14:30:16 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:30:16 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-rif-irc
14:30:23 <ChrisW> zakim, clear agenda
14:30:23 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:30:27 <ChrisW> zakim, this will be rif
14:30:27 <Zakim> ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 30 minutes
14:30:45 <ChrisW> Chair: Chris Welty
14:30:55 <ChrisW> Meeting: RIF Telecon 25-Aug-09
14:35:20 <ChrisW> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0022.html
14:35:35 <ChrisW> ChrisW has changed the topic to: Aug 25 RIF Telecon agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0022.html
14:36:26 <ChrisW> agenda+ Admin
14:36:46 <ChrisW> agenda+ Liason
14:36:52 <ChrisW> agenda+ Action Review
14:37:03 <ChrisW> agenda+ Public Comments
14:37:08 <ChrisW> agenda+ Exit Criteria
14:37:18 <ChrisW> agenda+ Publication
14:37:23 <ChrisW> agenda+ Test Cases
14:37:26 <ChrisW> agenda+ AOB
14:37:44 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
14:37:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
14:38:03 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make logs public
14:46:11 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif
14:57:29 <Harold> Harold has joined #rif
15:01:37 <johnhall> johnhall has joined #rif
15:02:33 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
15:02:41 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:02:46 <StellaMitchell> StellaMitchell has joined #rif
15:03:04 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
15:03:14 <mdean> mdean has joined #rif
15:03:17 <johnhall> zakim, ipcaller is me
15:03:17 <Zakim> +johnhall; got it
15:03:24 <ChrisW> ChrisW has joined #rif
15:03:37 <ChrisW> sorry about that, telecom problems
15:03:38 <ChrisW> joining
15:03:47 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres
15:04:01 <Zakim> +[IBM]
15:04:03 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
15:04:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see johnhall, Mike_Dean, AxelPolleres, [IBM]
15:04:09 <ChrisW> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:04:09 <Zakim> +ChrisW; got it
15:04:18 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:04:19 <Zakim> +Stella_Mitchell
15:04:59 <AdrianP> AdrianP has joined #rif
15:05:28 <ChrisW> Scribe: AxelPolleres
15:05:29 <AxelPolleres> scribe: Axel Polleres
15:05:47 <sandro> scribenick: AxelPolleres 
15:05:51 <ChrisW> July 21 minutes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jul/att-0045/21-rif-minutes.html
15:05:54 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
15:06:01 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept minutes of July 21 telecon
15:06:02 <sandro> RRSAgent, make record public
15:06:09 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept minutes of July 21 telecon
15:06:10 <Zakim> +??P14
15:06:20 <AdrianP> Zakim, ??P14 is me
15:06:20 <Zakim> +AdrianP; got it
15:06:28 <ChrisW> July 28 minuntes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jul/att-0047/28-July-2009-rif-minutes.html
15:06:29 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:06:34 <Harold> zakim, [NRCC] is me
15:06:34 <Zakim> +Harold; got it
15:06:35 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept minutes of July 28 telecon
15:06:45 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept minutes of July 28 telecon
15:06:54 <Zakim> +??P29
15:07:13 <ChrisW> zakim, list agenda
15:07:13 <Zakim> I see 8 items remaining on the agenda:
15:07:14 <Zakim> 1. Admin [from ChrisW]
15:07:14 <Zakim> 2. Liason [from ChrisW]
15:07:15 <Zakim> 3. Action Review [from ChrisW]
15:07:15 <Zakim> 4. Public Comments [from ChrisW]
15:07:16 <Zakim> 5. Exit Criteria [from ChrisW]
15:07:16 <Zakim> 6. Publication [from ChrisW]
15:07:18 <Zakim> 7. Test Cases [from ChrisW]
15:07:20 <Zakim> 8. AOB [from ChrisW]
15:07:27 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: agenda amendmends?
15:07:38 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:07:38 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:07:58 <AxelPolleres> Topic: Liaison
15:08:05 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW:
15:08:39 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:08:39 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Liason" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:08:58 <AxelPolleres> ... Liaison with SPARQL?
15:09:25 <johnhall> zakim, mute me
15:09:25 <Zakim> johnhall should now be muted
15:09:27 <AxelPolleres> Axel: FPWD features and rationale, we'd be still happy for feedback
15:09:50 <AxelPolleres> ... technical FPWDs first versions not to be expected before end of Sep.
