14:03:52 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/03/11-ldp-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/03/11-ldp-irc ←
14:03:54 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
14:03:56 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be LDP ←
14:03:56 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started ←
14:03:57 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
14:03:57 <trackbot> Date: 11 March 2013
14:04:35 <Zakim> -ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP ←
14:04:59 <Zakim> +[GVoice]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[GVoice] ←
14:05:19 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on here?
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, who's on here? ←
14:05:20 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, Arnaud.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, Arnaud. ←
14:05:46 <Arnaud> zakim, who is here?
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, who is here? ←
14:05:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, Arnaud, [GVoice], pchampin, Ashok_Malhotra, ??P10, TallTed (muted), ??P13, dret, JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Sandro, Arnaud, [GVoice], pchampin, Ashok_Malhotra, ??P10, TallTed (muted), ??P13, dret, JohnArwe ←
14:05:48 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Arnaud, JohnArwe, dret, Zakim, Ashok, TallTed, pchampin, jmvanel, gavinc, sandro, ericP, Yves, thschee, betehess, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, Arnaud, JohnArwe, dret, Zakim, Ashok, TallTed, pchampin, jmvanel, gavinc, sandro, ericP, Yves, thschee, betehess, trackbot ←
14:06:14 <ericP> Zakim, [GVoice] is me
Eric Prud'hommeaux: Zakim, [GVoice] is me ←
14:06:14 <Zakim> +ericP; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ericP; got it ←
14:08:38 <dret> i can step in
Erik Wilde: i can step in ←
14:08:46 <dret> ok, i won't step in
Erik Wilde: ok, i won't step in ←
14:08:53 <sandro> scribe: sandro
(Scribe set to Sandro Hawke)
<sandro> chair: Arnaud
14:11:00 <sandro> two unidentified callers. mysterious!
two unidentified callers. mysterious! ←
14:11:23 <dret> +1
Erik Wilde: +1 ←
14:11:24 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
<sandro>Topic: Minutes of last meeting
14:11:32 <sandro> PROPOSED: accept minutes from last week
PROPOSED: accept minutes from last week ←
14:11:45 <sandro> RESOLVED: accept minutes from last week (March 4)
RESOLVED: accept minutes from last week (March 4) ←
<sandro>Topic: Next meetings
14:11:27 <sandro> Arnaud: At our last F2F, we arranged for an informal telecon afterwords.
Arnaud Le Hors: At our last F2F, we arranged for an informal telecon afterwords. ←
14:12:20 <sandro> Arnaud: At informal telecon right afterwords, we went over what happened, to catch up people who missed it. That's the plan for next week's telecon.
Arnaud Le Hors: At informal telecon right afterwords, we went over what happened, to catch up people who missed it. That's the plan for next week's telecon. ←
14:12:44 <sandro> Arnaud: So people who come to the F2F, you don't have to join the telecon next week. We wont be making any decisions or anything like that.
Arnaud Le Hors: So people who come to the F2F, you don't have to join the telecon next week. We wont be making any decisions or anything like that. ←
14:12:58 <sandro> Arnaud: On the F2F -- do we have the final list of participatns?
Arnaud Le Hors: On the F2F -- do we have the final list of participatns? ←
14:13:29 <sandro> Arnaud: I haven't heard any feedback on the agenda.
Arnaud Le Hors: I haven't heard any feedback on the agenda. ←
14:14:25 <sandro> Arnaud: Maybe breakouts. Long list of issues; no proposal for some of them.
Arnaud Le Hors: Maybe breakouts. Long list of issues; no proposal for some of them. ←
14:15:00 <sandro> Arnaud: I STRONGLY suggest if you care about an issue, you send out a proposal BEFORE the meeting.
Arnaud Le Hors: I STRONGLY suggest if you care about an issue, you send out a proposal BEFORE the meeting. ←
14:15:05 <dret> the break-out groups would be chartered with preparing proposals for those issues which don't have any right now.
