14:01:54 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dwbp
14:01:54 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/11/06-dwbp-irc
14:01:56 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs 351
14:01:56 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #dwbp
14:01:58 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be DWBP
14:01:58 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
14:01:59 <trackbot> Meeting: Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
14:01:59 <trackbot> Date: 06 November 2015
14:02:12 <phila> present+ phila, yaso
14:02:40 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dwbp
14:03:52 <annette_g> present+ annette_g
14:03:55 <MTCarrasco> present+ MTCarrasco
14:03:57 <ericstephan> ericstephan has joined #dwbp
14:04:20 <Makx> Makx has joined #dwbp
14:04:26 <hadleybeeman> present+ hadleybeeman
14:05:14 <newtonca_> present+ newtonca_
14:05:18 <hadleybeeman> hadleybeeman has changed the topic to: Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20151106
14:05:23 <newtonca_> newtonca_ has left #dwbp
14:05:27 <newtonca_> newtonca_ has joined #dwbp
14:05:28 <BernadetteLoscio> BernadetteLoscio has joined #dwbp
14:05:35 <gatemezi> gatemezi has joined #dwbp
14:05:36 <newtonca_> newtonca_ has left #dwbp
14:05:38 <annette_g> Is someone having construction done?
14:05:55 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
14:05:58 <newton> newton
14:06:14 <Ig_Bittencourt> zakim, mute me
14:06:14 <Zakim> sorry, Ig_Bittencourt, I can't do that anymore
14:06:22 <ericstephan> present+ ericstephan
14:06:42 <BernadetteLoscio> present +BernadetteLoscio
14:07:17 <antoine> present+ antoine
14:07:20 <laufer> laufer has joined #dwbp
14:07:42 <hadleybeeman> zakim, who is here?
14:07:42 <Zakim> Present: phila, yaso, annette_g, MTCarrasco, hadleybeeman, newtonca_, ericstephan, antoine
14:07:45 <Zakim> On IRC I see laufer, newton, gatemezi, BernadetteLoscio, Makx, ericstephan, annette_g, Zakim, RRSAgent, MTCarrasco, antoine, phila, Ig_Bittencourt, yaso, hadleybeeman, rhiaro,
14:07:45 <Zakim> ... trackbot
14:08:22 <laufer> present+ laufer
14:08:42 <Ig_Bittencourt> present+ Ig_Bittencourt
14:08:48 <phila> scribe: phila
14:08:53 <phila> scribeNick: phila
14:08:57 <hadleybeeman> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2015-10-30
14:09:01 <phila> PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes
14:09:07 <phila> +0 (absent)
14:09:08 <hadleybeeman> +0
14:09:10 <ericstephan> +1
14:09:12 <yaso> 0
14:09:13 <newton> +0 (absent)
14:09:18 <Ig_Bittencourt> +0
14:09:20 <yaso> +0
14:09:24 <laufer> 0 (not there)
14:09:24 <antoine> 0 (absent)
14:09:27 <BernadetteLoscio> 0
14:09:40 <annette_g> +1
14:10:00 <phila> RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes
14:10:09 <annette_g> *now I see why we had trouble with phila's name
14:10:12 <phila> Topic: Update on the vocabs
14:10:35 <ericstephan> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/New_thoughts_on_citations
14:10:36 <phila> Dataset Usage...
14:10:58 <ericstephan> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Newer_thoughts_on_citations
14:10:59 <phila> ericstephan: I talked last week about new thoiughts on data citations. Not spent a lot of time on it this week, but...
14:11:18 <phila> ... I've got something called even newer thoughts on citations - we're trying to move forward.
14:11:35 <phila> ... We've found a good citation model from the Force11 and OKFN
14:11:53 <phila> ... They've been looking at how they tie in to JSON-LD
14:12:06 <phila> ... They also form a community that we can call on for vclidation of the model
14:12:15 <phila> ... Hoping for closure next week.
14:12:25 <phila> hadleybeeman: Do you need anything from the rest of the WG before next week?
14:12:27 <BernadetteLoscio> ;)
14:12:34 <phila> ericstephan: No, I just need to talk to Sumit and Berna
14:12:47 <phila> ... We just need the editors to get together and move forward.