15:10:19 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: OWL doesn't need rdf:PlainLiteral functions.
15:10:30 <AxelPolleres> ... at the moment.
15:11:27 <AxelPolleres> ... OWL hung up on some XSD issue at the moment, but may not want to wait for us.
15:11:44 <AxelPolleres> ... not sure how much time we have.
15:11:49 <AxelPolleres> q+
15:12:06 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: What prevents OWL to implement those functions?
15:13:36 <AxelPolleres> ... Axel: those functions back up the facets, IMO
15:14:22 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: we made two functions at risk.
15:16:18 <Gary_Hallmark> Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
15:16:19 <AxelPolleres> ... length() and compare()
15:16:36 <AxelPolleres> Axel: yes these are strictly speaking redundant wrt. the resp. string functions.
15:16:56 <Zakim> +Gary
15:17:50 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: seems ridiculous to hold up just for these straightforward functions. they don't seem to be a challenge.
15:18:41 <AxelPolleres> ... back-and-forth to strings etc obviously needed, and rdf:Plainliteral is the right place.
15:19:20 <AxelPolleres> sandro: strong opinions about "at risk" functions?
15:19:31 <AxelPolleres> axel: no strong opinion
15:19:36 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: leave them in.
15:20:28 <sandro> PROPOSED: RIF considers rdf-plain-literal to be ready for PR.  The features-at-risk should be left in, and we do not believe implementation reports are necessary, given the simplicity of the spec.
15:20:44 <AxelPolleres> +1
15:20:48 <sandro> +1
15:20:50 <ChrisW> +1
15:20:55 <mdean> +1
15:20:56 <johnhall> +1
15:20:59 <AdrianP> +1
15:21:00 <DaveReynolds> 0 (overloaded functions would be cleaner but not worth the work)
15:21:11 <ChrisW> rrsagent, pointer?
15:21:11 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-rif-irc#T15-21-11
15:21:13 <sandro> (I agree, Dave)
15:21:30 <sandro> RESOLVED: RIF considers rdf-plain-literal to be ready for PR.  The features-at-risk should be left in, and we do not believe implementation reports are necessary, given the simplicity of the spec.
15:22:04 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: anything else todo for rdf:plainLiteral/OWL?
15:22:14 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:22:14 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, ChrisW
15:22:17 <ChrisW> q?
15:22:20 <ChrisW> ack axel
15:22:24 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:22:24 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Action Review" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:22:24 <AxelPolleres> ack me
15:23:22 <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Implementations
15:23:48 <AxelPolleres> ACTION-899: done?
15:23:48 <trackbot> ACTION-899 Look for a template for implementation reports notes added
15:23:54 <ChrisW> action-899: complete
15:23:54 <trackbot> ACTION-899 Look for a template for implementation reports notes added
15:24:00 <ChrisW> action-899: done
15:24:00 <trackbot> ACTION-899 Look for a template for implementation reports notes added
15:24:08 <ChrisW> action-899: closed
15:24:08 <trackbot> ACTION-899 Look for a template for implementation reports notes added
15:24:08 <trackbot> If you meant to close ACTION-899, please use 'close ACTION-899'
15:24:18 <ChrisW> close action-899
15:24:18 <trackbot> ACTION-899 Look for a template for implementation reports closed
15:25:08 <AxelPolleres> ACTION-882 done
15:25:17 <ChrisW> close action-882
15:25:17 <trackbot> ACTION-882 Contact University of Innsbruck. closed
15:25:30 <sandro> Here's my e-mail asking for OWL implementation reports: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-dev/2009JulSep/0055.html
15:25:56 <AxelPolleres> actions 880, 879 continued
15:26:04 <AxelPolleres> close ACTION-873
15:26:04 <trackbot> ACTION-873 Contact Leo Obrst. closed
15:26:20 <AxelPolleres> close ACTION-878
15:26:20 <trackbot> ACTION-878 Contact Elisa Kendall. closed
15:26:50 <AxelPolleres> close ACTION-877
15:26:50 <trackbot> ACTION-877 Contact William Andersen. closed
15:27:34 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: What about ACTION-896?
15:27:48 <AxelPolleres> sandro: unsure, make it continued.
15:28:26 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: sandro you had also ACTION-892?
