16:47:07 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdb2rdf
16:47:07 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-rdb2rdf-irc
16:47:09 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
16:47:09 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdb2rdf
16:47:11 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7322733
16:47:11 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDB2RDF()12:00PM scheduled to start in 13 minutes
16:47:12 <trackbot> Meeting: RDB2RDF Working Group Teleconference
16:47:12 <trackbot> Date: 15 February 2011
16:47:19 <ivan> Chair: Ivan
16:47:28 <ivan> Regrets: Boris, Michael, Ashok
16:52:43 <ivan> Regrets+ Sören
16:56:26 <dmcneil> dmcneil has joined #RDB2RDF
16:58:37 <Zakim> SW_RDB2RDF()12:00PM has now started
16:58:44 <Zakim> +dmcneil
16:58:51 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
16:58:51 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
16:58:52 <Zakim> -dmcneil
16:58:52 <Zakim> +dmcneil
16:58:52 <Zakim> +Ivan
16:59:26 <ivan> Topic: admin issues
16:59:40 <Zakim> +Alexandre
17:00:09 <privera> privera has joined #RDB2RDF
17:00:12 <Zakim> +EricP
17:00:55 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdb2rdf
17:01:27 <juansequeda> juansequeda has joined #rdb2rdf
17:01:41 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
17:01:53 <Zakim> -EricP
17:01:55 <Zakim> +EricP
17:02:20 <privera> zakim, mute me
17:02:20 <Zakim> sorry, privera, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
17:02:40 <ivan> zakim, IPcaller is privera
17:02:40 <Zakim> +privera; got it
17:02:50 <privera> zakim, mute me
17:02:50 <Zakim> privera should now be muted
17:03:01 <Zakim> +Souri
17:03:32 <Seema> Seema has joined #rdb2rdf
17:03:41 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdb2rdf
17:03:59 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
17:04:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see dmcneil, Ivan, Alexandre, EricP, privera (muted), Souri
17:04:02 <Zakim> On IRC I see Souri, Seema, juansequeda, cygri, privera, dmcneil, Zakim, RRSAgent, ivan, betehess, LeeF, MacTed, iv_an_ru, trackbot, ericP
17:04:15 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aaaa
17:04:32 <betehess> Zakim, aaaa is Seema 
17:04:32 <Zakim> +Seema; got it
17:04:50 <Zakim> +mhausenblas
17:05:16 <ivan> zakim, mhausenblas is cygri
17:05:16 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
17:05:32 <ivan> zakim, pick a victim
17:05:32 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose dmcneil
17:06:00 <ivan> scribenick: dmcneil 
17:06:13 <ericP> dmcneil: i can scribe
17:06:15 <ericP> ... but i need to know the incantations
17:06:22 <Ashok> Ashok has joined #rdb2rdf
17:07:00 <ivan> topic: admin
17:07:12 <dmcneil> ivan: starting meeting with admin
17:07:18 <ivan> last week's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2011/02/08-rdb2rdf-minutes.html
17:07:20 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
17:07:54 <ericP> i second minutes
17:07:57 <betehess> +1
17:07:59 <dmcneil> ivan: meetings are accepted
17:08:12 <dmcneil> ivan: minutes are accepted
17:08:38 <dmcneil> ivan: test cases are on the agenda, but Boris sent his regrets
17:08:52 <dmcneil> ivan: any test case related issues for the call?
17:09:08 <betehess>  /me would like to thank Boris for participating to http://this-db-really.does-not-exist.org/
17:09:09 <dmcneil> ericP: we can still try out the test cases and see if they make sense
17:09:27 <dmcneil> ivan: proposes moving to R2RML issues
17:09:28 <ivan> Topic: R2RML
17:09:32 <Ashok> RESOLUTION:  Minutes from last week are accepted 
17:09:55 <Souri> We can discuss ISSUE-23 raised by David
17:10:09 <ivan> ISSUE-23?
