13:57:55 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-ldp-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-ldp-irc ←
13:57:57 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be LDP ←
13:57:57 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started ←
13:57:58 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:57:58 <trackbot> Date: 28 April 2014
13:58:00 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
13:58:02 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
13:58:02 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
13:58:02 <Zakim> Attendees were [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were [IPcaller] ←
13:58:33 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started ←
13:58:39 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
13:58:46 <codyburleson> Zakim, IPcaller is me.
Cody Burleson: Zakim, IPcaller is me. ←
13:58:46 <Zakim> +codyburleson; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +codyburleson; got it ←
14:00:51 <Zakim> +Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud ←
14:00:55 <Zakim> +Steve_Speicher
Zakim IRC Bot: +Steve_Speicher ←
14:01:11 <SteveS> Zakim, Steve_Speicher is me
Steve Speicher: Zakim, Steve_Speicher is me ←
14:01:11 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveS; got it ←
14:01:30 <Zakim> +JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: +JohnArwe ←
14:01:37 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:01:39 <betehess> Zakim, IPcaller is betehess
Alexandre Bertails: Zakim, IPcaller is betehess ←
14:01:39 <Zakim> +betehess; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +betehess; got it ←
14:02:20 <Zakim> +Roger
Zakim IRC Bot: +Roger ←
14:02:56 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on the phone?
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, who's on the phone? ←
14:02:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see codyburleson, Arnaud, SteveS, JohnArwe, betehess, Roger
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see codyburleson, Arnaud, SteveS, JohnArwe, betehess, Roger ←
14:03:01 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
14:03:48 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ashok_Malhotra ←
14:05:38 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
14:05:44 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
14:05:45 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it ←
<codyburleson> scribe: cody
(Scribe set to Cody Burleson)
<codyburleson> chair: Arnaud
<codyburleson> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2014.04.28
<codyburleson> present: codyburleson, Arnaud, SteveS, JohnArwe, betehess, Roger, Sandro, Ashok_Malhotra, TallTed, pchampin, nmihindu, deiu
<codyburleson> topic: Admin
14:05:56 <codyburleson> Resolved: Approved minutes of April 7th
RESOLVED: Approved minutes of April 7th ←
14:06:22 <Zakim> +??P19
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P19 ←
14:06:26 <codyburleson> Arnaud: April 15, 16 17, there are 3 days worth of minutes (for the Face to Face)
Arnaud Le Hors: April 15, 16 17, there are 3 days worth of minutes (for the Face to Face) ←
14:06:28 <betehess> if Arnaud didn't change much since the meeting, should be fine :-)
Alexandre Bertails: if Arnaud didn't change much since the meeting, should be fine :-) ←
14:07:17 <codyburleson> RESOLVED: Minutes for April 15, 16, 17th approved.
RESOLVED: Minutes for April 15, 16, 17th approved. ←
<codyburleson> TOPIC: Tracking of Actions and Issues
14:07:50 <codyburleson> subTOPIC: Actions
14:08:15 <Zakim> +??P20
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P20 ←
14:08:23 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P20 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P20 is me ←
14:08:23 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
14:08:34 <nmihindu> Zakim, mute me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, mute me ←
14:08:34 <Zakim> nmihindu should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: nmihindu should now be muted ←
14:09:01 <codyburleson> Arnaud: How about Action 104? Roger?
Arnaud Le Hors: How about ACTION-104? Roger? ←
14:09:18 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I will close Action 104.
Arnaud Le Hors: I will close ACTION-104. ←
14:09:47 <JohnArwe> scribe: cody
14:09:48 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Cody you had action 134.
Arnaud Le Hors: Cody you had ACTION-134. ←
14:10:19 <sandro> action-137?