15:28:54 <AxelPolleres> sandro: think I concluded it was obsolete. think they commented enoug in the past, suggest we close it
15:29:01 <AxelPolleres> close ACTION-892
15:29:01 <trackbot> ACTION-892 Get an OWL-WG comment on RIF closed
15:29:52 <AxelPolleres> close ACTION-854
15:29:52 <trackbot> ACTION-854 Check all docs for use of "rdf:text" closed
15:29:53 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jun/0103.html
15:30:19 <AxelPolleres> ACTION-850 continued.
15:31:12 <AxelPolleres> ACTION-785 is pending review.
15:31:28 <AxelPolleres> ACTION-733 is continued.
15:32:00 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: sandro why is ACTION-864 pending review?
15:32:26 <AxelPolleres> sandro: I talked to doug and chime, I think we can close that
15:32:36 <AxelPolleres> close ACTION-864
15:32:36 <trackbot> ACTION-864 Contact Doug Lenat (Cleveland Clinic) closed
15:32:39 <ChrisW> zakim, next item
15:32:39 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Public Comments" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:33:01 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Table on WG homepage. 
15:33:32 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/
15:33:48 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_DM1
15:34:07 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: just questions, no concerns raised.
15:34:25 <AxelPolleres> ... david hopes to do an implementation also.
15:34:45 <AxelPolleres> ... Comments?
15:35:00 <AxelPolleres> sandro: do we need to track the response?
15:35:20 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: wans't really raising concerns.
15:35:42 <AxelPolleres> sandro: looks better if we get a response "yes, looks fine"
15:36:06 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: I can add "please let us know if that's satisfactory. 
15:36:14 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_DM2
15:36:35 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: do we need to respond on "AT RISK" comment?
15:36:54 <AxelPolleres> sandro: we shall respond "if there are implementations then we'll keep it"
15:37:28 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_CS1
15:37:54 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: no comments on this one.
15:38:01 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_SH1
15:38:17 <AxelPolleres> chrisw: small corrections in Core which I just made... comments?
15:38:38 <AxelPolleres> sandro: just explaining words added... looks fine.
15:38:48 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_AR3
15:39:12 <AxelPolleres> chrisw: mainly use cases for equality and claims he is working on an implementation.
15:39:39 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_PF1
15:40:12 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: one of michael's students, suggestion for Reaction rule dialect.
15:40:51 <AxelPolleres> ... I responded to all dialect requests that we look for dialects as "FLD implementations".
15:41:40 <AxelPolleres> ... also asked for how to define terms as equal in Core.
15:41:59 <AxelPolleres> sandro: looks like a good question for an FAQ.
15:43:38 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: slightly updated response to make it clearer. if anyone wants to add an example, go ahead.
15:43:56 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_BG1
15:44:40 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: mostly says "keep going"... mild critique on PRD being not fully "semantic"
15:45:00 <AxelPolleres> ... we may just understand it as "good first step".
15:45:29 <AxelPolleres> sandro: we shall include a "are you satisfied?" question in the response.
15:46:00 <AxelPolleres> ... let me check the wording OWL uses.
15:46:15 <johnhall> zakim, unmute me
15:46:16 <Zakim> johnhall should no longer be muted
15:46:34 <AxelPolleres> ... asking whether he is satisfied with the response is maybe good enough.
15:46:57 <sandro> OWL's text:    
15:46:57 <sandro> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment. 
15:46:57 <johnhall> zakim, mute me
15:46:57 <Zakim> johnhall should now be muted
15:47:10 <AxelPolleres> johnhall: he has a point, that we give no way to implement PRD in a non-operational way.
15:48:15 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_WL
15:48:17 <AdrianP> we had started with a model-theoretic semantics for PRD but then gave priority to the operational one
15:48:23 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: response already sent.
15:48:32 <johnhall> That wasn't quite my point - rather that without procedural semantics, most of the industry could not implement PRD
15:48:47 <ChrisW> action: Chris to contact WL for response
15:48:47 <trackbot> Created ACTION-901 - Contact WL for response [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-09-01].
15:49:14 <AxelPolleres> sandro: suggest one more ping with the suggested "please respond" text on the wiki. 
15:49:29 <AxelPolleres> (sandro can you paste where you put it on the wiki)
15:50:37 <AxelPolleres> dave: response to WL links to wrong mail
15:50:52 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: actually, hasn't been sent yet
15:51:14 <AxelPolleres> ACTION-901 is void...
15:51:30 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_TG1
15:52:18 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: this is a message of support.
15:52:39 <AxelPolleres> ... preferred more general extensibility mechanism for procedures and built-ins.
