutes until 1732Z 16:32:53 patH, we're tryign to resolve 16:32:57 Zakim, who's on the phone? 16:32:57 On the phone I see OlympiaC, JanneS 16:32:59 OlympiaC has Jos, AndyS, KendallC, Yoshio, HiroyukiS, EricP, Jack, SteveH, DanC, BijanP, JordiA, Lee, BalajiP 16:33:13 ok, thanks. dont waste too much time on it. 16:33:22 janne, we're switching to 83261, ok? 16:33:30 ok 16:33:37 Zakim, call OlympiaC 16:33:37 -OlympiaC 16:33:38 ok, DanC_; the call is being made 16:33:39 +OlympiaC 16:34:09 (and Zakim is wicked cool.) 16:34:22 Zakim, what conference is this? 16:34:22 this is SW_DAWG(TP)8:30AM conference code 3294 16:34:36 Zakim, drop OlympiaC 16:34:36 OlympiaC is being disconnected 16:34:38 -OlympiaC 16:34:49 Zakim, this will be Team_(dawg) 16:34:49 ok, DanC_; I see Team_(dawg)16:32Z scheduled to start 2 minutes ago 16:34:55 Zakim, call OlympiaC 16:34:55 ok, DanC_; the call is being made 16:34:56 Team_(dawg)16:32Z has now started 16:34:58 +OlympiaC 16:35:21 Zakim, drop OlympiaC 16:35:21 OlympiaC is being disconnected 16:35:22 Team_(dawg)16:32Z has ended 16:35:24 Attendees were OlympiaC 16:35:29