Last week's minutes were approved and actions closed. The co-chairs are planning to identify a suitable time and location for F2F2, early in the new year. Participants are invited to suggest names for the standard, in view of resolution in September.
Provenance Implementation and Test Cases
No further feedback was received. The questionnaire is now going to be rolled out.
The RDF-WG has approached the co-chairs to set up a joint teleconference, in which PROV-WG requirements for RDF Named Graphs are being discussed. Satya is setting up a page on the wiki. Members are invited to express their views on what requirements are.
Four proposals were drafted in the agenda. The first three were adopted. We did not reach consensus on directionality. Furthermore, we debated the use of tense without formulating a resolution. Watch this space!
Satya reported on progress on the ontology. Focus is on working on the formal model document, the owl file will be updated later. The file example is now encoded in rdf and available in the document.
Nothing specific to report on. Members are invited to raise issues, which will determine the focus of the next iteration.
14:44:19 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/08/25-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/08/25-prov-irc ←
14:44:21 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:44:23 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be ←
14:44:23 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot ←
14:44:24 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV
Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
14:44:24 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:44:24 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes ←
14:44:24 <trackbot> Date: 25 August 2011
14:44:40 <Luc> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.08.25
14:44:50 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
14:44:58 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public ←
14:52:07 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started ←
14:52:14 <Zakim> +??P48
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P48 ←
14:52:26 <pgroth> zakim, ??P48 is me
Paul Groth: zakim, ??P48 is me ←
14:52:26 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgroth; got it ←
14:55:54 <Zakim> +Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc ←
14:56:24 <Luc> zakim, who is here?
Luc Moreau: zakim, who is here? ←
14:56:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see pgroth, Luc ←
14:56:30 <Zakim> On IRC I see pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot ←
14:59:08 <Zakim> +Vinh
Zakim IRC Bot: +Vinh ←
15:00:14 <Luc> zakim, who is here?
Luc Moreau: zakim, who is here? ←
15:00:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Vinh
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Vinh ←
15:00:15 <Zakim> On IRC I see Helena, GK_, edoardo, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Helena, GK_, edoardo, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot ←
15:00:36 <Zakim> +??P57
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P57 ←
15:00:52 <Zakim> +Curt
Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt ←
15:01:35 <pgroth> scribe?
Paul Groth: scribe? ←
15:02:17 <pgroth> Zakim, who is one the phone?
Paul Groth: Zakim, who is one the phone? ←
15:02:32 <Luc> scribe: pgroth
(Scribe set to Paul Groth)
15:02:38 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, pgroth.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, pgroth. ←
15:02:46 <pgroth> zakim, who is here?
zakim, who is here? ←
15:03:06 <pgroth> scribe: pgroth
15:03:11 <Zakim> +satya
Zakim IRC Bot: +satya ←
15:03:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Vinh, ??P57, Curt, satya
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Vinh, ??P57, Curt, satya ←
15:04:01 <Luc> TOPIC: Admin
Summary: Last week's minutes were approved and actions closed. The co-chairs are planning to identify a suitable time and location for F2F2, early in the new year. Participants are invited to suggest names for the standard, in view of resolution in September.
<luc>Summary: Last week's minutes were approved and actions closed. The co-chairs are planning to identify a suitable time and location for F2F2, early in the new year. Participants are invited to suggest names for the standard, in view of resolution in September.
15:03:17 <pgroth> luc overviewing the agenda
luc overviewing the agenda ←
15:03:37 <Luc> PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of Aug 18 telecon
PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of Aug 18 telecon ←
15:03:42 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:03:51 <Zakim> +??P64
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P64 ←
15:03:52 <edoardo> +1
Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1 ←
15:03:52 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
15:03:53 <Helena> +1
Helena Deus: +1 ←
15:03:58 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
15:04:04 <StephenCresswell> +1
Stephen Cresswell: +1 ←
15:04:12 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
15:04:15 <smiles> +1
Simon Miles: +1 ←