15:53:20 <AxelPolleres> ... "please acknowlege" sentence to be added.
15:53:54 <AxelPolleres> sandro: not sure I agree, but I have no better response.
15:54:10 <AxelPolleres> ... we have a perfect way to attach procedures.
15:54:25 <AdrianP> he probably means user-defined procedures
15:54:34 <AxelPolleres> ... we could say: URIs are perfectly extensible and provide that.
15:55:06 <sandro> I don't think so, Adrian.   But who knows.
15:55:26 <AxelPolleres> harold: in FLD/FLD we define that "Externals" could relate to other resources, such as procedures.
15:57:03 <Harold> "This syntax enables very flexible representations for externally defined information sources: not only predicates and functions, but also frames, classification, and equality terms can be used. In this way, external sources can be modeled in an object-oriented way."
15:57:24 <Harold> (http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/FLD#Terms)
16:00:20 <Harold> "Thus, External("http://foo.bar.com"^^rif:iri["foo"^^xs:string->"123"^^xs:integer]) and External("pred:isTime"^^rif:iri("22:33:44"^^xs:time) are examples of invocations of external terms -- one querying an external source and another invoking a built-in."
16:00:39 <Gary> so basically, "we believe that RIF's use of IRIs for external procedures and functions is a general and extensible method for attaching procedures that is agnostic w.r.t 
16:00:39 <Harold> )http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/DTB#Appendix:_Schemas_for_Externally_Defined_Terms)
16:00:40 <Gary> programming langauge. The builtins are a core set that should foster interoperability"
16:01:04 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_TG1
16:04:20 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_AA1
16:04:30 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: nothing special needed there
16:04:41 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_JdR1
16:05:09 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: implementation support. seems to have a lot of work done.
16:05:18 <AxelPolleres> ... shall I say more?
16:05:51 <AxelPolleres> sandro: we shall reference the implementation report template.
16:06:09 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_PasH1
16:06:51 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: mainly support plus dialect suggestions.
16:07:02 <AxelPolleres> ... none of the cited papers mentions RIF.
16:07:18 <AxelPolleres> ... mentions book where RIF was included.
16:07:41 <AxelPolleres> ... we shall maybe put it on the publications page? he was a member of RIF.
16:08:17 <AxelPolleres> http://semantic-web-book.org/page/C6-Rules
16:08:36 <AxelPolleres> dave: section 6 is about RIF
16:08:42 <AxelPolleres> mike: RIF about 18 pages.
16:09:36 <AxelPolleres> (we have, BTW,  a summer school article on RIF with Paula, Harold, Michael, though very outdated in between )
16:09:48 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_GL1
16:09:58 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: compliments & advertising
16:10:16 <AxelPolleres> ... other comments on that one?
16:10:24 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_CB1
16:10:42 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: similar as last one.
16:11:04 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_NB2
16:11:35 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: has specific comments on XML Schema.
16:11:45 <AxelPolleres> ... didn't draft response yet. 
16:13:00 <AxelPolleres> ... we had postponed schema 
16:13:29 <AxelPolleres> ... Harold, your action to address the schema and I will do the response. 
16:13:32 <ChrisW> action: harold to look at message from Nick B. and check FLD schema
16:13:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-902 - Look at message from Nick B. and check FLD schema [on Harold Boley - due 2009-09-01].
16:15:36 <AxelPolleres> sandro: question whether schema may evolve after spec.
16:15:49 <AxelPolleres> harold: he only gives a warning
16:16:11 <AxelPolleres> sandro: would be awkward to proceed without fixing this.
16:16:19 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: we need to fix it.
16:16:30 <AxelPolleres> harold: cannot promise 2 weeks.
16:16:41 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Gary, can you look into this?
16:16:46 <StellaMitchell> isn't his comment just saying to remove one line in the schema?
16:16:53 <AxelPolleres> Gary: Can do, not really familiar with FLD schema.
16:18:28 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: respond we need to look into this more carefully.
16:18:55 <AxelPolleres> sandro: I think that making the schema normative is awkward
16:19:07 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: where else would it be?
16:19:56 <AxelPolleres> sandro: this looks critical path.
16:20:20 <AxelPolleres> dave: can we just drop the include?
16:20:34 <AxelPolleres> sandro: seems to be what he suggested.
16:21:25 <AxelPolleres> dave: XML schema section 4.5 has the defs of redefine. 