14:12:58 <phila> Data Quality Vocabulary
14:13:28 <newton> s/vclidation/validation
14:13:31 <phila> antoine: Usual scheduling problems.
14:13:42 <phila> ... New sections have been added
14:14:59 <phila> ... Looked at DCAT Dataset and Distribution
14:15:55 <phila> ... dqv:computedOn and dqv:asQualityMeausure may not need to have strict dcat:Dataset/Distribution for domain and ranges. Prob say that we expect them to be used with them but they may not be
14:16:15 <phila> ... I believe last week discussed this and general consensus that informal D&R is probbaly better
14:16:15 <hadleybeeman> s/dvq:asQualityMeausure/dqv:asQualityMeasure
14:16:16 <phila> q+
14:16:24 <phila> q-
14:16:53 <phila> phila: +1 to not defining domain and range unless necessary
14:17:15 <phila> antoine: If there is an objection, OK, we can discuss by e-mail. If not then we'll take it as resolved
14:17:22 <laufer> no objection
14:17:50 <phila> RESOLUTION: dvq:asQualityMeausure and dqv:asQualityMeasure will not have defined domains and ranges but will encourage use of relevant DCAT classes
14:18:13 <phila> antoine: Next question is one of schedule
14:18:19 <hadleybeeman> s/dvq:asQualityMeausure/dqv:asQualityMeasure
14:18:45 <hadleybeeman> s/and dqv:asQualityMeasure/dqv:computedOn
14:18:51 <phila> antoine: We have had feedback that is significant and we'd like to address that before we go for a new draft. OK? This will put us back a little but it feels right
14:19:00 <hadleybeeman> s/dqv:computedOn/and dqv:computedOn
14:19:12 <phila> phila: What kind of delay?
14:19:15 <phila> s/kind/length/
14:19:42 <BartvanLeeuwen> BartvanLeeuwen has joined #dwbp
14:19:44 <phila> antoine: I don't know, maybe a couple of weeks, maybe 3 at most
14:20:06 <phila> antoine: Other issues are more tech so we should continue that discussion on the mailing list
14:20:16 <phila> hadleybeeman: So please jump in to the Ml discussions
14:20:21 <phila> Topic: Best Practices
14:20:39 <phila> hadleybeeman: It occurs to me that we should ytalk about the two things in the agenda but are there otehr things we should cover today?
14:20:57 <newton> s/ytalk/talk
14:21:05 <phila> -> http://www.w3.org/2013/share-psi/bp/ Share-PSI BPs
14:21:13 <BartvanLeeuwen> present+ BartvanLeeuwen
14:21:29 <hadleybeeman> phila: this is for information. The Share-PSI project has a project review in 2 weeks time, in front of the European Commission
14:21:30 <gatemezi> present+ gatemezi
14:21:42 <hadleybeeman> ...One of the things we are being judged on is the best practices of that project.
14:22:04 <hadleybeeman> ...To remind you: we all said that if those BPs are technical, then we should take care of it (which is happeneing).
14:22:18 <hadleybeeman> ...But if it is policy-related, and out of scope for this group, then Share-PSI should handle it.
14:22:29 <hadleybeeman> ...As a result, there is a lot of them.
14:22:41 <hadleybeeman> ...I just wanted this group to be aware of this set of BPs.
14:23:02 <hadleybeeman> ...If you are writing a policy statement, the Share PSI BPs might be useful.
14:23:16 <hadleybeeman> ...There are 40 partners and 22-23 sets of guidelines being created across Europe.
14:23:25 <hadleybeeman> ...This will help us in DWPB to prove implementation experience.
14:23:42 <hadleybeeman> ...(to implement what we are recommending)
14:23:55 <antoine> this is really great!
14:24:09 <hadleybeeman> ...We agreed in Sao Paolo that our next working group will be held with the Share PSI meeting, 14-16 March in Zagreb, Croatia
14:24:17 <hadleybeeman> ...There are a few of us in both groups.