15:04:19 <Zakim> On IRC I see smiles, khalidbelhajjame, satya, yogesh, Curt, Helena, GK_, edoardo, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see smiles, khalidbelhajjame, satya, yogesh, Curt, Helena, GK_, edoardo, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot ←
15:04:44 <Luc> ACCEPTED: the minutes of Aug 18 telecon
Luc Moreau: ACCEPTED: the minutes of Aug 18 telecon ←
15:05:01 <pgroth> reviewing the action items
reviewing the action items ←
15:05:08 <Zakim> +??P61
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P61 ←
15:05:09 <pgroth> luc still has an open action
luc still has an open action ←
15:05:22 <khalidbelhajjame> zakim, ??P61 is me
Khalid Belhajjame: zakim, ??P61 is me ←
15:05:23 <Zakim> +??P66
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P66 ←
15:05:29 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.789.470.aaaa ←
15:05:30 <pgroth> luc: discussing a potential f2f
Luc Moreau: discussing a potential f2f ←
15:05:45 <pgroth> luc: initial discussions about f2f at iswc
Luc Moreau: initial discussions about f2f at iswc ←
15:05:47 <Zakim> +??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←
15:05:53 <Zakim> -??P61
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P61 ←
15:05:59 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:06:10 <pgroth> luc: but probably not good because of current work on various drafts
Luc Moreau: but probably not good because of current work on various drafts ←
15:06:11 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's here? ←
15:06:21 <pgroth> luc: chairs will propose a time in the new year 2012
Luc Moreau: chairs will propose a time in the new year 2012 ←
15:06:27 <Zakim> +??P6
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P6 ←
15:06:38 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
15:06:38 <jorn> zakim, ??p6 is me
Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p6 is me ←
15:06:38 <pgroth> luc: discussing the name of the standard
Luc Moreau: discussing the name of the standard ←
15:06:39 <Zakim> I already had ??P61 as ??P61, khalidbelhajjame
Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P61 as ??P61, khalidbelhajjame ←
15:06:41 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
15:06:41 <MacTed> zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: zakim, mute me ←
15:06:48 <pgroth> luc: please update the suggestions
Luc Moreau: please update the suggestions ←
15:06:56 <Zakim> +Yogesh
Zakim IRC Bot: +Yogesh ←
15:07:03 <Zakim> +Yolanda
Zakim IRC Bot: +Yolanda ←
15:07:05 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Vinh, ??P57, Curt, satya, ??P64, ??P66, +44.789.470.aaaa, ??P11, ??P6, OpenLink_Software, Yogesh, Yolanda
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, Vinh, ??P57, Curt, satya, ??P64, ??P66, +44.789.470.aaaa, ??P11, ??P6, OpenLink_Software, Yogesh, Yolanda ←
15:07:05 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:07:09 <pgroth> luc: agenda item next week on the name of the standard
Luc Moreau: agenda item next week on the name of the standard ←
15:07:24 <Zakim> +??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P28 ←
15:07:27 <Zakim> I already had ??P6 as ??P6, jorn
Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P6 as ??P6, jorn ←
15:07:28 <pgroth> luc: please volunteer for scribing:
Luc Moreau: please volunteer for scribing: ←
15:07:29 <Luc> Topic: Provenance Implementation and Test Cases
Summary: No further feedback was received. The questionnaire is now going to be rolled out.
<Luc>Summary: No further feedback was received. The questionnaire is now going to be rolled out.
15:07:33 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
15:07:37 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:07:49 <pgroth> luc: helena giving update on the questionnaire
Luc Moreau: helena giving update on the questionnaire ←
15:07:56 <Zakim> On IRC I see dcorsar, StephenCresswell, smiles, khalidbelhajjame, satya, Curt, Helena, GK_, edoardo, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see dcorsar, StephenCresswell, smiles, khalidbelhajjame, satya, Curt, Helena, GK_, edoardo, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, Vinh, MacTed, jorn, sandro, edsu, stain, trackbot ←
15:08:04 <pgroth> luc: are you ready to role out the questionnaire
Luc Moreau: are you ready to role out the questionnaire ←
15:08:07 <pgroth> helena: yes
Helena Deus: yes ←
15:08:18 <Zakim> +??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P31 ←
15:08:25 <Zakim> + +1.509.375.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.509.375.aabb ←
15:08:30 <pgroth> luc: including already populating the questionnaire?
Luc Moreau: including already populating the questionnaire? ←
15:08:46 <pgroth> helena: happy with the current questionanaire
Helena Deus: happy with the current questionanaire ←
15:08:47 <Luc> Topic: Named graphs requirements
Summary: The RDF-WG has approached the co-chairs to set up a joint teleconference, in which PROV-WG requirements for RDF Named Graphs are being discussed. Satya is setting up a page on the wiki. Members are invited to express their views on what requirements are.
<Luc>Summary: The RDF-WG has approached the co-chairs to set up a joint teleconference, in which PROV-WG requirements for RDF Named Graphs are being discussed. Satya is setting up a page on the wiki. Members are invited to express their views on what requirements are.