14:10:19 <trackbot> action-137 -- Sandro Hawke to Contact yves and erik to make confirm with them that http-wg is okay with this reading of the link context -- due 2014-04-07 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-137 -- Sandro Hawke to Contact yves and erik to make confirm with them that http-wg is okay with this reading of the link context -- due 2014-04-07 -- OPEN ←
14:10:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/137
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/137 ←
14:10:19 <codyburleson> Cody: I did a bunch of updates this weekend, but I do not know if that one was included; I'll have to go back and look at that one.
Cody Burleson: I did a bunch of updates this weekend, but I do not know if that one was included; I'll have to go back and look at that one. ←
14:10:22 <JohnArwe> regrets: ericp
14:10:29 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Sandro, you had 137 and 138.
Arnaud Le Hors: Sandro, you had 137 and 138. ←
14:10:40 <sandro> action-138?
14:10:40 <trackbot> action-138 -- Sandro Hawke to Follow up on resolution about moving rel=describedby text -- due 2014-04-22 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-138 -- Sandro Hawke to Follow up on resolution about moving rel=describedby text -- due 2014-04-22 -- OPEN ←
14:10:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/138
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/138 ←
14:10:49 <JohnArwe> regrets: sergio
14:11:20 <betehess> no victory for ACTION-139 yet, but good progress
Alexandre Bertails: no victory for ACTION-139 yet, but good progress ←
14:12:12 <codyburleson> subTOPIC: Issues
14:13:16 <codyburleson> Which issue # are we talking about?
Which issue # are we talking about? ←
14:13:26 <Arnaud> ISSUE-98
14:13:26 <trackbot> ISSUE-98 -- HTTP status code for application specific errors -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-98 -- HTTP status code for application specific errors -- raised ←
14:13:26 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/98
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/98 ←
14:13:33 <codyburleson> Arnaud: We either add something to the BP doc or postpone it. Adding a MUST on anything changes the compliance which would take us back to Last Call; and that's no good.
Arnaud Le Hors: We either add something to the BP doc or postpone it. Adding a MUST on anything changes the compliance which would take us back to Last Call; and that's no good. ←
14:14:24 <SteveS> My suggestions were not for LDP 1.0, just ideas for future improvements
Steve Speicher: My suggestions were not for LDP 1.0, just ideas for future improvements ←
14:14:29 <betehess> fine with adding something in BP + postponing
Alexandre Bertails: fine with adding something in BP + postponing ←
14:14:31 <codyburleson> Arnaud: ? was asking which HTTP status code we should return in case of an error. We can postpone it and add something in the BP doc for the time being. What does everybody else think?
Arnaud Le Hors: ? was asking which HTTP status code we should return in case of an error. We can postpone it and add something in the BP doc for the time being. What does everybody else think? ←
14:14:37 <SteveS> option 1 seems like good BP material
Steve Speicher: option 1 seems like good BP material ←
14:14:40 <JohnArwe> q+
14:14:47 <Arnaud> ack JohnArwe
Arnaud Le Hors: ack JohnArwe ←
14:16:21 <codyburleson> Zakim, who is talking?
Zakim, who is talking? ←
14:16:32 <Zakim> codyburleson, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: betehess (34%), Sandro (9%), TallTed (41%)
Zakim IRC Bot: codyburleson, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: betehess (34%), Sandro (9%), TallTed (41%) ←
14:16:46 <Ashok> Cody, this is Alexandre
Ashok Malhotra: Cody, this is Alexandre ←
14:17:04 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:17:04 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
14:17:06 <codyburleson> Name on the forum is not Alexandre though; I was looking for the login name.
Name on the forum is not Alexandre though; I was looking for the login name. ←
14:18:03 <codyburleson> Alexandre: Can we propose which of 3 we want to put in the BP doc?