17:10:09 <trackbot> ISSUE-23 -- Make tableOwner optional -- raised
17:10:09 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/23
17:10:37 <ericP> scribenick: ericP 
17:11:13 <ericP> dmcneil: current R2RML spec requires the tableowner set when using tablename
17:11:14 <ivan> q?
17:11:16 <Souri> q+
17:11:21 <ivan> ack Souri 
17:11:32 <ericP> ... propose to make it optional to reflect SQL practice
17:11:45 <ericP> Souri: discussed with seema and @@1.
17:11:59 <ericP> ... it makes sense for it to be optional
17:12:32 <ericP> ... at query processing time, we'll be connected so we can resolve this via a query time binding
17:12:45 <ericP> ivan: clear what doc mod is required?
17:12:55 <ericP> Souri: yep, we just change the cardinality
17:13:03 <ericP> q+ to ask about SQL connectivity
17:13:18 <cygri> +1 from me
17:13:41 <ericP> scribenick: dmcneil
17:13:57 <Souri> PROPOSE: make rr:tableOwner property optional (that is, have a cardinality of 0 or 1)
17:14:04 <Ashok> Souri:  Recommends that the WG accept the proposed solution to Issue-23
17:14:06 <ivan> +1
17:14:09 <cygri> +1
17:14:12 <Souri> +1
17:14:16 <betehess> +1
17:14:21 <ivan> RESOLVED: make rr:tableOwner property optional (that is, have a cardinality of 0 or 1)
17:16:12 <dmcneil> cygri: do we need to keep an issue open to include this in testing? (paraphrased by ericP)
17:17:02 <dmcneil> Ashok: ISSUE-23 is not open, create an action to apply it
17:17:05 <ivan> ACTION: Souri to implement the conditionality of table ownder
17:17:05 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Souri
17:17:10 <Souri> sdas2
17:17:39 <ivan> ACTION: sdas2 to implement the conditionality of table ownder
17:17:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-103 - Implement the conditionality of table ownder [on Souripriya Das - due 2011-02-22].
17:17:54 <ivan> ISSUE-92?
17:17:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-92 does not exist
17:18:05 <ivan> ACTION-92?
17:18:05 <trackbot> ACTION-92 -- Richard Cyganiak to address the R2RML - DM connection -- due 2011-02-08 -- OPEN
17:18:05 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/92
17:18:40 <dmcneil> cygri: haven't done it yet, quite a bit of traffic on mailing list, need to think about how to do it in the document
17:19:12 <dmcneil> cygri: there was a discussion about whether there should be a primer, or something that explains how the working group deliverables work together
17:19:14 <ivan> q+
17:19:18 <Zakim> + +575737aabb
17:19:26 <juansequeda> zakim, aabb is me
17:19:26 <Zakim> +juansequeda; got it
17:19:28 <dmcneil> cygri: perhaps this could be addressed in the primer (or overview doc)
17:19:59 <Ashok> q+
17:20:03 <dmcneil> cygri: or we could just add a bit of text to each of the docs
17:20:23 <ivan> ack ivan
17:20:27 <ericP> q-
17:20:47 <dmcneil> ericP: withdraws question regarding whether a connection exists at times of query rewriting
17:21:11 <dmcneil> ivan: strongly in favor of an overview/primer document
17:21:32 <ivan> ack Ashok 
17:21:44 <dmcneil> Ashok: yes, we should write a primer, but people might not read it
17:21:53 <ivan> q+
17:22:06 <dmcneil> Ashok: also, add at least one paragraph to each doc talking about the relationships between the docs
17:22:24 <ericP> OWL primer?