15:08:51 <Zakim> -Yogesh
Zakim IRC Bot: -Yogesh ←
15:09:02 <Zakim> +Yogesh
Zakim IRC Bot: +Yogesh ←
15:09:33 <pgroth> luc: paul and I were contacted by the co-chair of the w3c rdf working group
Luc Moreau: paul and I were contacted by the co-chair of the w3c rdf working group ←
15:09:41 <Zakim> - +44.789.470.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: - +44.789.470.aaaa ←
15:09:50 <pgroth> luc: ref wg would like to know what our requirements are in terms of named graphs
Luc Moreau: ref wg would like to know what our requirements are in terms of named graphs ←
15:09:55 <pgroth> luc: setting up a telecon
Luc Moreau: setting up a telecon ←
15:09:57 <pgroth> �
� ←
15:10:33 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.789.470.aacc ←
15:10:34 <pgroth> luc: going over points from guus (in the agenda)
Luc Moreau: going over points from guus (in the agenda) ←
15:10:44 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal ←
15:10:53 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs-UC#Provenance_Use_Cases
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs-UC#Provenance_Use_Cases ←
15:11:03 <Zakim> +??P14
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14 ←
15:11:06 <pgroth> luc: includes a link to the current thinking and use cases with respect to named graphs
Luc Moreau: includes a link to the current thinking and use cases with respect to named graphs ←
15:11:10 <jcheney> zakim, ??p14 is me
James Cheney: zakim, ??p14 is me ←
15:11:10 <Zakim> +jcheney; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +jcheney; got it ←
15:11:24 <Zakim> + +1.915.603.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.915.603.aadd ←
15:11:39 <pgroth> luc: rdf-wg would really like to have specific requirements that the prov-wg has on named graphs
Luc Moreau: rdf-wg would really like to have specific requirements that the prov-wg has on named graphs ←
15:12:01 <pgroth> luc: this is a heads-up, who would be interested in getting involved in the discussion
Luc Moreau: this is a heads-up, who would be interested in getting involved in the discussion ←
15:12:26 <pgroth> luc: in particular people involved in representing the model in rdf
Luc Moreau: in particular people involved in representing the model in rdf ←
15:12:32 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:12:33 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
15:12:39 <Luc> ack satya
Luc Moreau: ack satya ←
15:13:05 <Paulo> zakim, aadd is me
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: zakim, aadd is me ←
15:13:05 <Zakim> +Paulo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Paulo; got it ←
15:13:20 <pgroth> satya: are they planning to extended existing work on rdf named graphs
Satya Sahoo: are they planning to extended existing work on rdf named graphs ←
15:13:25 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:14:21 <pgroth> satya: in terms of representing provenance in rdf. there are other approaches in terms of contextualization, is named graphs the only approach
Satya Sahoo: in terms of representing provenance in rdf. there are other approaches in terms of contextualization, is named graphs the only approach ←
15:14:27 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
15:14:34 <Paulo> q+
15:14:40 <pgroth> luc: rdf wg is chartered to do named graphs
Luc Moreau: rdf wg is chartered to do named graphs ←
15:15:15 <pgroth> satya: is it overall for rdf group, or just for named groups
Satya Sahoo: is it overall for rdf group, or just for named groups ←
15:15:23 <pgroth> luc: were approached only for named graphs
Luc Moreau: were approached only for named graphs ←
15:15:25 <pgroth> q+
q+ ←
15:15:26 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:15:29 <Luc> ack smil
Luc Moreau: ack smil ←
15:15:47 <pgroth> smiles: suggest some requirements
Simon Miles: suggest some requirements ←
15:16:02 <pgroth> smiles: give the provenance of rdf based data
Simon Miles: give the provenance of rdf based data ←
15:16:15 <Zakim> +??P16
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P16 ←
15:16:18 <pgroth> smiles: need to be able to say that two things have the same provenance
Simon Miles: need to be able to say that two things have the same provenance ←
15:16:41 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:16:41 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P16 is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P16 is me ←
15:16:42 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it ←
15:16:46 <Luc> ack pau
Luc Moreau: ack pau ←
15:17:25 <Luc> paulo, isn't there an outline of specification in http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal?
Luc Moreau: paulo, isn't there an outline of specification in http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal? ←
15:17:26 <pgroth> paulo: in terms of formal specification, they are moving targets, even if they have one, we need more than one for the provenance solution
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: in terms of formal specification, they are moving targets, even if they have one, we need more than one for the provenance solution ←
15:17:50 <pgroth> paulo: the fact that we want to work with named graphs are just one of the aspects of formalizing provenance
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: the fact that we want to work with named graphs are just one of the aspects of formalizing provenance ←
15:18:03 <khalidbelhajjame> One of the concepts we may need RDF graph for is Provenance Container. We have not really discussed this concept in details yet, though.
Khalid Belhajjame: One of the concepts we may need RDF graph for is Provenance Container. We have not really discussed this concept in details yet, though. ←
15:18:24 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:18:27 <Paulo> q+
15:18:28 <Luc> ack pgr
Luc Moreau: ack pgr ←
15:19:08 <Luc> ack pau
Luc Moreau: ack pau ←
15:19:09 <satya> pgroth: RDF WG is looking for requirements of named graphs - to help them identify their objectives
Paul Groth: RDF WG is looking for requirements of named graphs - to help them identify their objectives [ Scribe Assist by Satya Sahoo ] ←
15:19:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:19:20 <pgroth> pgroth: shaping where the rdf-wg is going on named graphs
Paul Groth: shaping where the rdf-wg is going on named graphs ←
15:19:50 <pgroth> paulo: assumption is that the mapping to owl, and rdf is enough in terms of formalization
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: assumption is that the mapping to owl, and rdf is enough in terms of formalization ←
15:20:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:20:16 <pgroth> paulo: not enough for the formalization
Paulo Pinheiro da Silva: not enough for the formalization ←
15:20:52 <khalidbelhajjame> Paulo, we are investigating in the formal model task force on whether OWL is sifficient, or whether we need another language that we need to specify the semantics
Khalid Belhajjame: Paulo, we are investigating in the formal model task force on whether OWL is sifficient, or whether we need another language that we need to specify the semantics ←
15:21:05 <pgroth> luc: simon identified two requirements for named graphs, there's a third requirement coming from the provenance container (have asserter, maybe having signature)
Luc Moreau: simon identified two requirements for named graphs, there's a third requirement coming from the provenance container (have asserter, maybe having signature) ←
15:21:18 <pgroth> luc: a possibility for provenance containers is to use named graphs
Luc Moreau: a possibility for provenance containers is to use named graphs ←
15:21:20 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:21:35 <pgroth> luc: potentially another requirement for the rdf wg
Luc Moreau: potentially another requirement for the rdf wg ←
15:21:47 <pgroth> luc: start creating a wiki page for these requirements
Luc Moreau: start creating a wiki page for these requirements ←
15:21:50 <Zakim> -??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P28 ←
15:22:00 <satya> I will be happy to create the page
Satya Sahoo: I will be happy to create the page ←
15:22:02 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:22:11 <Zakim> +??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15 ←
15:22:16 <jorn> zakim, ??p15 is me
Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p15 is me ←
15:22:16 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it ←
15:22:20 <smiles> yes, that's fine
Simon Miles: yes, that's fine ←
15:22:22 <pgroth> luc: satya will create the page
Luc Moreau: satya will create the page ←
15:22:25 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:22:32 <pgroth> luc: simon will write up his requirements on the page
Luc Moreau: smiles will write up his requirements on the page ←
15:22:39 <Luc> TOPIC: Adopting naming conventions
Summary: Four proposals were drafted in the agenda. The first three were adopted. We did not reach consensus on directionality. Furthermore, we debated the use of tense without formulating a resolution. Watch this space!