Alexandre Bertails: Can we propose which of 3 we want to put in the BP doc? ←
14:18:11 <betehess> [[
Alexandre Bertails: [[ ←
14:18:11 <betehess> I am totally fine with the 3 following solutions:
Alexandre Bertails: I am totally fine with the 3 following solutions: ←
14:18:11 <betehess> 1. 400 + rel=describedby
Alexandre Bertails: 1. 400 + rel=describedby ←
14:18:11 <betehess> 2. new status code
Alexandre Bertails: 2. new status code ←
14:18:11 <betehess> 3. 400 + specialized link relation
Alexandre Bertails: 3. 400 + specialized link relation ←
14:18:12 <betehess> ]]
Alexandre Bertails: ]] ←
14:18:35 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Can we close this as adding option 1 in the Best Practice doc?
Arnaud Le Hors: Can we close this as adding option 1 in the Best Practice doc? ←
14:18:40 <JohnArwe> option 1 best of the 3 IMO
John Arwe: option 1 best of the 3 IMO ←
14:18:53 <pchampin> I prefer option 1 as well
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I prefer option 1 as well ←
14:18:53 <TallTed> "400 Bad Request" seems a fine response code...
Ted Thibodeau: "400 Bad Request" seems a fine response code... ←
14:18:57 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Maybe it is too quick. I will put it as a proposal for next week; that way people have time to think about it,.
Arnaud Le Hors: Maybe it is too quick. I will put it as a proposal for next week; that way people have time to think about it,. ←
14:19:07 <Ashok> Yeah, option 1 seems right
Ashok Malhotra: Yeah, option 1 seems right ←
14:19:18 <JohnArwe> ... new status code would be met with skepticism (well founded IMO) in IETF; if "209" wasn't easy, this would be MUCH harder
John Arwe: ... new status code would be met with skepticism (well founded IMO) in IETF; if "209" wasn't easy, this would be MUCH harder ←
14:19:27 <codyburleson> TOPIC: LDP Specification
14:19:35 <TallTed> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-26#section-6.5.1
Ted Thibodeau: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-26#section-6.5.1 ←
14:19:35 <TallTed> "The 400 (Bad Request) status code indicates that the server cannot or will not process the request due to something which is perceived to be a client error (e.g., malformed request syntax, invalid request message framing, or deceptive request routing)."
Ted Thibodeau: "The 400 (Bad Request) status code indicates that the server cannot or will not process the request due to something which is perceived to be a client error (e.g., malformed request syntax, invalid request message framing, or deceptive request routing)." ←
14:20:10 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Is there any more the editors are working on in regard to the spec itself. Are we done with handling editorial based on recent comments?
Arnaud Le Hors: Is there any more the editors are working on in regard to the spec itself. Are we done with handling editorial based on recent comments? ←
14:20:31 <codyburleson> JohnArwe: Some of what Joe raised in his comments, I fixed, but I'm sure we haven't gotten them all.
John Arwe: Some of what Joe raised in his comments, I fixed, but I'm sure we haven't gotten them all. ←
14:21:10 <codyburleson> SteveS: And there is a couple of editorial items I wanted to do based on exchange with Sergio and my own implementation findings. So, those things are pending. One I completed this morning.
Steve Speicher: And there is a couple of editorial items I wanted to do based on exchange with Sergio and my own implementation findings. So, those things are pending. One I completed this morning. ←
14:21:45 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Can we have the spec ready to go to CR by next Monday?
Arnaud Le Hors: Can we have the spec ready to go to CR by next Monday? ←
14:22:10 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Editors? Next monday? Or do you need more time?
Arnaud Le Hors: Editors? Next monday? Or do you need more time? ←
14:22:26 <codyburleson> SteveS: I think it can be ready by next Monday./
Steve Speicher: I think it can be ready by next Monday./ ←
14:23:22 <codyburleson> JohnArwe: I wasn't planning on spending much time on it this week, but I will do my best. Presumably, we have to respond to Joe, but I don't think these are any normative changes.
John Arwe: I wasn't planning on spending much time on it this week, but I will do my best. Presumably, we have to respond to Joe, but I don't think these are any normative changes. ←
14:24:42 <codyburleson> RESOLVED: Plan on finalizing the spec and exit LC and go for CR on next Monday.
