14:59:46 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg
14:59:46 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/05/15-rdf-wg-irc
14:59:48 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:59:48 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-wg
14:59:50 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394
14:59:50 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
14:59:51 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:59:51 <trackbot> Date: 15 May 2013
15:00:05 <AndyS> zakim, this is 73394
15:00:05 <Zakim> ok, AndyS; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM
15:00:19 <Zakim> +??P19
15:00:31 <Zakim> +Guus_Schreiber
15:00:31 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:00:36 <yvesr> Zakim, ??P19 is me
15:00:37 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it
15:00:39 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me
15:00:40 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
15:01:06 <pfps> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:01:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.408.992.aaaa, yvesr, Guus_Schreiber, AndyS
15:01:09 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
15:01:14 <pfps> zakim, aaaa is me
15:01:14 <Zakim> +pfps; got it
15:01:17 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:01:20 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:01:21 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
15:01:23 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
15:01:23 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
15:01:37 <TallTed> TallTed has changed the topic to: RDF WG -- current agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.05.15
15:01:52 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:02:17 <Zakim> + +1.415.686.aabb
15:02:25 <gkellogg> zakim, I am aabb
15:02:25 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
15:02:33 <Zakim> + +1.540.538.aacc
15:02:34 <Zakim> +??P33
15:02:42 <AZ> Zakim, aacc is me
15:02:42 <Zakim> +AZ; got it
15:03:07 <davidwood> Zakim, aacc is me
15:03:08 <Zakim> sorry, davidwood, I do not recognize a party named 'aacc'
15:03:21 <AZ> Zakim, ??P33 is me
15:03:21 <Zakim> +AZ; got it
15:03:30 <davidwood> Zakim, aacc is me
15:03:30 <Zakim> sorry, davidwood, I do not recognize a party named 'aacc'
15:03:36 <davidwood> Zakim, who is here?
15:03:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see pfps, yvesr, Guus_Schreiber, AndyS, TallTed (muted), Sandro, gkellogg, AZ, AZ.a
15:03:37 <Zakim> On IRC I see AZ, Zakim, RRSAgent, gkellogg, pfps, AndyS, Guus, davidwood, TallTed, manu1, sandro, trackbot, yvesr, manu, ericP, mischat
15:03:56 <davidwood> Zakim, AZ.a is me
15:03:56 <Zakim> +davidwood; got it
15:04:03 <davidwood> Zakim, who is here?
15:04:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see pfps, yvesr, Guus_Schreiber, AndyS, TallTed (muted), Sandro, gkellogg, AZ, davidwood
15:04:06 <Zakim> On IRC I see AZ, Zakim, RRSAgent, gkellogg, pfps, AndyS, Guus, davidwood, TallTed, manu1, sandro, trackbot, yvesr, manu, ericP, mischat
15:04:15 <pfps> q+
15:04:18 <pfps> q-
15:04:29 <AZ> Zakim, mute me
15:04:29 <Zakim> AZ should now be muted
15:05:00 <TallTed> q?
15:05:22 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:05:22 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
15:05:23 <davidwood> ack AZ, davidwood
15:05:39 <sandro> zakim, who is muted?
15:05:40 <Zakim> I see AZ muted
15:05:42 <davidwood> Zakim, unmute me
15:05:42 <Zakim> davidwood was not muted, davidwood
15:05:47 <AZ> Zakim, unmute me
15:05:47 <Zakim> AZ should no longer be muted
15:05:48 <Zakim> +Souri
15:05:50 <TallTed> Zakim, AZ is davidwood
15:05:50 <Zakim> +davidwood; got it
15:06:01 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:06:01 <Zakim> On the phone I see pfps, yvesr, Guus_Schreiber, AndyS, TallTed, Sandro, gkellogg, davidwood.a, davidwood, Souri
15:06:03 <Zakim> On IRC I see AZ, Zakim, RRSAgent, gkellogg, pfps, AndyS, Guus, davidwood, TallTed, manu1, sandro, trackbot, yvesr, manu, ericP, mischat
15:06:11 <AZ> david, sorry to have used your identity
15:06:15 <Guus> zakim, mute me
15:06:15 <Zakim> Guus_Schreiber should now be muted
15:06:49 <AZ> Zakim, davidwood is me
15:06:49 <Zakim> +AZ; got it
15:07:08 <davidwood> Zakim, davidwood.a is me
15:07:08 <Zakim> +davidwood; got it
15:07:11 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
15:07:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see pfps, yvesr, Guus_Schreiber (muted), AndyS, TallTed, Sandro, gkellogg, davidwood, AZ, Souri
15:08:16 <Zakim> +[GVoice]
15:08:18 <davidwood> Zakim, pick a victim
15:08:18 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose TallTed
15:08:38 <Zakim> +??P37
15:08:39 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
15:08:39 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
15:08:41 <sandro> scribe: sandro
15:08:49 <davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 08 May telecon:
15:08:49 <davidwood> 
15:08:49 <davidwood>    https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-05-08
15:08:51 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #rdf-wg
15:09:00 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-wg
15:09:11 <davidwood> RESOLVED to accept the minutes of the 08 May telecon:   https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-05-08
15:09:19 <davidwood> Review of action items
15:09:19 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview
15:09:19 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open
15:09:21 <pfps> Minutes are fine
15:09:25 <sandro> RESOLVED: to accept the minutes of the 08 May telecon:   https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-05-08
15:09:31 <pchampin> zakim, ??P37 is me
15:09:31 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
15:09:53 <davidwood> close ACTION-215
15:09:53 <trackbot> Closed ACTION-215 Provide update to RDF semantics within two weeks..