<Luc>Summary: Four proposals were drafted in the agenda. The first three were adopted. We did not reach consensus on directionality. Furthermore, we debated the use of tense without formulating a resolution. Watch this space!
15:23:24 <pgroth> luc: i had an action to poll the group on naming conventions
Luc Moreau: i had an action to poll the group on naming conventions ←
15:23:49 <pgroth> luc: seems to have consensus around naming conventions (see agenda)
Luc Moreau: seems to have consensus around naming conventions (see agenda) ←
15:23:55 <pgroth> luc: wants feed back
Luc Moreau: wants feed back ←
15:24:21 <pgroth> luc: go through these conventions one by one
Luc Moreau: go through these conventions one by one ←
15:24:39 <pgroth> luc: process, see whether there's objection or comments
Luc Moreau: process, see whether there's objection or comments ←
15:24:40 <Luc> To adopt camel case notation. In OWL, classes begin with upper case, and properties begin with lower case.
Luc Moreau: To adopt camel case notation. In OWL, classes begin with upper case, and properties begin with lower case. ←
15:25:14 <dgarijo> +1 (I think the ontology os already using this convention)
Daniel Garijo: +1 (I think the ontology os already using this convention) ←
15:25:15 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:25:30 <Luc> PROPOSED: To adopt camel case notation. In OWL, classes begin with upper case, and properties begin with lower case.
PROPOSED: To adopt camel case notation. In OWL, classes begin with upper case, and properties begin with lower case. ←
15:25:36 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:25:37 <smiles> +1
Simon Miles: +1 ←
15:25:37 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
15:25:38 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
15:25:39 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:25:40 <jorn> +1
15:25:40 <edoardo> +1
Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1 ←
15:25:41 <StephenCresswell> +1
Stephen Cresswell: +1 ←
15:25:42 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:25:42 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:25:43 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
15:25:45 <Helena> +1
Helena Deus: +1 ←
15:26:06 <Luc> ACCEPTED: To adopt camel case notation. In OWL, classes begin with upper case, and properties begin with lower case.
RESOLVED: To adopt camel case notation. In OWL, classes begin with upper case, and properties begin with lower case. ←
15:26:49 <pgroth> luc: moving on whether we want To express nodes in noun form
Luc Moreau: moving on whether we want To express nodes in noun form ←
15:27:08 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
15:27:12 <pgroth> luc: we express edges in verbal form
Luc Moreau: we express edges in verbal form ←
15:27:15 <Luc> ack smi
Luc Moreau: ack smi ←
15:27:26 <Zakim> -Paulo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Paulo ←
15:27:50 <pgroth> smiles: a process execution might be best described by a verb (i.e. publish), the node in a particular graph might be a verb
Simon Miles: a process execution might be best described by a verb (i.e. publish), the node in a particular graph might be a verb ←
15:28:08 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:28:13 <pgroth> luc: talking about the concepts in the model or classes defined in the ontology
Luc Moreau: talking about the concepts in the model or classes defined in the ontology ←
15:28:14 <MacTed> hasPublisher ?
Ted Thibodeau: hasPublisher ? ←
15:28:32 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:28:32 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
15:28:46 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:29:04 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:29:04 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:29:05 <pgroth> MacTed: depending on what the process execution may be, you can noun things
Ted Thibodeau: depending on what the process execution may be, you can noun things ←
15:29:18 <Luc> PROPOSED: To express nodes in noun form
PROPOSED: To express nodes in noun form ←
15:29:38 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:29:38 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
15:29:38 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
15:29:40 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:29:41 <smiles> +1
Simon Miles: +1 ←
15:29:41 <edoardo> +1
Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1 ←
15:29:41 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:29:42 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
15:29:43 <StephenCresswell> +1
Stephen Cresswell: +1 ←
15:29:43 <Helena> +!