Erik Wilde: the break-out groups would be chartered with preparing proposals for those issues which don't have any right now. ←
14:15:20 <Ashok> q+
Ashok Malhotra: q+ ←
14:15:51 <sandro> Arnaud: If people are remote and really care, we can try to work around their schedule.
Arnaud Le Hors: If people are remote and really care, we can try to work around their schedule. ←
14:16:05 <Arnaud> ack ashok
Arnaud Le Hors: ack ashok ←
14:16:47 <sandro> Ashok: We still have arguments and disagreements on the overall @@. I was hoping we could talk about that early
Ashok Malhotra: We still have arguments and disagreements on the overall model. I was hoping we could talk about that early ←
14:16:55 <sandro> s/@@/model/
14:17:20 <sandro> Arnaud: I'm kind of torn on that.
Arnaud Le Hors: I'm kind of torn on that. ←
14:17:57 <sandro> Arnaud: If we could agree on the model, things would be easier, yes. But it doesn't seem to be working, so maybe bottom up will work better.
Arnaud Le Hors: If we could agree on the model, things would be easier, yes. But it doesn't seem to be working, so maybe bottom up will work better. ←
14:18:03 <Zakim> +Yves
Zakim IRC Bot: +Yves ←
14:18:06 <sandro> .. like develop the test suite, and see how that goes.
.. like develop the test suite, and see how that goes. ←
14:18:11 <dret> switch from topd-down to bottom-up mode, yes. i think we have established that top-down doesn't seem to work all that great for us.
Erik Wilde: switch from topd-down to bottom-up mode, yes. i think we have established that top-down doesn't seem to work all that great for us. ←
14:18:29 <sandro> +1 bottom up
+1 bottom up ←
14:18:51 <sandro> Arnaud: We'll end up needing to make the same design decisions, but without the details we don't understand each other.
Arnaud Le Hors: We'll end up needing to make the same design decisions, but without the details we don't understand each other. ←
14:18:54 <dret> and then when we have better spec'd bottom-up cases, we need to distill the model.
Erik Wilde: and then when we have better spec'd bottom-up cases, we need to distill the model. ←
14:19:23 <sandro> eric: There's a possibility that working with test cases will get us toward the model than discussion the model theoretically
Eric Prud'hommeaux: There's a possibility that working with test cases will get us toward the model than discussion the model theoretically ←
14:19:28 <sandro> Arnaud: exactly.
Arnaud Le Hors: exactly. ←
14:19:35 <dret> yup, i agree that the tests are an excellent way to go forward.
Erik Wilde: yup, i agree that the tests are an excellent way to go forward. ←
14:19:52 <sandro> ericP: Ashok, do you see a way to have the Test discussion first, in a way that will help us have a grounded Model discussion.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: Ashok, do you see a way to have the Test discussion first, in a way that will help us have a grounded Model discussion. ←
14:19:55 <Arnaud> q?
Arnaud Le Hors: q? ←
14:20:04 <sandro> dret, can you take over scribing for 10-15 now?
dret, can you take over scribing for 10-15 now? ←
14:20:12 <sandro> Ashok: I need to think about this.
Ashok Malhotra: I need to think about this. ←
14:21:34 <dret> i can do that...
Erik Wilde: i can do that... ←
<dret>scribe: dret
(Scribe set to Erik Wilde)
14:22:46 <dret> Arnaud: keep breakout sessions as an option, but in such a fragmented group it may be counter-productive; will be decided on demand
Arnaud Le Hors: keep breakout sessions as an option, but in such a fragmented group it may be counter-productive; will be decided on demand ←
14:23:06 <Zakim> -??P13
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P13 ←
14:23:20 <dret> Topic: Actions and Issues
14:23:49 <Zakim> -??P10
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P10 ←
14:24:13 <dret> Proposal: close ACTION-29
14:24:54 <dret> Resolved: ACTION-29 closed
14:26:22 <dret> ACTION-38 remains open while we switch to bottom-up mode for the model discussion
ACTION-38 remains open while we switch to bottom-up mode for the model discussion ←
<sandro>Topic: Open Issues
<sandro>subtopic: Issue-49
14:30:00 <Ashok> But is this a LDP issue?