16:23:06 <AxelPolleres> gary: schema processors seem to stumble over redefines
16:23:36 <AdrianP> yes, redefine is a known problem of Altova
16:23:44 <AxelPolleres> ... do not like including and refedining the same thing
16:24:31 <AxelPolleres> (harold, can you type in your suggestion?)
16:27:16 <Harold> http://ruleml.org/rif/fld/LC/
16:28:40 <AxelPolleres> harold: I can try to merge two redefines in one.
16:28:56 <AxelPolleres> ... need to look back in the XSD, not sure.
16:29:08 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: let's make it non-normative.
16:29:21 <AxelPolleres> harold: I think it is essential to FLD.
16:29:53 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: if we can't make the decision today to go to CR, we have to put it off for some time.
16:30:14 <AxelPolleres> harold: the telecon was short announced, let's give it another 2 weeks.
16:30:20 <AxelPolleres> sandro: next week?
16:30:21 <AdrianP> agree XML schema is essential to a dialect
16:30:28 <DaveReynolds> I can't be there next week.
16:30:32 <AdrianP> will be travelling next week - i-Semantics conference
16:30:44 <AxelPolleres> chrisW: can you have it next week harold?
16:30:49 <sandro> DaveReynolds, are you okay with doing the CR decision in your absence?
16:31:02 <AxelPolleres> harold: there are some more comments.
16:31:04 <AxelPolleres> q+
16:31:16 <DaveReynolds> Sandro - does that include the exit criteria?
16:31:44 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: extend meeting by 10 minutes
16:31:48 <DaveReynolds> +1
16:31:48 <sandro> probably, DaveReynolds.
16:31:54 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: extend meeting by 10 minutes
16:33:06 <DaveReynolds> Sandro - I'm OK doing CR decision w/o me. For the exit criteria it might be good to explicitly allow implementations of Core so that Core could go to PR w/o BLD+PRD.
16:33:13 <AxelPolleres> Axel: two things on DTB
16:33:33 <sandro> Good point DaveReynolds, but I don't think we need to decide that going into CR.
16:33:49 <sandro> (we're not actually disallowing implementation or Core, of course.)
16:33:54 <DaveReynolds> Sandro, ok.
16:34:26 <AxelPolleres> ... 1) string-join, we need to fix that, two alternatives: a minimalistic one and a meaningful one (use lists) cf. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0011.html
16:34:41 <AxelPolleres> 2) list functions are under-specified, we need to fix that for CR.
16:35:07 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_RG2
16:35:35 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: similar as previous ansers,referring to that we look forward to dialect implementations.
16:35:49 <AxelPolleres> Harold: another comment on Nick's mail.
16:36:00 <AxelPolleres> (Harold, can you type that in?)
16:36:29 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: If we can't fix the issue in time, we havbe to make it non-normative.
16:36:49 <AxelPolleres> harold: we might need to talk to the XML schema people in XSD.
16:37:19 <AxelPolleres> sandro: I'd be happy to leave only FLD open and get at least the other docs to CR.
16:37:27 <Zakim> -Gary
16:37:29 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:37:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:37:29 <Zakim> -Harold
16:37:30 <Zakim> -Stella_Mitchell
16:37:32 <Zakim> -DaveReynolds
16:37:34 <ChrisW> zakim, list attendees
16:37:34 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Mike_Dean, johnhall, AxelPolleres, ChrisW, Sandro, Stella_Mitchell, AdrianP, Harold, DaveReynolds, Gary
16:37:49 <ChrisW> Regrets: MichaelKifer LeoraMorgenstern
16:37:55 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:37:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/25-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:38:07 <johnhall> Have to go - bye
16:38:09 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public
16:38:11 <johnhall> johnhall has left #rif
16:38:22 <Zakim> -johnhall
16:38:32 <Zakim> -AdrianP
16:38:39 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
16:38:49 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:38:49 <Zakim> On the phone I see Mike_Dean, ChrisW, Sandro
16:39:04 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
16:39:06 <AxelPolleres> did you still need me?
16:39:10 <ChrisW> no, thanks!
16:39:15 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
16:39:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see ChrisW, Sandro
16:43:10 <Zakim> -ChrisW
16:43:10 <Zakim> -Sandro
16:43:11 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:43:12 <Zakim> Attendees were Mike_Dean, johnhall, AxelPolleres, ChrisW, Sandro, Stella_Mitchell, AdrianP, Harold, DaveReynolds, Gary
16:47:56 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has left #rif