Helena Deus: +! ←
15:29:44 <jorn> +1
15:29:47 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:30:06 <Luc> ACCEPTED: To express nodes in noun form
RESOLVED: To express nodes in noun form ←
15:30:19 <Luc> PROPOSED: To express edges in verbal form
PROPOSED: To express edges in verbal form ←
15:30:21 <satya> +1
Satya Sahoo: +1 ←
15:30:22 <khalidbelhajjame> +1
Khalid Belhajjame: +1 ←
15:30:23 <edoardo> +1
Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1 ←
15:30:27 <jorn> +1
15:30:27 <dcorsar> +1
David Corsar: +1 ←
15:30:28 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
15:30:28 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:30:30 <Zakim> -Yolanda
Zakim IRC Bot: -Yolanda ←
15:30:32 <smiles> +1
Simon Miles: +1 ←
15:30:35 <StephenCresswell> +1
Stephen Cresswell: +1 ←
15:30:35 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:30:37 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
15:30:44 <Luc> ACCEPTED: To express edges in verbal form
RESOLVED: To express edges in verbal form ←
15:30:53 <dgarijo> Luc, is Ralph here? He was the one that rose all the issues
Daniel Garijo: Luc, is Ralph here? He was the one that rose all the issues ←
15:31:12 <Zakim> +Yolanda
Zakim IRC Bot: +Yolanda ←
15:31:13 <dgarijo> ok
Daniel Garijo: ok ←
15:31:28 <pgroth> luc: ralph is not around but there's nothing we can do
Luc Moreau: ralph is not around but there's nothing we can do ←
15:32:00 <pgroth> luc: introducing the edge directionality
Luc Moreau: introducing the edge directionality ←
15:32:16 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:32:24 <pgroth> luc: this directionality may be best expressed by pointing towards the past
Luc Moreau: this directionality may be best expressed by pointing towards the past ←
15:32:30 <pgroth> luc: asks for feedback
Luc Moreau: asks for feedback ←
15:32:34 <dgarijo> +q
Daniel Garijo: +q ←
15:32:43 <pgroth> luc: asks satya specifically, are you happy?
Luc Moreau: asks satya specifically, are you happy? ←
15:33:16 <pgroth> luc: satya are you happy with your edges point towards the past
Luc Moreau: satya are you happy with your edges point towards the past ←
15:33:23 <pgroth> satya: what do you mean?
Satya Sahoo: what do you mean? ←
15:33:38 <khalidbelhajjame> entity <- uses--process execution
Khalid Belhajjame: entity <- uses--process execution ←
15:34:05 <jorn> example\: e2 is derived from e1, then e2 is the most recent entity and e1 is older, so edge points to past
Jörn Hees: example\: e2 is derived from e1, then e2 is the most recent entity and e1 is older, so edge points to past ←
15:34:06 <pgroth> luc: giving examples of the possibilities
Luc Moreau: giving examples of the possibilities ←
15:34:26 <MacTed> process takesInput foo
Ted Thibodeau: process takesInput foo ←
15:34:26 <MacTed> process hasOutput bar
Ted Thibodeau: process hasOutput bar ←
15:35:05 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:35:05 <MacTed> q+
Ted Thibodeau: q+ ←
15:35:05 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
15:35:35 <pgroth> luc: not discussing ordering of events
Luc Moreau: not discussing ordering of events ←
15:35:58 <pgroth> luc: as designers of the model we have the choice of expressing the edges in different ways
Luc Moreau: as designers of the model we have the choice of expressing the edges in different ways ←
15:36:03 <Zakim> +Paulo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Paulo ←
15:36:05 <pgroth> luc: proposing to adopt a convention
Luc Moreau: proposing to adopt a convention ←
15:36:07 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:36:30 <pgroth> satya: we had the discussion in the formal model task group
Satya Sahoo: we had the discussion in the formal model task group ←
15:37:00 <pgroth> satya: from an ontology model perspective it doesn't matter, just a matter of style
Satya Sahoo: from an ontology model perspective it doesn't matter, just a matter of style ←
15:37:38 <Zakim> -jorn
Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn ←
15:37:49 <Zakim> +??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15 ←
15:37:54 <pgroth> dgarijo: happy with everything in the past
Daniel Garijo: happy with everything in the past ←
15:38:05 <Luc> ack dgar
Luc Moreau: ack dgar ←
15:38:19 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
15:38:54 <pgroth> luc: not all edges should point to the past
Luc Moreau: not all edges should point to the past ←
15:39:07 <pgroth> luc: only for edges that have an event ordering
Luc Moreau: only for edges that have an event ordering ←
15:39:17 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:39:24 <pgroth> luc: currently, definition of hasParticipant does not imply an event ordering
Luc Moreau: currently, definition of hasParticipant does not imply an event ordering ←
15:39:42 <Luc> ack mac
Luc Moreau: ack mac ←
15:39:45 <StephenCresswell> The ontology can define the edges in both direction (pairs of mutually inverse properties), and let people use which they find natural in their application.