14:24:26 <yaso> thanks for the report, Phil
14:24:30 <fradulov> fradulov has joined #DWBP
14:25:23 <hadleybeeman> topic:  Webby URIs -- links to values within datasets
14:25:44 <hadleybeeman> phila: This came from Jeremy Tandy, from CSV on the Web and Spatial Data on the Web. He pointed out that it was missing, so I quickly wrote it.
14:25:46 <phila> -> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#identifiersWithinDatasets
14:25:55 <hadleybeeman> It's now this BP, number 11.
14:26:16 <annette_g> q+
14:26:18 <hadleybeeman> ...What was missing was persistent URIs within the data, or something that can be turned into a persistent URI
14:26:35 <hadleybeeman> ...I'm pleased that BernadetteLoscio reviewed it.  We need others to look at it and agree/comment.
14:26:48 <hadleybeeman> ...It agrees the "webby data" thing that Eric Wilde keeps talking about .
14:26:58 <BernadetteLoscio> q+
14:27:06 <hadleybeeman> ...I want to make sure we don't write things we aren't comfortable with. And that doesn't go against what he or a future group might write.
14:27:15 <hadleybeeman> ...Grateful for feedback.
14:27:17 <MTCarrasco> +
14:27:19 <hadleybeeman> ack annette_g
14:28:09 <hadleybeeman> annette_g: Subsetting data? Can we address that here too?
14:28:10 <MTCarrasco> ?
14:28:28 <ericstephan> +1 annette_g
14:28:35 <hadleybeeman> phila: This has come up a lot in the Spatial Web group. When they met in Sapporo, they were trying to establish the relationship between them and us.
14:28:53 <hadleybeeman> ...Geospatial datasets are enormous; so subsets are helpful.
14:29:05 <hadleybeeman> ...This raises the question: who writes it? Us or them?
14:29:26 <hadleybeeman> ...They are thinking: Protocol OpenSearch, which is a standard query string that you send to a search engine.
14:29:47 <hadleybeeman> ...Its what's allows you in your browser to select different search engines, since the query that is sent to Google or Yandex or Yahoo is the same.
14:29:50 <hadleybeeman> ...q=......
14:29:54 <antoine> http://www.opensearch.org/
14:30:02 <hadleybeeman> ...That search string is independent of the technology that uses it.
14:30:23 <hadleybeeman> ...OGC added to that — but only in 2 dimensions
14:30:28 <Caroline> Caroline has joined #DWBP
14:30:34 <hadleybeeman> ...Spatial data are looking at adding in time and space
14:30:45 <hadleybeeman> ...Where this fits between the two groups — open to debate.
14:30:58 <hadleybeeman> ....@annette_g, is your use case under spatial/temporal?
14:31:12 <hadleybeeman> annette_g: No. Commonly done with a data cube.
14:31:17 <hadleybeeman> ...Certainly can be.
14:31:43 <ericstephan> +1 annette_g
14:31:52 <Caroline> Present+ Caroline
14:31:53 <hadleybeeman> ...My feeling is we don't need to define a new way of referencing it, but publishers should provide it.
14:32:06 <ericstephan> q+
14:32:12 <hadleybeeman> phila: Are you happy to leave it at that? Or should we define a way to identify a subset of a dataset?
14:32:16 <MTCarrasco> q+
14:32:17 <phila> q+ MTCarrasco
14:32:27 <phila> ack b
14:32:30 <hadleybeeman> annette_g: Since our charter doesn't indicate we define new technologies, that's beyond our scope.
14:32:48 <hadleybeeman> BernadetteLoscio: @annette_g, if we have a best practice for this, where does it fit?  Data access/
14:33:09 <hadleybeeman> annette_g: Yes, that is a good place. But I'm also seeing if you want identifiers for subsets, it's also related to identifiers.
14:33:21 <hadleybeeman> BernadetteLoscio: So it's to have identifiers for subsets, and a way to access subsets?
14:33:41 <phila> I talked about this yesterday at SemWebPro (Paris) and used this slide to illustrate it http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/1105_phila_semwebpro/#(14)
14:33:41 <hadleybeeman> annette_g: Primarily it's about access. A corollary of that is that they need identifiers.  The sections should reference each other.