17:22:25 <dmcneil> ivan: may not agree
17:22:28 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/ 
17:23:10 <dmcneil> ivan: points to the OWL document that is brief (1.5 pages) that shows how all of the pieces fit together
17:23:17 <juansequeda> +1 to an overview document
17:23:23 <dmcneil> ivan: this document was well received
17:23:23 <cygri> q+
17:23:32 <ivan> ack ivan
17:23:35 <betehess> q+ to comment quickly on how we could use the spec grouping feature, like http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/rdfrel.html#w3c_all
17:23:50 <ivan> ack cygri 
17:24:40 <dmcneil> cygri: probably a short document because there is not a long list of deliverables (like OWL), but it will make it seem more complicated
17:24:54 <dmcneil> cygri: if it can be addressed easily in the main document, then it is a good idea
17:25:13 <dmcneil> cygi: the main documents are Direct Mapping and R2RML documents
17:25:35 <dmcneil> cygri: different paragraph in each referring to the other
17:26:04 <Souri> q+
17:26:05 <dmcneil> cygri: this would produce a more usable set of documents
17:26:40 <dmcneil> cygri: could try putting the content in the wiki and then assess whether it warrants a separate document
17:26:43 <ivan> ack betehess 
17:26:43 <Zakim> betehess, you wanted to comment quickly on how we could use the spec grouping feature, like http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/rdfrel.html#w3c_all
17:27:09 <betehess> http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/rdfrel.html#w3c_all
17:27:16 <dmcneil> betehess: it is possible to create a new group to have all the specification in one group
17:27:40 <ivan> q?
17:27:46 <dmcneil> betehess: dependencies between documents is difficult to manage
17:28:11 <ivan> ack Souri 
17:28:12 <cygri> q+
17:28:29 <cygri> q-
17:28:51 <dmcneil> Souri: the R2RML document needs to be extended to describe how direct mappings can be used in a custom mapping
17:29:00 <betehess>  /me would like to recall we'll also have a document for the tests
17:29:09 <dmcneil> Souri: need examples/test cases that show such hybrid mappings, this could go in a "primer"
17:29:31 <betehess> ivan, open an issue :-)
17:29:34 <ericP> q+
17:29:43 <ivan> ack ericP 
17:29:44 <Souri> illustrating hybrid mappings (some portion R2RML, some portion DM)
17:29:50 <juansequeda> q+ 
17:30:05 <ivan> q+
17:30:06 <dmcneil> ericP: currently the Direct Mapping refers to the R2RML spec
17:30:23 <ivan> ack juansequeda 
17:30:29 <dmcneil> ericP: the R2RML spec will need a reference to the Direct Mapping for the feature of using Direct Mappings in a custom mapping
17:30:35 <dmcneil> ericP: so this will be covered anyway
17:30:54 <ivan> ack ivan
17:30:57 <dmcneil> juansequeda: short, summary document could be a good thing for the wider community
17:31:41 <dmcneil> ivan: a summary document that clearly shows where to start reading makes sense
17:32:11 <ivan> ACTION-93?
17:32:11 <trackbot> ACTION-93 -- Souripriya Das to identify not-mapping vs. default-mapping issues in R2RML/DM (Wiki or via mail) -- due 2011-02-08 -- OPEN
17:32:11 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/93
17:32:13 <dmcneil> ivan: re-interpret ACTION-92 to be write proposed content on the wiki
17:32:38 <dmcneil> Souri: discussed general approach last week, haven't worked on it much, not difficult to get done
17:32:45 <ivan> ACTION-97?
17:32:45 <trackbot> ACTION-97 -- Richard Cyganiak to look into D2RQ implementation and update http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Entity_disambiguation -- due 2011-02-08 -- OPEN
17:32:45 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/97
17:32:47 <dmcneil> Souri will write down more details
17:32:58 <dmcneil> on Action-93
17:33:41 <dmcneil> cygri: ACTION-97 is to document how D2RQ supports translation tables
17:34:02 <dmcneil> ivan: why is this relevant?
17:34:44 <dmcneil> cygri: charter requires that we try and re-use entity URIs, question is how to get external URIs into the output of the mapping
17:34:48 <ivan> ACTION-96?
17:34:48 <trackbot> ACTION-96 -- Richard Cyganiak to capture this (multiple subject maps) and other (future) potential error cases in the Wiki (ISSUE-16) -- due 2011-02-08 -- OPEN
17:34:48 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/96
17:35:12 <ivan> ISSUE-16?