Stephen Cresswell: The ontology can define the edges in both direction (pairs of mutually inverse properties), and let people use which they find natural in their application. ←
15:39:59 <pgroth> MacTed: is there a link to the event ordering definition
Ted Thibodeau: is there a link to the event ordering definition ←
15:40:00 <satya> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html
Satya Sahoo: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html ←
15:40:25 <Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#concept-Use
Luc Moreau: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#concept-Use ←
15:40:26 <pgroth> MacTed: i'm not getting a firm understanding of what is meant by the proposal
Ted Thibodeau: i'm not getting a firm understanding of what is meant by the proposal ←
15:41:01 <pgroth> Luc: explaining an example
Luc Moreau: explaining an example ←
15:41:58 <khalidbelhajjame> Mac, he possibilities we are discussing are: entity <--uses---process execution and entity ---is used by --> process execution. In the first, the edges point to the past.
Khalid Belhajjame: Mac, he possibilities we are discussing are: entity <--uses---process execution and entity ---is used by --> process execution. In the first, the edges point to the past. ←
15:42:24 <pgroth> MacTed: there are two time frames, saying both of those is useful
Ted Thibodeau: there are two time frames, saying both of those is useful ←
15:42:38 <jorn> Luc's example: process generates output vs. output is generated by process
Jörn Hees: Luc's example: process generates output vs. output is generated by process ←
15:42:42 <pgroth> luc: only one of them is defined in the model
Luc Moreau: only one of them is defined in the model ←
15:42:44 <smiles> I think the case for future-to-past directionality (as proposed) is clearest where provenance is distributed. If I have created a new entity, for example, then what I can link it to is other entities which already exist, but not to things which don't yet exist. So the new entity is the *subject* of what I'm asserting, the older entity is the *object*.
Simon Miles: I think the case for future-to-past directionality (as proposed) is clearest where provenance is distributed. If I have created a new entity, for example, then what I can link it to is other entities which already exist, but not to things which don't yet exist. So the new entity is the *subject* of what I'm asserting, the older entity is the *object*. ←
15:42:59 <pgroth> Luc: useful to have a convention
Luc Moreau: useful to have a convention ←
15:43:19 <pgroth> MacTed: this is a question for reasoning edges to deal with their inverse
Ted Thibodeau: this is a question for reasoning edges to deal with their inverse ←
15:44:10 <pgroth> MacTed: inverse properties are extremely important for modeling
Ted Thibodeau: inverse properties are extremely important for modeling ←
15:44:15 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:44:46 <pgroth> Satya: this can be done in the ontology
Satya Sahoo: this can be done in the ontology ←
15:45:24 <pgroth> Luc: Ted would like to see the inverse properties expressed in the model as well
Luc Moreau: Ted would like to see the inverse properties expressed in the model as well ←
15:45:34 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:45:35 <pgroth> Luc: do we have consensus
Luc Moreau: do we have consensus ←
15:45:38 <pgroth> q+
q+ ←
15:45:45 <Zakim> -Vinh
Zakim IRC Bot: -Vinh ←
15:46:00 <MacTed> ISSUE: express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology
ISSUE: express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology ←
15:46:00 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-83 - Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/83/edit .
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-83 - Express inverse relationships in Provenance Model as well as ontology ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/83/edit . ←
15:46:16 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:46:21 <Luc> ack khal
Luc Moreau: ack khal ←
15:46:39 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:46:51 <satya> As part of the formal model discussion, we are enumerating the list of possible properties - I invite Ted to add his proposal to the ontology wiki: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology
Satya Sahoo: As part of the formal model discussion, we are enumerating the list of possible properties - I invite Ted to add his proposal to the ontology wiki: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology ←
15:46:54 <Luc> why not define them as "short-cut/extensions"
Luc Moreau: why not define them as "short-cut/extensions" ←
15:48:10 <pgroth> luc: is it a set of properties defined in the model
Luc Moreau: is it a set of properties defined in the model ←
15:48:35 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:48:44 <Zakim> -??P57
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P57 ←
15:49:04 <Zakim> - +1.509.375.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.509.375.aabb ←
15:50:02 <Luc> proposed: make a set of edges consistent with respect to directionality
PROPOSED: make a set of edges consistent with respect to directionality ←
15:50:16 <jorn> q+ to mention that creating two ways of expressing one things always needs reasoning... problematic with masses of linked data
Jörn Hees: q+ to mention that creating two ways of expressing one things always needs reasoning... problematic with masses of linked data ←
15:50:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:50:51 <Luc> ack jorn
Luc Moreau: ack jorn ←
15:50:51 <Zakim> jorn, you wanted to mention that creating two ways of expressing one things always needs reasoning... problematic with masses of linked data
Zakim IRC Bot: jorn, you wanted to mention that creating two ways of expressing one things always needs reasoning... problematic with masses of linked data ←
15:51:19 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:51:20 <pgroth> jorn: maybe problematic because you would always have to turn on reasoning
Jörn Hees: maybe problematic because you would always have to turn on reasoning ←
15:51:38 <pgroth> MacTed: definitely not a should
Ted Thibodeau: definitely not a should ←
15:52:53 <pgroth> luc: it's important to right simple queries that let's us go into the past
Luc Moreau: it's important to right simple queries that let's us go into the past ←
15:53:02 <pgroth> MacTed: you're looking at the wrong place
Ted Thibodeau: you're looking at the wrong place ←
15:53:10 <pgroth> MacTed: simple queries are not ruled out
Ted Thibodeau: simple queries are not ruled out ←
15:53:17 <Zakim> -??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P15 ←
15:53:29 <Zakim> +??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15 ←
15:53:29 <pgroth> MacTed: inverse properties are going to exisit
Ted Thibodeau: inverse properties are going to exisit ←
15:53:36 <jorn> zakim, ??p15 is me
Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p15 is me ←
15:53:36 <Zakim> +jorn; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it ←
15:54:06 <pgroth> Luc: what are the relations pointing to the future and to the past?