14:34:00 <hadleybeeman> BernadetteLoscio: It would be nice. We could give an example? It's hard to see how to adjust the document.
14:34:17 <hadleybeeman> annette_g: I wrote this in the OpenMSI use case. They allow selection of subsets of the data.
14:34:35 <hadleybeeman> ...The data is terabytes, so too big to work with by download.
14:34:42 <hadleybeeman> BernadetteLoscio: Okay, I'll look at it.
14:34:48 <phila> q+ to say that subsetting is something for next iteration of the doc
14:34:48 <hadleybeeman> ...I don't know how to include this yet.
14:34:54 <phila> ack e
14:35:22 <phila> ericstephan: +1 There are a numebr of communities that need to do this
14:35:37 <newton> s/numebr/number
14:35:47 <phila> ... I think this has an opportunity for domains that don't do that, and are burdened by always using the full dataset
14:35:59 <phila> ... Some domains will be very opiniated about how to do that
14:36:02 <fradulov> present+ fradulov
14:36:08 <phila> q?
14:36:12 <MTCarrasco> There should be a way for URIs to directly identify at least the variants: language, format, version and subsets (granularity)
14:36:12 <hadleybeeman> ack mt
14:36:17 <MTCarrasco> http://dragoman.org/comuri.html#variant
14:36:38 <MTCarrasco> http://dragoman.org/webdata.html#granularity
14:36:48 <phila> MTCarrasco: The question of granularity is more general. We need to address the variance of things like language, format etc. For subsetting - it's not the same
14:36:58 <hadleybeeman> q?
14:37:01 <phila> ... if you want a single term that's a few bytes, you don't want 2 TB of data
14:37:12 <phila> ... And this should be done with URIs
14:37:14 <hadleybeeman> +1 to using URIs as identifiers
14:37:14 <phila> ... this is in my draft
14:37:30 <phila> phila: +1 on using URis for this as well
14:37:43 <phila> MTCarrasco: Mememnto is not always webby.
14:37:52 <phila> ... It relies on an off-the Web protocol
14:37:53 <hadleybeeman> ack phila
14:37:53 <Zakim> phila, you wanted to say that subsetting is something for next iteration of the doc
14:38:16 <hadleybeeman> phila: on Memento: I'm not disagreeing, but I think that' s a side issue.
14:38:29 <hadleybeeman> ...I think we all agree that we need URIs for identifiers, and subsets are useful.
14:38:41 <hadleybeeman> ...I'd suggest we make a note that we are talking about this, and Spatial Data are talking about this.
14:38:45 <ericstephan> At times it is cheaper to move the code to the data to do something such as extraction.
14:38:52 <BernadetteLoscio> we're gonna include a note about this
14:38:57 <hadleybeeman> ...It will take a while to sort this.
14:38:57 <BernadetteLoscio> yes
14:39:22 <hadleybeeman> ...I'd suggest we have an action for the editors to note in the document that we are discussing this, and talking to Spatial Data on the Web too.
14:40:12 <phila> action: BernadetteLoscio to add note to the BP doc that we are discussing the issue of subsetting data, and identifying those subsets. And that we're talking to the SDW WG about this issue too
14:40:13 <trackbot> Created ACTION-216 - Add note to the bp doc that we are discussing the issue of subsetting data, and identifying those subsets. and that we're talking to the sdw wg about this issue too [on Bernadette Farias Loscio - due 2015-11-13].
14:40:48 <phila> issue: What to say about subsetting data, and identifying those subsets. This to be done in conjunction with SDW WG about this issue
14:40:48 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-208 - What to say about subsetting data, and identifying those subsets. this to be done in conjunction with sdw wg about this issue.  Please complete additional details at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/208/edit>.
14:41:04 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: There was another message from Erik about Webby data about typed links
14:41:15 <phila> ... I think I'll raise an issue about this and discuss it by mail
14:41:23 <phila> ... I will send a message about this
14:41:34 <phila> ... We are reviewing the document and complementing it with examples
14:41:41 <phila> ... We really need some help with some sections
14:41:51 <phila> ... One of them is the data preservation section created by Christophe
14:41:56 <phila> ... Who is not in the WG any more
14:42:14 <phila> ... So I need some help to create some examples. This is a subject that isn't my thing
14:42:15 <gatemezi> Is the term "Webby data" owl:sameAs "Data on the Web"?