17:35:12 <trackbot> ISSUE-16 -- Should we allow multiple subjects for a logical table row? Also, what if no subject is specified? -- open
17:35:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/16
17:35:44 <dmcneil> cygri: ACTION-96 - since R2RML is expressed in RDF and there is not a schema that clearly expresses what is valid, wanted to collect cases where cardinality was violated
17:36:09 <dmcneil> cygri: we decided to collect such cases on a wiki page (e.g. "problem multiple subject maps")
17:36:29 <dmcneil> cygri: for each of those we could document the solution (e.g. "raise error", etc.)
17:36:30 <Zakim> -juansequeda
17:36:33 <juansequeda_> juansequeda_ has joined #rdb2rdf
17:36:52 <dmcneil> cygri: then we could use the wiki page contents to drive the specs
17:37:08 <Zakim> +juansequeda
17:37:10 <dmcneil> cygri: agrees to keeping this action item open
17:37:39 <Souri> We need to prioritize ... and in my opinion, Primer should come later (we can start on it, but), we need to push out the next draft sooner
17:37:45 <dmcneil> ivan: the R2RML editor's draft is quite different from the official draft
17:37:49 <Souri> q+
17:37:54 <cygri> q+
17:37:58 <dmcneil> ivan: when can we produce the next official draft
17:38:21 <ivan> ack Souri 
17:38:27 <dmcneil> ivan: the gap between the two drafts is so large that an updated draft needs to be done soon
17:38:53 <dmcneil> Souri: agrees, and thinks the official draft can be updated with issues marked
17:39:15 <ivan> ack cygri 
17:39:23 <dmcneil> Souri: ISSUE-93 - the constructs for hybrid maps is still not defined, but this can be marked as still "in progress"
17:39:38 <Zakim> + +1.512.484.aacc
17:39:44 <Zakim> -juansequeda
17:39:58 <dmcneil> cygri: there has been good progress on the Direct Mapping, might be a draft soon, might be able to publish them together?
17:39:58 <betehess> we should fix a date where we publish both documents
17:40:17 <betehess> +1 to ivan :-)
17:40:23 <cygri> +1 to publishing at same time
17:40:26 <dmcneil> ivan: very much in favor of publishing the two documents together, let's return to the Direct Mapping in a moment
17:40:38 <privera> zakim, aacc is juansequeda
17:40:38 <Zakim> +juansequeda; got it
17:40:49 <betehess> ivan, we should publish the test-suite NOTE
17:41:11 <dmcneil> is that juan talking?
17:41:38 <dmcneil> juansequeda: will be traveling to Chile soon and will get a large amount of work done then
17:41:47 <Zakim> -juansequeda
17:41:50 <dmcneil> juansequeda: on the Direct Mapping doc (?)
17:41:59 <Souri> 15-Mar-2010?
17:42:03 <Souri> 2011
17:42:08 <ivan> Topic: Direct Mapping
17:42:18 <dmcneil> ivan: let's not fix a precise date now
17:42:19 <Zakim> +juansequeda
17:42:27 <ivan> ACTION-98?
17:42:27 <trackbot> ACTION-98 -- Juan Sequeda to rename Issue 11 and fix it in the DM -- due 2011-02-08 -- OPEN
17:42:27 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/98
17:42:31 <dmcneil> ivan: on to the Direct Mapping, 3 open actions
17:42:33 <juansequeda> juansequeda has joined #rdb2rdf
17:42:50 <ivan> ISSUE-11?
17:42:50 <trackbot> ISSUE-11 -- Primary Key is a Foreign Key -- open
17:42:50 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/11
17:43:08 <dmcneil> juansequeda: I did ACTION-98 already
17:43:44 <dmcneil> juansequesa: this issue was where "foreign key" was incorrectly typed as "candidate key" in the spec
17:43:52 <ivan> ACTION-99?
17:43:52 <trackbot> ACTION-99 -- Juan Sequeda to change ISSUE-13 to postponed and add ref from ISSUE-11 to ISSUE-13 -- due 2011-02-08 -- OPEN
17:43:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/99
17:44:05 <dmcneil> juansequeda: the issue is still open (re ACTION-98)
17:44:08 <Ashok> Trackbot, Close ACTION-98
17:44:08 <trackbot> ACTION-98 Rename Issue 11 and fix it in the DM closed
17:44:12 <ivan> ACTION-102?