Ashok Malhotra: But is this a LDP issue? ←
14:30:44 <Arnaud> ack Yves
Arnaud Le Hors: ack Yves ←
14:31:47 <dret> discussing ISSUE-49 and whether it's part of LDP or should be considered orthogonal
discussing ISSUE-49 and whether it's part of LDP or should be considered orthogonal ←
14:32:46 <dret> Yves: pointing to metalink and saying that we should be very cautious about making mirroring/equivalence a part of LDP
Yves Lafon: pointing to metalink and saying that we should be very cautious about making mirroring/equivalence a part of LDP ←
14:33:02 <dret> Ashok: agrees with Yves
Ashok Malhotra: agrees with Yves ←
14:33:19 <dret> Arnaud: seems like most people agree that it's not an LDP issue
Arnaud Le Hors: seems like most people agree that it's not an LDP issue ←
14:33:20 <JohnArwe> ...yves said he would put reference to other materials on the public list; some issues with attack vectors.
John Arwe: ...yves said he would put reference to other materials on the public list; some issues with attack vectors. ←
14:33:43 <Arnaud> ack sandro
Arnaud Le Hors: ack sandro ←
14:34:26 <dret> Sandro: use OWL sameas in data or in the HTTP header
Sandro Hawke: use OWL sameas in data or in the HTTP header ←
14:35:04 <dret> these are RDF solutions, we might also recommend HTTP-level ones?
these are RDF solutions, we might also recommend HTTP-level ones? ←
14:35:14 <pchampin> q+ to notice that owl:sameAs is symetrical
Pierre-Antoine Champin: q+ to notice that owl:sameAs is symetrical ←
14:35:21 <Arnaud> ack pchampin
Arnaud Le Hors: ack pchampin ←
14:35:21 <Zakim> pchampin, you wanted to notice that owl:sameAs is symetrical
Zakim IRC Bot: pchampin, you wanted to notice that owl:sameAs is symetrical ←
14:36:28 <dret> pchampin: not sure about sameas, because it is supposed to be symmetrical
Pierre-Antoine Champin: not sure about sameas, because it is supposed to be symmetrical ←
14:37:39 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
14:37:39 <Yves> See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6249
Yves Lafon: See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6249 ←
14:37:44 <sandro> scribe: sandro
(Scribe set to Sandro Hawke)
14:38:03 <SteveS> zakim, [IBM] is me
Steve Speicher: zakim, [IBM] is me ←
14:38:03 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveS; got it ←
14:38:12 <Ashok> q+
Ashok Malhotra: q+ ←
14:38:15 <dret> thanks, sandro!
Erik Wilde: thanks, sandro! ←
14:38:23 <Arnaud> proposal: close issue-49, making no change
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-49, making no change ←
14:38:34 <Arnaud> ack ashok
Arnaud Le Hors: ack ashok ←
14:38:59 <sandro> Ashok: There's a section 4.1.4 that spoke to this. Does that get clarified or removed or what?
Ashok Malhotra: There's a section 4.1.4 that spoke to this. Does that get clarified or removed or what? ←
14:39:16 <sandro> Arnaud: No one has proposed that
Arnaud Le Hors: No one has proposed that ←
14:39:54 <sandro> Arnaud: There is one MUST in the spec.
Arnaud Le Hors: There is one MUST in the spec. ←
14:40:32 <sandro> Ashok: I recommend keeping it open and figuring out what to do with that part of our spec.