Luc Moreau: what are the relations pointing to the future and to the past? ←
15:54:15 <pgroth> MacTed: you want both
Ted Thibodeau: you want both ←
15:55:12 <pgroth> Luc: moving on from these issue because there is no consensus
Luc Moreau: moving on from these issue because there is no consensus ←
15:55:43 <pgroth> Luc: no stylistic constraints in how we write edge directions
Luc Moreau: no stylistic constraints in how we write edge directions ←
15:55:50 <pgroth> Luc: dropped issue
Luc Moreau: dropped issue ←
15:56:16 <pgroth> Luc: moving on to the debate around past tense verses future tense
Luc Moreau: moving on to the debate around past tense verses future tense ←
15:56:21 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:56:23 <pgroth> Luc: should be consistent
Luc Moreau: should be consistent ←
15:56:33 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:56:34 <pgroth> MacTed: missing temporality
Ted Thibodeau: missing temporality ←
15:56:40 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
15:56:49 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
15:57:00 <dgarijo> +1 for past tense. Provenance is for describing things that have already happened
Daniel Garijo: +1 for past tense. Provenance is for describing things that have already happened ←
15:57:00 <pgroth> MacTed: all kinds of temporality that might be of interest
Ted Thibodeau: all kinds of temporality that might be of interest ←
15:57:13 <jcheney> q-
James Cheney: q- ←
15:57:21 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:57:22 <pgroth> Luc: we are only talking about things in the past
Luc Moreau: we are only talking about things in the past ←
15:57:28 <Luc> ack smiles
Luc Moreau: ack smiles ←
15:57:29 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:57:39 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
15:57:44 <pgroth> smiles: don't want future tense
Simon Miles: don't want future tense ←
15:58:00 <pgroth> s/simon/smiles
15:58:08 <Luc> ack sat
Luc Moreau: ack sat ←
15:58:25 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:58:56 <pgroth> satya: bringing of the issue of the current
Satya Sahoo: bringing of the issue of the current ←
15:59:28 <pgroth> satya: is it past perfect or continuous
Satya Sahoo: is it past perfect or continuous ←
15:59:37 <khalidbelhajjame> +q
Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←
15:59:49 <jorn> there's one such process: the extraction of DBpedia from wikipedia takes a long time
Jörn Hees: there's one such process: the extraction of DBpedia from wikipedia takes a long time ←
15:59:52 <khalidbelhajjame> -q
Khalid Belhajjame: -q ←
16:00:00 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:00:01 <pgroth> luc: are you talking bout the nodes or the edges (the process execution are the present) edges represent past actions
Luc Moreau: are you talking bout the nodes or the edges (the process execution are the present) edges represent past actions ←
16:01:19 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:01:23 <khalidbelhajjame> Sorry, will need to leave, I have another telecon
Khalid Belhajjame: Sorry, will need to leave, I have another telecon ←
16:01:25 <Zakim> - +44.789.470.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: - +44.789.470.aacc ←
16:01:26 <pgroth> satya: using past perfect might not be enough because of continuous things
Satya Sahoo: using past perfect might not be enough because of continuous things ←
16:01:34 <Zakim> -??P6
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P6 ←
16:01:56 <pgroth> q+
q+ ←
16:01:57 <smiles> @satya I think there are edge cases where assertions may be about things ongoing, but I argue consistent past tense just makes things simple and clear for general intended use
Simon Miles: @satya I think there are edge cases where assertions may be about things ongoing, but I argue consistent past tense just makes things simple and clear for general intended use ←
16:02:06 <satya> +1 for past tense (not sure about past perfect or continous)
Satya Sahoo: +1 for past tense (not sure about past perfect or continous) ←
16:02:47 <dgarijo> @satya: you are not sure about isGeneratedBy vs wasGeneratedBy, right?