14:42:20 <phila> q+ to offer to contact CG
14:42:33 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: We need help to write some text
14:42:42 <phila> ... And they're not all to the same standard
14:42:47 <hadleybeeman> q?
14:42:54 <hadleybeeman> ack phila
14:42:54 <Zakim> phila, you wanted to offer to contact CG
14:42:54 <phila> ack q
14:43:24 <hadleybeeman> phila: I will take an action to write to Christophe (who hasn't disappeared, he just isn't in the group anymore) and ask if he can help the group by writing some examples.
14:43:29 <hadleybeeman> BernadetteLoscio: Great. I can do this with him.
14:43:31 <phila> action: phila to write to Christophe and ask for help with writing the examples for data preservation
14:43:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-217 - Write to christophe and ask for help with writing the examples for data preservation [on Phil Archer - due 2015-11-13].
14:43:38 <gatemezi> I would suggest to clarify the term in our glossary?!
14:43:42 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: The other section I need help with is data access
14:43:51 <phila> ... But I was discussing this with Newton before the meeting
14:44:03 <phila> ... We;re going to change some stuff in that section. Again we need help and feedback
14:44:12 <newton> s/We;re/We're
14:44:29 <phila> ... We don't have examples now. We need to review this section. I hope to have the section done by next meeting
14:44:38 <phila> ... We also need help with data identifiers examples
14:44:46 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: You said, phil, that you;d do that
14:45:06 <newton> s/you;d/you'd
14:45:21 <hadleybeeman> phil: I will.
14:45:30 <phila> action: phila To add the example for the data identifiers section
14:45:30 <trackbot> Created ACTION-218 - Add the example for the data identifiers section [on Phil Archer - due 2015-11-13].
14:45:38 <hadleybeeman> BernadetteLoscio: I created a document — feel free to improve the example.
14:45:43 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: Everyone is free to improve things
14:46:01 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: Please use the same example in each case
14:46:12 <phila> ... So we have how to apply the BPs to the smae example
14:46:25 <Ig_Bittencourt> I can help with examples to Data Vocabularies.
14:46:29 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: I also need help with the data vocabularies section, with examples#
14:46:36 <phila> ... In the way that...
14:47:06 <phila> ... Also some of the BPs need rewriting, especially in the intended outcomes section.
14:47:26 <phila> ... Don't know if others agree, but there is a uniformity/standard we're trying to reach for each BP
14:47:37 <phila> ... 'It should be possible to...'
14:47:51 <phila> ... I think it would be nice to have this type of description for each BP
14:48:02 <hadleybeeman> q?
14:48:08 <phila> ... But I don't feel comfortable changing BPs I didn't write
14:48:09 <antoine> q+
14:48:19 <hadleybeeman> ack antoine
14:48:37 <phila> antoine: I was editing this section. not sure I'll have time to do a lot of work on it, but I can't do examples in next week or so
14:48:51 <phila> ... Is it the case that the intended outcomes in the vocab section are not good
14:48:59 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: Not quality, the way it's written
14:49:22 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: If the Wg agrees, I think it's noice to have a common form of words (scribe interpretation)
14:49:29 <phila> phila: +1 on uniformity of style
14:49:40 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: It's about style, not substance
14:49:51 <annette_g> +1 for consistency
14:50:12 <phila> antoine: OK, I can try, but I don't see a consistent style, e.g. no. 11
14:50:18 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: That's why I need help.
14:50:21 <phila> q+
14:50:28 <hadleybeeman> ack phila
14:50:47 <hadleybeeman> phila: @BernadetteLoscio, could you point us toward one BP where you think the style is right?
14:51:04 <hadleybeeman> ...I can then look at the ones I've written and will edit them to match the style you want.