Ashok Malhotra: I recommend keeping it open and figuring out what to do with that part of our spec. ←
14:41:04 <sandro> Arnaud: I don't want to just leave it open, and then we'll come back in 2 months
Arnaud Le Hors: I don't want to just leave it open, and then we'll come back in 2 months ←
14:41:13 <sandro> Ashok: give me an action
Ashok Malhotra: give me an action ←
14:41:38 <SteveS> q+
Steve Speicher: q+ ←
14:41:38 <sandro> Arnaud: So we'll leave ISSUE-49 open for now, and Ashok with produce a recommendation about what to do about 4.1.4
Arnaud Le Hors: So we'll leave ISSUE-49 open for now, and Ashok with produce a recommendation about what to do about 4.1.4 ←
14:41:47 <Arnaud> ack steves
Arnaud Le Hors: ack steves ←
14:43:42 <sandro> action Ashok to propose how to modify the text of 4.1.4 to go with closing ISSUE-49 (with no material modification to spec)
action Ashok to propose how to modify the text of 4.1.4 to go with closing ISSUE-49 (with no material modification to spec) ←
14:43:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-40 - Propose how to modify the text of 4.1.4 to go with closing ISSUE-49 (with no material modification to spec) [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2013-03-18].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-40 - Propose how to modify the text of 4.1.4 to go with closing ISSUE-49 (with no material modification to spec) [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2013-03-18]. ←
14:44:42 <dret> i'm fine with ignoring ISSUE-37 for now and then attempt to distill it from tests
Erik Wilde: i'm fine with ignoring ISSUE-37 for now and then attempt to distill it from tests ←
<sandro>subtopic: Issue-21
14:45:22 <sandro> Arnaud: We were going to talk about Reverse Membership Predicate, but Steve Battle asked we not decide in his absence, so we'll put it off.
Arnaud Le Hors: We were going to talk about Reverse Membership Predicate, but Steve Battle asked we not decide in his absence, so we'll put it off. ←
14:45:35 <sandro> Arnaud: He did send email with example.
Arnaud Le Hors: He did send email with example. ←
14:46:59 <sandro> dret: I liked Steve's notion that navigability and data model are different things. What are the concepts that we identify and represent; and THEN decide on the affordances, where do we encode it, so clients can find that part of the data model in that place.
Erik Wilde: I liked Steve's notion that navigability and data model are different things. What are the concepts that we identify and represent; and THEN decide on the affordances, where do we encode it, so clients can find that part of the data model in that place. ←
14:47:35 <sandro> .. I really like the idea of splitting them. Make membership part of model, then later talk about how to make it navigable, maybe in both directions.
.. I really like the idea of splitting them. Make membership part of model, then later talk about how to make it navigable, maybe in both directions. ←
14:47:55 <sandro> Arnaud: I thought you might agree with that. :-)
Arnaud Le Hors: I thought you might agree with that. :-) ←
14:48:10 <sandro> Arnaud: Steve's example was very useful. I had not understood it.
Arnaud Le Hors: Steve's example was very useful. I had not understood it. ←
14:48:20 <sandro> Arnaud: We need more examples posted.
Arnaud Le Hors: We need more examples posted. ←
14:49:06 <sandro> Arnaud: I had thought it was a back-link, but he's just using a different membership property. The link is in the same direciton, container to member.
Arnaud Le Hors: I had thought it was a back-link, but he's just using a different membership property. The link is in the same direciton, container to member. ←
14:50:13 <sandro> subtopic: issue-35
14:50:16 <sandro> issue-35?
14:50:16 <trackbot> ISSUE-35 -- POSTing to a container MUST yield a fresh URI -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-35 -- POSTing to a container MUST yield a fresh URI -- open ←
14:50:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/35
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/35 ←
14:50:41 <sandro> Arnaud: We had a similar discussion about whether URIs could be reused after delete.
Arnaud Le Hors: We had a similar discussion about whether URIs could be reused after delete. ←
14:51:07 <sandro> .. Like MUST you get an error doing a GET after a DELETE?