RESOLVED: Plan on finalizing the spec and exit LC and go for CR on next Monday. ←
14:24:53 <codyburleson> TOPIC: Test Suite
14:26:08 <codyburleson> SteveS: Update on the test suite is - a couple of folks from IBM are working on it and working on getting approval to publish / provide it. Hopefully it will be cleared in a day or two. Remind me that I need to respond to some of the other impls we were looking at. It's going fine except that we don't have it in GetHub yet.
Steve Speicher: Update on the test suite is - a couple of folks from IBM are working on it and working on getting approval to publish / provide it. Hopefully it will be cleared in a day or two. Remind me that I need to respond to some of the other impls we were looking at. It's going fine except that we don't have it in GetHub yet. ←
14:26:32 <codyburleson> Arnaud: As of now, it seems like it's just a framework; there isn't any single test yet. Right?
Arnaud Le Hors: As of now, it seems like it's just a framework; there isn't any single test yet. Right? ←
14:26:36 <codyburleson> SteveS: That's right.
Steve Speicher: That's right. ←
14:26:50 <codyburleson> Arnaud: What about Sergio? Is he bringing in some test that he has?
Arnaud Le Hors: What about Sergio? Is he bringing in some test that he has? ←
14:28:18 <codyburleson> Arnaud: So the plan is that when we go to CR, we can point to the test suite. We need it to be ready in at least a first-shot kind of thing on Monday. Actually, as long as we have a link to the repo and by the time it is published (a week or two later), it should be fine.
Arnaud Le Hors: So the plan is that when we go to CR, we can point to the test suite. We need it to be ready in at least a first-shot kind of thing on Monday. Actually, as long as we have a link to the repo and by the time it is published (a week or two later), it should be fine. ←
14:29:35 <codyburleson> TOPIC: Paging
14:30:01 <codyburleson> Arnaud: We made a whole bunch of decisions at the F2F; I'd like to know what the status of the draft is.
Arnaud Le Hors: We made a whole bunch of decisions at the F2F; I'd like to know what the status of the draft is. ←
14:30:48 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I'm thinking very strongly that Sandro should step in as an editor of this spec module. Who is working on this spec today who can give an update? Has the draft changed?
Arnaud Le Hors: I'm thinking very strongly that Sandro should step in as an editor of this spec module. Who is working on this spec today who can give an update? Has the draft changed? ←
14:30:50 <JohnArwe> not it (i.e. not working on paging since f2f, aside from typo fixing)
John Arwe: not it (i.e. not working on paging since f2f, aside from typo fixing) ←
14:31:13 <codyburleson> SteveS: Other things are taking priority; can't see where I'll be able to jump in within the next two weeks.
Steve Speicher: Other things are taking priority; can't see where I'll be able to jump in within the next two weeks. ←
14:31:25 <JohnArwe> once main ldp spec is out of our hands, I'd shift onto paging
John Arwe: once main ldp spec is out of our hands, I'd shift onto paging ←
14:31:30 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Understand. Sandro, how about you? Can you start editing?
Arnaud Le Hors: Understand. Sandro, how about you? Can you start editing? ←
14:32:14 <codyburleson> Sandro: I'm having a hard time figuring out how to justify that. As we have worked it, it doesn't turn out to be as useful to the work I am doing that I was expecting it to be.
Sandro Hawke: I'm having a hard time figuring out how to justify that. As we have worked it, it doesn't turn out to be as useful to the work I am doing that I was expecting it to be. ←
14:32:44 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I welcome any one else to chime in; otherwise - that spec is at a loss of man power right now.
Arnaud Le Hors: I welcome any one else to chime in; otherwise - that spec is at a loss of man power right now. ←
14:33:26 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I always hoped this would follow the main spec very closely. I did not want this to start dragging far behind. But I guess there is only so much we can do. Please all, think about it.