15:09:56 <pfps> That's an old aciton that was done quite some time ago (action 215)
15:10:21 <davidwood> close ACTION-262
15:10:21 <trackbot> Closed ACTION-262 Add text to Concepts that bad language tag is a syntax error.
15:10:50 <davidwood> ACTION-261?
15:10:50 <trackbot> ACTION-261 -- Patrick Hayes to add wording to Semantics to again define the merge of two RDF graphs -- due 2013-05-08 -- OPEN
15:10:50 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/261
15:11:28 <davidwood> Topic: LC Drafts of Concepts and Semantics
15:11:29 <sandro> davidwood: I think action-261 is done.     can you confirm, pfps?
15:11:29 <sandro> pfps: not at the moment
15:11:45 <davidwood> Sandro's suggestion: blank nodes as named graph labels
15:11:45 <davidwood> 	▪	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013May/0120.html
15:12:53 <pfps> action 261 is done - I'm marking it pending
15:12:53 <trackbot> Error finding '261'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/users>.
15:13:46 <davidwood> Sandro: The RDF WG decided that the thing in the forth column in a quad can only be a URI (not a literal or a blank node).  However, the LDP WG highlighted that blank nodes could be useful to define a PATCH.
15:13:54 <sandro> { :insert <#i>;  :delete <#d> }   <#i> { .... }   <#d>  {.... }
15:15:35 <pfps> does SPARQL consume datasets?  If not, there is no problem at all
15:15:42 <sandro> q?
15:15:53 <sandro> queue=
15:16:16 <pfps> q?
15:16:19 <yvesr> that answers it, thank you :)
15:16:49 <pfps> q+
15:16:53 <AndyS> Clarification -- PATCH /url does give a base
15:17:31 <sandro> davidwood: Andy, thoughts?
15:18:13 <davidwood> Andy: A PATCH must be defined against a base URL.
15:20:14 <sandro> AndyS: I don't think this is a great way to do patch, as seen in my example
15:21:39 <sandro> sandro: I'm not saying this a complete design for patch, just that we should enable it.
15:22:19 <sandro> davidwood: this isn't about LDP -- it's about whethe we are over-constraining RDF by forcing the 4th column of a quad to be a URI
15:22:20 <yvesr> davidwood, +1 - it's not really about PATCH, but about overconstraining RDF
15:22:44 <sandro> davidwood:So what are your thoughts on that, Andy?
15:23:15 <sandro> andy: I don't have the energy to go through all this again
15:23:38 <sandro> andy: I want this WG to finish.   I'd rather not re-open this issue, because it could take a lot of time.
15:23:49 <sandro> eric: Let's just nail it today?
15:24:30 <sandro> andy: Lack of practical experience.
15:24:48 <sandro> andy: I'm trying not to re-open the whole debate
15:25:24 <sandro> davidwood: Can I please have a list of all resolutions, Sandro?
15:26:28 <sandro> davidwood: I think this would help JSON-LD.     it might help LDP.  I take Andy's point.
15:27:21 <ericP> _:statement1 dc:author "Bob" . _:statement1 { :TheMoon :madeOf :greenCheese } .
15:27:21 <sandro> greg: There's no open issue.     It was about use of JSON-LD for transient messages.
15:27:31 <sandro> greg: which is much like this.
15:27:41 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/JSON-LD_Features_at_Risk#Allow_blank_nodes_to_be_used_as_graph_name_or_property
15:27:43 <gkellogg> gs/greg/gregg/
15:27:56 <sandro> davidwood: It's an At Risk issue, but not recorded in issue tracker.