.. Like MUST you get an error doing a GET after a DELETE? ←
14:51:22 <sandro> .. people seemed to think there may be cases where a URI is reused.
.. people seemed to think there may be cases where a URI is reused. ←
14:51:26 <sandro> issue-24?
14:51:26 <trackbot> ISSUE-24 -- Should DELETED resources remain deleted? -- closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-24 -- Should DELETED resources remain deleted? -- closed ←
14:51:26 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/24
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/24 ←
14:51:39 <dret> i hope we don't say anywhere that you MUST get an error..
Erik Wilde: i hope we don't say anywhere that you MUST get an error.. ←
14:51:45 <sandro> Arnaud, so issue-35 and issue-24 seem linked
Arnaud, so ISSUE-35 and ISSUE-24 seem linked ←
14:51:59 <pchampin> I agree that they seem linked
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I agree that they seem linked ←
14:52:01 <sandro> (your logic sounds good to me, Arnaud)
(your logic sounds good to me, Arnaud) ←
14:52:31 <TallTed> seems an accurate assessment...
Ted Thibodeau: seems an accurate assessment... ←
14:52:57 <sandro> dret, I don't think we have liberty to decide this. if a server decides to re-use URIs, that's up to it. clients shouldn't make those assumptions.
Erik Wilde: I don't think we have liberty to decide this. if a server decides to re-use URIs, that's up to it. clients shouldn't make those assumptions. ←
14:53:12 <sandro> s/dret,/dret:/
14:53:29 <sandro> dret: I don't think clients have business looking at URIs like this.
Erik Wilde: I don't think clients have business looking at URIs like this. ←
14:53:43 <sandro> Arnaud: Richard proposed server must not re-assign URI.
Arnaud Le Hors: Richard proposed server must not re-assign URI. ←
14:54:00 <sandro> q+
q+ ←
14:54:19 <TallTed> POSTing to a container MUST yield a URI ... it's server's choice what that URI is, and I think whether that URI is guaranteed new or re-used is and should remain outside our control
Ted Thibodeau: POSTing to a container MUST yield a URI ... it's server's choice what that URI is, and I think whether that URI is guaranteed new or re-used is and should remain outside our control ←
14:54:47 <sandro> Arnaud: To be consistent with 24 we can't change anything on 35. because we already said URIs may be reused
Arnaud Le Hors: To be consistent with 24 we can't change anything on 35. because we already said URIs may be reused ←
14:54:51 <Arnaud> ack sandro
Arnaud Le Hors: ack sandro ←
14:55:32 <ericP> sandro: i'm concearned about the situation where client A deletes </foo> and client B continues to use </foo>
Sandro Hawke: i'm concearned about the situation where client A deletes </foo> and client B continues to use </foo> [ Scribe Assist by Eric Prud'hommeaux ] ←
14:56:03 <ericP> ... if something else creates </foo>, the meaning will change out from under client B.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: ... if something else creates </foo>, the meaning will change out from under client B. ←
14:56:23 <sandro> Arnaud: Yeah, "under certain cirumstances". So in the NORMAL case you'd get a new URI.
Arnaud Le Hors: Yeah, "under certain cirumstances". So in the NORMAL case you'd get a new URI. ←
14:56:28 <ericP> ... we need text which talks about "delete if if you're *sure* the URL hasn't leaked out"
Eric Prud'hommeaux: ... we need text which talks about "delete if if you're *sure* the URL hasn't leaked out" ←
14:56:33 <sandro> Arnaud: So I'm okay with a SHOULD.
Arnaud Le Hors: So I'm okay with a SHOULD. ←
14:56:34 <Arnaud> ack tallted
Arnaud Le Hors: ack tallted ←
14:56:43 <dret> i think this is "deployment guide" stuff: don't do it, because of this and that.