Daniel Garijo: @satya: you are not sure about isGeneratedBy vs wasGeneratedBy, right? ←
16:03:01 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
16:03:07 <pgroth> ack pgroth
ack pgroth ←
16:03:21 <Luc> ack curt
Luc Moreau: ack curt ←
16:03:27 <satya> @Daniel: no I vote for "was"
Satya Sahoo: @Daniel: no I vote for "was" ←
16:03:57 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:04:04 <pgroth> q+
q+ ←
16:04:11 <Luc> ack pgro
Luc Moreau: ack pgro ←
16:04:14 <MacTed> verbal expression does not require "to be"
Ted Thibodeau: verbal expression does not require "to be" ←
16:04:25 <MacTed> (is, was, will be, has been)
Ted Thibodeau: (is, was, will be, has been) ←
16:04:32 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
16:04:40 <Luc> ack satya
Luc Moreau: ack satya ←
16:04:51 <jorn> isn't this about was generating vs. generated
Jörn Hees: isn't this about was generating vs. generated ←
16:05:04 <MacTed> Produces, isProducedBy
Ted Thibodeau: Produces, isProducedBy ←
16:05:18 <jorn> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_progressive
Jörn Hees: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_progressive ←
16:05:24 <MacTed> participation is linguistic
Ted Thibodeau: participation is linguistic ←
16:05:52 <Luc> e.g., uses, isControlledBy, isComplementOf
Luc Moreau: e.g., uses, isControlledBy, isComplementOf ←
16:05:53 <jorn> resp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_tense
Jörn Hees: resp. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_tense ←
16:06:13 <pgroth> but you put uses
but you put uses ←
16:06:18 <MacTed> isUsedBy ?
Ted Thibodeau: isUsedBy ? ←
16:06:24 <pgroth> luc: do we need is, was in the names
Luc Moreau: do we need is, was in the names ←
16:06:38 <Luc> TOPIC: Provenance Ontology
Summary: Satya reported on progress on the ontology. Focus is on working on the formal model document, the owl file will be updated later. The file example is now encoded in rdf and available in the document.
<luc>Summary: Satya reported on progress on the ontology. Focus is on working on the formal model document, the owl file will be updated later. The file example is now encoded in rdf and available in the document.
16:06:46 <pgroth> luc: update the status
Luc Moreau: update the status ←
16:06:52 <satya> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html
Satya Sahoo: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html ←
16:07:03 <pgroth> luc: is there anything in the model that is blocking progression?
Luc Moreau: is there anything in the model that is blocking progression? ←
16:07:08 <pgroth> satya: giving an update
Satya Sahoo: giving an update ←
16:07:18 <pgroth> satya: invites people to go through the encoding
Satya Sahoo: invites people to go through the encoding ←
16:08:06 <pgroth> satya: what's holding up is that we don't understand the definitions
Satya Sahoo: what's holding up is that we don't understand the definitions ←
16:08:25 <pgroth> satya: the scope is often not clear from the model
Satya Sahoo: the scope is often not clear from the model ←
16:08:31 <Zakim> -Paulo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Paulo ←
16:08:50 <pgroth> satya: there is a gap in understanding of some concepts in particular roles
Satya Sahoo: there is a gap in understanding of some concepts in particular roles ←
16:08:57 <Zakim> -jorn
Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn ←
16:09:16 <Luc> satya, where is the example you referred to? in the document?
Luc Moreau: satya, where is the example you referred to? in the document? ←
16:09:20 <pgroth> satya: need very well defined domains and ranges
Satya Sahoo: need very well defined domains and ranges ←
16:09:51 <pgroth> satya: the approach we are taking is updating the html document and leaving the owl file until later
Satya Sahoo: the approach we are taking is updating the html document and leaving the owl file until later ←
16:10:56 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#Visualization_of_the_RDF_graph
Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#Visualization_of_the_RDF_graph ←
16:11:44 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:12:23 <Luc> TOPIC: Provenance Model Document
Summary: Nothing specific to report on. Members are invited to raise issues, which will determine the focus of the next iteration.
<Luc>Summary: Nothing specific to report on. Members are invited to raise issues, which will determine the focus of the next iteration.
16:12:43 <pgroth> Luc: nothing specific to report on today
Luc Moreau: nothing specific to report on today ←
16:13:09 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:13:29 <Zakim> -Yolanda
Zakim IRC Bot: -Yolanda ←
16:13:31 <Zakim> -pgroth
Zakim IRC Bot: -pgroth ←
16:13:31 <Zakim> -??P66
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P66 ←
16:13:33 <Zakim> -satya
Zakim IRC Bot: -satya ←
16:13:33 <Zakim> -dgarijo
Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo ←
16:13:34 <Zakim> -jcheney
Zakim IRC Bot: -jcheney ←
16:13:35 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
16:13:36 <Zakim> -Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←
16:13:37 <Zakim> -Yogesh
Zakim IRC Bot: -Yogesh ←
16:13:43 <Zakim> -??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P31 ←
16:13:44 <Zakim> -??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P11 ←
16:13:47 <Zakim> -??P64
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P64 ←
16:27:44 <Zakim> -Curt
(No events recorded for 13 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt ←
16:27:45 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended ←
16:27:47 <Zakim> Attendees were pgroth, Luc, Vinh, Curt, satya, +44.789.470.aaaa, Yogesh, Yolanda, MacTed, +1.509.375.aabb, +44.789.470.aacc, jcheney, +1.915.603.aadd, Paulo, dgarijo, jorn
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were pgroth, Luc, Vinh, Curt, satya, +44.789.470.aaaa, Yogesh, Yolanda, MacTed, +1.509.375.aabb, +44.789.470.aacc, jcheney, +1.915.603.aadd, Paulo, dgarijo, jorn ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#2) generated 2011-08-26 10:28:07 UTC by 'lmoreau', comments: 'added summaries'