15:28:43 <sandro> greg: this would be a great way to resolve the issue.      and I think there is implementation experience.
15:28:48 <sandro> andy: who?
15:29:02 <sandro> greg: python,
15:29:05 <sandro> greg: ruby
15:29:07 <davidwood> q?
15:29:27 <gkellogg> Python librdf, Ruby rdf.rb allow bnodes as graph names.
15:29:31 <sandro> AndyS: Internally, Jena doesn't care about this.    It doesn't even mind bnodes as predicates.   It's just in publishing data that it gets restricted.
15:29:34 <davidwood> ack pfps
15:29:37 <sandro> eric: same with SWObjects
15:29:51 <sandro> PROPOSED: Datasets can use blank nodes as graph names, not just IRIs.
15:30:04 <gkellogg> +1
15:30:04 <sandro> +1
15:30:06 <ericP> +1
15:30:08 <pfps> >0
15:30:09 <TallTed> +0
15:30:10 <yvesr> +0.5
15:30:10 <AndyS> abstain
15:30:16 <Souri> -1
15:30:18 <AZ> 0
15:30:30 <sandro> davidwood: Souri?   Explain?
15:30:58 <pfps> q+
15:31:33 <pfps> q-
15:31:42 <pfps> q+
15:32:01 <sandro> Souri: The way way interepreted balnk nodes earlier, we used rraph names to distinguish blank nodes.      I understand we're thinking of sharing blank nodes between graphs.   But earlier, they were separate.   That seems to be going away here, and that's going to cause issues.
15:32:11 <sandro> souri: I could put minus .5
15:32:22 <sandro> souri: I do not fully understand all the implications.
15:32:24 <davidwood> ack pfps
15:32:59 <sandro> pfps: My reading is that for months in the WG, it's been assumed that graphs can share blank nodes.
15:33:34 <sandro> sandro: agreed.  I'll make that list of resolutions later today.
15:33:34 <gkellogg> LDP PATCH semantics would probably depend on BNodes being shared between graphs.
15:33:54 <sandro> souri: We are okay with that.  Graph names themselves being blank nodes --- that's not something we had assumed.
15:34:01 <ericP> q?
15:34:23 <sandro> souri: so _:g1 { ... _:b1 ... }     I can interpret    it as _:g1__b1
15:34:33 <sandro> souri: I'll have to make something unique
15:34:36 <sandro> q+
15:34:36 <ericP> q+
15:35:10 <AZ> RDF datasets do not have a formal semantics, so graph IRI, graph bnode, graph literal or graph schmuck, it's all equally meaningless...
15:35:18 <pfps> I'm still confused.  Is the issue *just* consing up unique IDs for blank nodes within datasets?
15:35:29 <sandro> souri: It's almost like graph is a name for a set of triple, ...   and then that itself becoming a blank node, it causes some difficulty in implement.  I'm fine with it -- I just wanted to let you know it's not the most desirable thing.
15:35:49 <davidwood> ack sandro
15:35:49 <yvesr> one of the main issue i can see is around scoping - would probably need some semantics to back it up
15:36:25 <davidwood> ack ericP
15:36:26 <sandro> sandro: you can skolemize
15:36:31 <sandro> sandro: I'm hearing consensus.
15:36:43 <sandro> eric: if souri has new information, he could bring that forward.
15:36:49 <TallTed> there was a -1
15:37:40 <Souri> -0
15:37:45 <sandro> RESOLVED: Datasets can use blank nodes as graph names, not just IRIs.
15:38:06 <pfps> actions on concepts and semantics?
15:38:06 <davidwood> Language tags
15:38:06 <davidwood> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013May/0048.html
15:38:11 <sandro> davidwood: Souri (or anyone else) if you find a new problem with this, please say so.
15:38:23 <sandro> topic: Language Tags
15:38:25 <ericP> YES!!!! a thousand n3 use cases are now available to RDF
15:38:30 <AndyS> q+ to ask we do this properly - change SPARQL
15:38:38 <davidwood> ack AndyS
15:38:38 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to ask we do this properly - change SPARQL
15:39:22 <gkellogg> TriG, NQuads
15:39:30 <yvesr> ericP, now to re-vote on literal as subjects :)
15:39:57 <sandro> eric: Andy, do you want the action?
15:40:20 <sandro> I don't see how it's an erratum.
15:41:29 <sandro> sandro: oh, okay, if it's called "RDF Dataset" in SPARQL, then yes, we should bring them into line some day.
15:41:31 <pfps> So the solution is to add a note in Concepts indicating that there is a difference.
15:41:32 <sandro> sandro: so errata is fine.