Erik Wilde: i think this is "deployment guide" stuff: don't do it, because of this and that. ←
14:56:57 <sandro> TallTed: This is no different from any other situation where URIs change.
Ted Thibodeau: This is no different from any other situation where URIs change. ←
14:57:42 <pchampin> I agree with TallTed
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I agree with TallTed ←
14:57:49 <dret> me too
Erik Wilde: me too ←
14:57:54 <sandro> TallTed: I don't think this is an undetectable error condition. You just have to document your server behavior
Ted Thibodeau: I don't think this is an undetectable error condition. You just have to document your server behavior ←
14:58:20 <dret> i'd prefer non-spec level, this is just best practice
Erik Wilde: i'd prefer non-spec level, this is just best practice ←
14:58:57 <sandro> sandro: documenting server bevavior means there's no spec here.
Sandro Hawke: documenting server bevavior means there's no spec here. ←
14:59:18 <SteveS> I like increasing the awareness from what we have, like with should or recommended, and possibly update some guidance into the deployment guide
Steve Speicher: I like increasing the awareness from what we have, like with should or recommended, and possibly update some guidance into the deployment guide ←
14:59:45 <sandro> sandro: MUST is too hard to implemnt, but strongly worded SHOULD is okay
Sandro Hawke: MUST is too hard to implemnt, but strongly worded SHOULD is okay ←
15:00:04 <sandro> Arnaud: Sounds like we're coming to SHOULD, but let's not decide until we have Richard present.
Arnaud Le Hors: Sounds like we're coming to SHOULD, but let's not decide until we have Richard present. ←
15:00:11 <dret> not sure. this is not a protocol issue. it's just a recommendation.
Erik Wilde: not sure. this is not a protocol issue. it's just a recommendation. ←
15:00:57 <dret> yup, and if people want to shoot themselves in the foot, they are allowed to do so. they just dimish the vaue of their service.
Erik Wilde: yup, and if people want to shoot themselves in the foot, they are allowed to do so. they just dimish the vaue of their service. ←
15:00:59 <sandro> TallTed: I think SHOULD might be too strong. eg in the case of a reboot
Ted Thibodeau: I think SHOULD might be too strong. eg in the case of a reboot ←
15:01:19 <sandro> sandro: if the client can't assume the URIs will be stable on a given server, we have a huge problem.
Sandro Hawke: if the client can't assume the URIs will be stable on a given server, we have a huge problem. ←
15:01:21 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ashok_Malhotra ←
15:01:23 <dret> thanks everybody! thanks, sandro!
Erik Wilde: thanks everybody! thanks, sandro! ←
15:01:29 <Zakim> -dret
Zakim IRC Bot: -dret ←
15:01:33 <sandro> thanks, dret!
thanks, dret! ←
15:01:41 <sandro> Arnaud: See many of you in Boston!!
Arnaud Le Hors: See many of you in Boston!! ←
15:01:45 <sandro> ADJOURN
ADJOURN ←
15:01:49 <Zakim> -Yves
Zakim IRC Bot: -Yves ←
15:01:50 <Zakim> -TallTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> -pchampin
Zakim IRC Bot: -pchampin ←
15:03:17 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: -JohnArwe ←
15:04:34 <Zakim> -SteveS
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveS ←
15:05:07 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
15:05:08 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
15:05:12 <Zakim> -ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP ←
15:05:13 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
15:05:13 <Zakim> Attendees were pchampin, Ashok_Malhotra, TallTed, dret, JohnArwe, Sandro, Arnaud, ericP, Yves, SteveS
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were pchampin, Ashok_Malhotra, TallTed, dret, JohnArwe, Sandro, Arnaud, ericP, Yves, SteveS ←
<sandro> present: pchampin, Ashok_Malhotra, TallTed, dret, JohnArwe, Sandro, Arnaud, ericP, Yves, SteveS
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#4) generated 2013-03-11 22:05:03 UTC by 'alehors', comments: 'Set Present'