Arnaud Le Hors: I always hoped this would follow the main spec very closely. I did not want this to start dragging far behind. But I guess there is only so much we can do. Please all, think about it. ←
14:33:46 <codyburleson> TOPIC: Access Control Document
14:34:01 <codyburleson> +q
+q ←
14:34:36 <Arnaud> https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/AccessControlTake2
Arnaud Le Hors: https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/AccessControlTake2 ←
14:34:45 <codyburleson> Ashok: I started a completely different wiki page with a sort of different mind-set. It has use cases and requirements. It's quite small.
Ashok Malhotra: I started a completely different wiki page with a sort of different mind-set. It has use cases and requirements. It's quite small. ←
14:35:21 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:35:21 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
14:35:24 <codyburleson> Ashok: I have 1 question which turned up when Sandro and I were in discussion. Are we speaking about access control only for RDF?
Ashok Malhotra: I have 1 question which turned up when Sandro and I were in discussion. Are we speaking about access control only for RDF? ←
14:35:50 <codyburleson> Sandro: That was not my intention, but I was assuming we would EXPRESS access control in RDF.
Sandro Hawke: That was not my intention, but I was assuming we would EXPRESS access control in RDF. ←
14:36:20 <Arnaud> ack codyburleson
Arnaud Le Hors: ack codyburleson ←
14:37:17 <codyburleson> -q
-q ←
14:37:41 <codyburleson> Cody: We will have a requirement to do bot: secure at collection level, but also sometimes at an item level.
Cody Burleson: We will have a requirement to do bot: secure at collection level, but also sometimes at an item level. ←
14:38:33 <codyburleson> Ashok: All the talk about other implementations, we took out. Also, all the stuff about other authentication and authorization stuff, we took out. And people said we want to start with very simple use cases.
Ashok Malhotra: All the talk about other implementations, we took out. Also, all the stuff about other authentication and authorization stuff, we took out. And people said we want to start with very simple use cases. ←
14:39:51 <codyburleson> TallTed: I haven't looked at the new doc yet, but did throw some stuff into the discussion thread recently.
Ted Thibodeau: I haven't looked at the new doc yet, but did throw some stuff into the discussion thread recently. ←
14:40:44 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I think you're in the right direction with the new document. Did you go for all the UCs and Reqs in the old doc?
Arnaud Le Hors: I think you're in the right direction with the new document. Did you go for all the UCs and Reqs in the old doc? ←
14:41:09 <codyburleson> Ashok: Yes. I've got them all.
Ashok Malhotra: Yes. I've got them all. ←
14:42:16 <codyburleson> Arnaud: OK. Team, it's open for review, comments, additional use cases. I just did not want to go into details of solutions we might come up with. But it is an important point that we want to control all types of resources, not just RDF resources./
Arnaud Le Hors: OK. Team, it's open for review, comments, additional use cases. I just did not want to go into details of solutions we might come up with. But it is an important point that we want to control all types of resources, not just RDF resources./ ←
14:42:39 <codyburleson> TOPIC: Best Practices and Guidelines Document
14:44:30 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Let's identify 2 reviewers
Arnaud Le Hors: Let's identify 2 reviewers ←
14:44:54 <SteveS> I would be happy to review
Steve Speicher: I would be happy to review ←
14:44:57 <codyburleson> Arnaud: This will be published as a Working group Note, so we don't have to kill ourselves. But at the same time, we need to be sure it's worth publishing./
Arnaud Le Hors: This will be published as a Working group Note, so we don't have to kill ourselves. But at the same time, we need to be sure it's worth publishing./ ←
14:46:10 <codyburleson> Cody: It has had SOME review by others besides me (Nandana and Miguel)
Cody Burleson: It has had SOME review by others besides me (Nandana and Miguel) ←
14:46:31 <codyburleson> Roger: I will do my best to try to review.