15:42:22 <AndyS> ACTION Andy Raise an erratum against SPARQL for the resolution that graph names can be blank nodes.
15:42:22 <trackbot> Created ACTION-263 - Raise an erratum against SPARQL for the resolution that graph names can be blank nodes. [on Andy Seaborne - due 2013-05-22].
15:42:36 <sandro> action: sandro find the history and suggest phrasing for Concepts
15:42:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-264 - Find the history and suggest phrasing for Concepts [on Sandro Hawke - due 2013-05-22].
15:42:37 <Zakim> +PatH
15:43:21 <davidwood> Language tags as values
15:43:21 <davidwood> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013May/0112.html
15:43:48 <PatH> PatH has joined #rdf-wg
15:44:25 <sandro> andy: There are couple of ways to treat language tags.     We could take it out of the syntax issues.
15:44:45 <sandro> andy: that would license systems to decide how much of langstring to implement
15:45:12 <sandro> andy: I think the same can be done for xsd:string -- it doesnt have to be required for implementation
15:45:19 <sandro> q+
15:46:14 <sandro> davidwood: People seem to like this proposal
15:46:29 <sandro> davidwood: Need a WG resolution on this
15:46:34 <davidwood> q?
15:46:39 <davidwood> ack sandro
15:47:35 <sandro> sandro: I THINK this just enables a new kind of implentaiton, not changing any existing ones
15:47:42 <pfps> q+ to disagree with Sandro
15:47:48 <sandro> davidwood: I don't think this changes any existing implementations
15:47:57 <pfps> q+ ... in a certain way
15:48:31 <ericP> -> http://www.w3.org/mid/20130507104945.GB28539@w3.org a proposal for language tag case-insensitivity which does not lean on a value mapping
15:48:31 <davidwood> ack pfps
15:48:31 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to disagree with Sandro
15:48:36 <PatH> q+
15:48:38 <sandro> AndyS: I don't think it would license some behaviors that are currently not licensed, that's all.
15:49:05 <sandro> pfps: So suppose I want to write a new impl, and I don't lile lang tag string, so I'm going to ignreo @
15:49:12 <sandro> sandro: that wouldnt be a turtle parser
15:50:04 <AndyS> ericP -- it's ambiguous as to one or two triples in the graph -- depends when tests are done.
15:50:11 <sandro> s/AndyS: I don't think/AndyS: I think/
15:50:42 <ericP> q?
15:51:17 <sandro> sandro: I agree, using rdf:PlainLiteral would be simpler here, but that would involve some backtracking.
15:51:17 <ericP> q+ to ask how the plain literal solution is a solution
15:51:40 <sandro> pat: It would get rid of the strange characters.
15:52:05 <davidwood> ack PatH
15:52:16 <davidwood> ack ericP
15:52:16 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to ask how the plain literal solution is a solution
15:52:21 <PatH> q-
15:52:21 <sandro> david: We might run a few minutes late that noon ET.
15:52:47 <AndyS> LANG("abc") = xsd:string and LANG("abc"@en) = rdf:langString.
15:52:48 <pfps> my proposal is that Concepts doesn't have plain literals any more, instead it uses rdf:plainLiteral
15:52:52 <davidwood> s/late that/later than/
15:53:29 <sandro> eric: The problem we're trying to address is that historically, if you give triples with "foo"@EN, rdf said that was the same literal as "foo"@en.   And BCP-47 says DONT case-fold.
15:54:38 <sandro> pfps: rdf:PlainLiteral says the lexical space of the language tag does not have to be lower case, but the value space has it lower case.
15:54:45 <Zakim> -AndyS
15:54:51 <sandro> we lost AndyS
15:55:08 <AndyS> zakim cut me off!
15:55:13 <sandro> pat: the std rules of lang tags would only apply to the value space
15:55:33 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:55:39 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me
15:55:39 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
15:56:51 <sandro> eric: Proposal that the value space have case folded version.
15:57:01 <sandro> eric: Proposal that these are compared case-insentively
15:57:20 <sandro> sandro: I don't think we understand this well enough right now.
15:57:34 <sandro> pat: look at rdf:PlainLiteral spec carefully during the week.
15:57:40 <davidwood> q?
15:57:56 <sandro> AndyS: SPARQL already committed to something, because we understood there would not be rdf:LangString any more.
15:58:06 <sandro> s/not//
15:58:10 <ericP> 2013-05-15T15:52:47Z <AndyS> LANG("abc") = xsd:string and LANG("abc"@en) = rdf:langString.
15:58:15 <sandro> s/any more//
15:58:33 <pfps> what is rdf:langString??