17:44:12 <trackbot> ACTION-102 -- Ted Thibodeau to sum up the possibilities for generating reliable URIs for DM (to avoid bNodes) on the Wiki -- due 2011-02-15 -- OPEN
17:44:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/102
17:44:52 <dmcneil> ivan: ACTION-102 still open because Ted is not here
17:45:01 <dmcneil> ivan: what is the status of the Direct Mapping?
17:45:42 <dmcneil> ericP: there is not much new information, new information will come from Juan's work in Chile (with Marcello (?))
17:46:23 <dmcneil> ericP: an open question is whether the Direct Mapping produces persistent identifiers for rows without primary keys
17:46:52 <dmcneil> juansequeda: there is still an open issue related to avoiding blank nodes
17:47:28 <dmcneil> juansequeda: there are several issues that we can begin discussing: e.g. hierarchical relationships, etc.
17:47:42 <betehess> the denotational semantics does *not* need a primary key and uses bnode very well https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FeDeRate/file/0407570a9826/directmapping/src/main/scala/DirectMapping.scala#l37
17:47:45 <dmcneil> ivan: would like to come back to the publication issue before the end of the call
17:47:54 <dmcneil> ivan: what open issues to dicsuss now?
17:48:16 <dmcneil> ericP: maybe we can knock off the "primary key is a foreign key" issue
17:49:27 <betehess> you can try hier_table in http://this-db-really.does-not-exist.org/ with and without "Detects hierarchy relation"
17:49:36 <dmcneil> ericP: there was a model for the mapping, the considered the case of whether a primary key is also a foreign key, this is one of the 3 ways users express hierarchies in RDBMS, created a solution for expressing this in the mapping
17:50:46 <dmcneil> ericP: the behavior with "detects hierarchy" turned off is the simple behavior
17:50:49 <juansequeda> q+ to discuss the three possible cases
17:51:07 <ivan> ack juansequeda 
17:51:07 <Zakim> juansequeda, you wanted to discuss the three possible cases
17:51:12 <dmcneil> ericP: the proposal is that this simple behavior be the behavior that is implemented when a primary key is a foreign key
17:51:42 <dmcneil> juansequeda: there are three possibilities: 1) always detect hierarchy 2) never detect as hierarchy 3) make it an option to detect this as a hierarchy
17:52:01 <betehess> ivan, yes
17:52:04 <dmcneil> ivan: how would option "3" work, the beauty of the Direct Mapping is it just works
17:52:16 <dmcneil> juansequeda: there could be "flavors" of direct mappings
17:52:17 <betehess> q+ to say I'm against any switch
17:52:33 <dmcneil> ivan: would rather not see a switch (personal opinion)
17:52:44 <ivan> ack betehess 
17:52:44 <Zakim> betehess, you wanted to say I'm against any switch
17:52:55 <dmcneil> betehess: agrees with ivan
17:53:22 <ivan> q+
17:53:23 <juansequeda> q+ 
17:53:38 <cygri> +1 to have only one flavour. if you want switches, go to r2rml, it has plenty
17:53:43 <dmcneil> betehess: put the switch into the demo application to show what is being discussed, not to advocate for a switch in the Direct Mapping
17:53:46 <ivan> ack ivan
17:54:13 <dmcneil> ivan: proposes publishing the document with the simplest approach, put in a statement that this is still an open issue, ask community for feedback
17:54:19 <ivan> ack juansequeda 
17:54:21 <betehess> sounds like a wise proposal
17:54:23 <ericP> q+ to say we've already done one round without feedback
17:54:26 <dmcneil> juansequeda: agrees with ivan
17:54:30 <ivan> ack ericP 
17:54:30 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say we've already done one round without feedback
17:54:35 <privera> +1
17:54:36 <dmcneil> Ashok: agrees with ivan
17:54:48 <dmcneil> ericP: we tried that, and the community did not respond
17:55:01 <dmcneil> ericP: so proposes that we just go with the simple solution
17:55:15 <dmcneil> ivan: has no problem with that
17:56:15 <dmcneil> ericP: the compromise is that most primary keys appear as literals in the output triples
17:56:39 <juansequeda> ericP, which example are you talking about?