Roger Menday: I will do my best to try to review. ←
14:46:53 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Action 83 kind of already puts you on the hook for this one. Ensure that Issue 62 is addressed/
Arnaud Le Hors: ACTION-83 kind of already puts you on the hook for this one. Ensure that ISSUE-62 is addressed/ ←
14:47:16 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Keep us updated, Cody. When the document is totally ready - send an email to the list.
Arnaud Le Hors: Keep us updated, Cody. When the document is totally ready - send an email to the list. ←
14:47:29 <codyburleson> TOPIC: Primer
14:48:22 <codyburleson> Roger: We have done a lot of changes in the last 4 days. We've ALMOST gotten there, but we're not 100% ready. I think we need a few more days and then we will be ready for review.
Roger Menday: We have done a lot of changes in the last 4 days. We've ALMOST gotten there, but we're not 100% ready. I think we need a few more days and then we will be ready for review. ←
14:48:40 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Wer had Ashok and Henry in the Q for reviewers. I am not sure of Henry's status.
Arnaud Le Hors: Wer had Ashok and Henry in the Q for reviewers. I am not sure of Henry's status. ←
14:48:52 <Ashok> Roger, send mail when the primer is ready for review
Ashok Malhotra: Roger, send mail when the primer is ready for review ←
14:49:19 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
14:49:22 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Let the group know as soon as you are done. Then Ashok can review so we can close Action 70. Then if anyone else can review it, that would be good. If you could finish by midweek, that would be good.
Arnaud Le Hors: Let the group know as soon as you are done. Then Ashok can review so we can close ACTION-70. Then if anyone else can review it, that would be good. If you could finish by midweek, that would be good. ←
14:49:26 <deiu> Zakim: P2 is me
14:49:29 <deiu> Zakim, P2 is me
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, P2 is me ←
14:49:29 <Zakim> sorry, deiu, I do not recognize a party named 'P2'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, deiu, I do not recognize a party named 'P2' ←
14:49:34 <deiu> Zakim, ??P2 is me
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, ??P2 is me ←
14:49:34 <Zakim> +deiu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +deiu; got it ←
14:49:35 <codyburleson> Roger: OK, I'll ping Henry to see if is available to review as well.
Roger Menday: OK, I'll ping Henry to see if is available to review as well. ←
14:49:40 <deiu> Zakim, mute me
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, mute me ←
14:49:40 <Zakim> deiu should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: deiu should now be muted ←
14:50:10 <codyburleson> TOPIC: Any Other Business
<codyburleson> Arnaud: anything else?
Arnaud Le Hors: anything else? ←
14:50:20 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Sounds like we can close early.
Arnaud Le Hors: Sounds like we can close early. ←
14:50:39 <codyburleson> MEETING ADJOURNED
MEETING ADJOURNED ←
14:50:42 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ashok_Malhotra ←
14:50:46 <Zakim> -SteveS
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveS ←
14:50:48 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: -JohnArwe ←
14:50:48 <Zakim> -betehess
Zakim IRC Bot: -betehess ←
14:50:49 <Zakim> -Roger
Zakim IRC Bot: -Roger ←
14:50:51 <Zakim> -nmihindu
Zakim IRC Bot: -nmihindu ←
14:50:52 <Zakim> -codyburleson
Zakim IRC Bot: -codyburleson ←
14:50:53 <Zakim> -TallTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed ←
14:50:53 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
14:50:55 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
14:51:08 <Zakim> -deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: -deiu ←
15:35:00 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, pchampin, in SW_LDP()10:00AM
(No events recorded for 43 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: disconnecting the lone participant, pchampin, in SW_LDP()10:00AM ←
15:35:01 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
15:35:01 <Zakim> Attendees were codyburleson, Arnaud, SteveS, JohnArwe, betehess, Roger, Sandro, Ashok_Malhotra, TallTed, pchampin, nmihindu, deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were codyburleson, Arnaud, SteveS, JohnArwe, betehess, Roger, Sandro, Ashok_Malhotra, TallTed, pchampin, nmihindu, deiu ←
Formatted by CommonScribe