15:59:03 <sandro> AndyS: rdf:langString is in the docs right now.
15:59:09 <davidwood> Topic: LC for  JSON-LD API
15:59:13 <sandro> Pat: It's the ugly thing I want to get rid of.  :-)
15:59:19 <AZ> Andy, you mean DATATYPE("abc"@en) = rdf:langString  ?
15:59:35 <ericP> i was wondering that
15:59:58 <sandro> greg: Briefly, the LC2 of JSON-LD-API failed to be published yesterday, so we have a chance to put in two AT RISK notes.
16:00:12 <sandro> ... one on Native Types for Number, and other other for how to reference Futures
16:00:26 <AndyS> Currently, rdf:langString is defined in MT (I'm suggesting it go in concepts with the other datatypes mentioned)
16:00:28 <gkellogg> PROPOSAL: Publish the latest (
16:00:29 <gkellogg> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/json-ld/raw-file/default/spec/WD/json-ld-api/20130516/index.html
16:00:30 <gkellogg> ) JSON-LD Algorithms and API 1.0 specification as a 2nd Last Call
16:00:31 <gkellogg> Working Draft on Thursday, May 16th 2013 with a Last Call period of 3 weeks.
16:00:35 <sandro> .. we don't want to resolve these today, just put in the issue markers.
16:01:00 <sandro> PROPOSAL: Publish the latest (https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/json-ld/raw-file/default/spec/WD/json-ld-api/20130516/index.html) JSON-LD Algorithms and API 1.0 specification as a 2nd Last Call
16:01:01 <sandro> +1
16:01:06 <gkellogg> +1
16:01:11 <TallTed> +1
16:01:12 <AndyS> +1
16:01:13 <PatH> +1
16:01:16 <yvesr> +1
16:01:19 <pfps> +0 (lacking knowledge)
16:01:34 <davidwood> +1
16:01:49 <davidwood> FEATURE AT RISK 1 is handled by https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-05-15#resolution_2
16:01:50 <sandro> RESOLVED: Publish the latest (https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/json-ld/raw-file/default/spec/WD/json-ld-api/20130516/index.html) JSON-LD Algorithms and API 1.0 specification as a 2nd Last Call
16:02:07 <sandro> davidwood: Any other business?
16:02:07 <davidwood> Topic: AOB
16:02:15 <davidwood> q?
16:02:21 <pfps> no comments on semantics
16:02:29 <Zakim> -pfps
16:02:41 <sandro> ADJOURNED
16:02:48 <Zakim> -Souri
16:02:49 <Zakim> -gkellogg
16:02:49 <Zakim> -davidwood
16:02:50 <Zakim> -TallTed
16:02:50 <Zakim> -Sandro
16:02:52 <Zakim> -AZ
16:02:53 <PatH> byeee
16:03:11 <Zakim> -Guus_Schreiber
16:03:13 <Zakim> -AndyS
16:03:33 <Zakim> -ericP
16:05:02 <Zakim> -pchampin
16:19:27 <davidwood> davidwood has joined #rdf-wg
16:19:32 <gavinc> gavinc has joined #rdf-wg
16:31:52 <AndyS> There are no action items for working through the consequences of the resolution on blank nodes for named graphs.
16:37:59 <Zakim> -PatH
16:42:59 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, yvesr, in SW_RDFWG()11:00AM
16:43:00 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has ended
16:43:00 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.408.992.aaaa, Guus_Schreiber, yvesr, AndyS, pfps, Sandro, TallTed, +1.415.686.aabb, gkellogg, +1.540.538.aacc, Souri, AZ, davidwood, ericP, pchampin, PatH
17:17:28 <davidwood> davidwood has joined #rdf-wg
17:36:37 <davidwood> davidwood has joined #rdf-wg
17:40:49 <gavinc> While we're at it why not just replace all the nodes with blank nodes?
17:41:18 <gavinc> Everything is a variable! It's very unconstrained
17:41:20 <gavinc> Everything is a variable! It's very unconstrained
17:55:01 <AndyS> Hmm - this will be the only place where [] is allowed and is a unique parse term - everywhere else it's a possible blankNodePropertyList
17:55:47 <AndyS> (well, I find it interesting)
18:03:33 <gavinc> _:b {_:b rdf:value _:b } is very strange.
18:08:37 <AndyS> Currently, I'm merely updating RIOT parser without putting extra code on the critical path for NT and NQ.
18:16:12 <davidwood> davidwood has joined #rdf-wg
18:29:17 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdf-wg
19:17:19 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-wg
20:21:30 <davidwood> davidwood has joined #rdf-wg