17:56:51 <dmcneil> ericP: but id the PK is also a FK then it appears only as a reference to another tuple
17:57:33 <dmcneil> s/tuple/triple/
17:58:49 <dmcneil> cygri: in general agrees with proposal to proceed, there wasn't a really clear answer, so simplest is safest
17:59:13 <Souri> To me pk=fk case seems to indicate presence of a simple 1:1 join between a parent table and a child table (which often appears in a normalized DB design) ... is there much more to it?
17:59:15 <ericP> PROPOSAL: unary primary keys which are also foreign keys are treated exactly as other unary foreign keys
17:59:18 <betehess> for the record, this is were we don't take unary foreign key in the scalars function: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FeDeRate/file/0407570a9826/rdb/src/main/scala/RDB.scala#l129
17:59:30 <betehess> s/is were/is where/
17:59:44 <ivan> +1
17:59:49 <ericP> +1
18:00:11 <Souri> s/were/where/
18:00:15 <juansequeda> +25
18:00:15 <betehess> +1
18:00:17 <dmcneil> +1
18:00:18 <privera> +1
18:00:20 <ivan> RESOLVED: unary primary keys which are also foreign keys are treated exactly as other unary foreign keys
18:00:22 <Souri> 0 (not fully clear)
18:00:41 <dmcneil> ivan: can we stay on for a few minutes to discuss publishing Direct Mapping
18:01:15 <ericP> q+ to suggest we lose review attention
18:01:25 <dmcneil> ivan: proposes that the Direct Mapping document be published at the same time as the R2RML document without the Chilean work from Juan
18:01:27 <betehess> are the r2rml people ready to publish too?
18:01:38 <ivan> ack ericP 
18:01:38 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to suggest we lose review attention
18:01:45 <dmcneil> juansequeda: progress has been made since the current workign draft
18:01:48 <ivan> q+
18:02:12 <ericP> ack ivan
18:02:12 <dmcneil> ericP: fears publishing document with few changes because it endangers the public review capacity
18:02:20 <Souri> I am ok with publishing R2RML next draft alone
18:02:52 <betehess> +1 to ivan comment re: publication of both documents makes sense
18:02:55 <dmcneil> ivan: agrees with respect to Direct Mapping, but R2RML doc has changed a lot, needs to be published soon, is a good habit to publish them together
18:03:44 <dmcneil> betehess: agrees with ivan
18:03:55 <dmcneil> ericP: thinks the review capacity is more important
18:04:04 <dmcneil> ivan: meeting is adjourned
18:04:06 <privera> +1 to member:ivan comment re: publication of both documents makes sense
18:04:08 <cygri> great job dmcneil!
18:04:14 <Zakim> -Seema
18:04:21 <ericP> PROPOSED: dmcneil is scribe for life
18:04:22 <dmcneil> Ashok: will publish minutes
18:04:23 <betehess> bye
18:04:27 <ivan> zakim, bye
18:04:27 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees were dmcneil, Ivan, Alexandre, EricP, privera, Souri, +1.603.897.aaaa, Seema, cygri, Ashok_Malhotra, +575737aabb, juansequeda,
18:04:27 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdb2rdf
18:04:30 <juansequeda> +25
18:04:30 <Zakim> ... +1.512.484.aacc
18:04:42 <ericP> resolved
18:04:42 <Ashok> rrsagent, make logs public
18:04:55 <juansequeda> ericP, I think dmcneil has been the best scribe ever!
18:04:57 <Ashok> rrsagent, draft minutes
18:04:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-rdb2rdf-minutes.html Ashok
18:17:38 <privera> privera has left #RDB2RDF
18:24:29 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdb2rdf
18:25:47 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdb2rdf