14:51:08 <MTCarrasco> Common style +1
14:51:15 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: BP for data formats anda data versioning, quality - all follow the smae style
14:51:25 <hadleybeeman> s/smae/same
14:51:33 <phila> ... until no. 9 they're the same, then they become less consistent
14:51:44 <phila> ... IDs, vocabs, need changing
14:52:02 <phila> q+ minor Q - reuse or re-use?
14:52:07 <antoine> q+
14:52:23 <hadleybeeman> phila: Thanks, I will look at the ones I need to.
14:52:39 <hadleybeeman> ... Also, I will do a "native English" check.
14:52:58 <hadleybeeman> BernadetteLoscio: Is it best to start this now, or after this review is done?
14:53:02 <phila> phila: Offers a native speaker check
14:53:23 <annette_g> without!!
14:53:59 <ericstephan> I rely on my technical editor to tell me ;-)
14:54:11 <phila> reuse as the verb
14:54:16 <ericstephan> I can ask
14:54:20 <phila> also no hyphen for the nous
14:54:25 <annette_g> :)
14:54:36 <hadleybeeman> Hadley: from the dictionary: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reuse
14:55:00 <BernadetteLoscio> q?
14:55:04 <newton> q+
14:55:13 <hadleybeeman> ack antoine
14:55:21 <phila> antoine: Rewriting the intended outcome...
14:55:35 <annette_g> *loll, lau-fer*
14:55:40 <phila> ... is the idea that every IO starts "it should be possible to...
14:56:03 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: Basically, yes. The idea was to use RFC terms whuch we've got rid of
14:56:13 <phila> antoine: Then feel free to do it in the vocab sedction
14:56:35 <hadleybeeman> s/sedction/section
14:56:45 <phila> ... So if we're doing that then I woinder why we decided to drop the RFC keywords. Anyway, I don't have tme to do it
14:56:50 <hadleybeeman> s/tme/time
14:56:58 <phila> antoine: You can do it, I don't think I have time to
14:57:10 <ericstephan> Sorry I have to go....
14:57:11 <hadleybeeman> q?
14:57:22 <phila> (scribe notes tone is more, I could but I don't think I want to, but I'm not going to stop you, you're the editor)
14:57:38 <hadleybeeman> ack newton
14:57:48 <hadleybeeman> q+ newton
14:58:06 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: I included a new section in the doc 'BP Benefits'
14:58:12 <phila> phila: Really likes that new section
14:58:13 <BernadetteLoscio> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#bp-benefits
14:58:24 <phila> phila: It actually matches what we're doing in the Share-PSI work
14:58:39 <hadleybeeman> q?
14:58:46 <phila> BernadetteLoscio: So it's an action on the group to review
14:58:59 <phila> ack n
14:59:27 <phila> newton: My point is about a possible new BP about content negotiation. Berna and I werre talking about this. WE don't have a BP about conneg. Should we have?
14:59:34 <yaso> +1 to newton
14:59:37 <annette_g> q+
14:59:54 <hadleybeeman> phila: my initial reaction is: where do we stop?
15:00:01 <MTCarrasco> q+
15:00:02 <yaso> maybe citing conneg in the best practices that already exists
15:00:03 <annette_g> +1 to phil
15:00:13 <newton> -> we have an item about content negotiation http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/#implementation
15:00:17 <hadleybeeman> ...If we tell people they should use conneg, which I think they should — then where do we stop? Should we tell them to use HTML?
15:00:23 <hadleybeeman> zakim, close the queue
15:00:23 <Zakim> ok, hadleybeeman, the speaker queue is closed
15:00:32 <annette_g> q-
15:00:44 <phila> hadleybeeman: Please continue this on the list, but we're out of time.
15:00:52 <annette_g> I was just going to say what Phil said.
15:01:03 <BartvanLeeuwen> thx hadleybeeman
15:01:03 <laufer> bye bye all
15:01:04 <newton> I'll start a thread in the mailing list
15:01:05 <BartvanLeeuwen> bye
15:01:05 <Ig_Bittencourt> thanks. Bye
15:01:09 <annette_g> bye all!
15:01:10 <BernadetteLoscio> thanks
15:01:12 <phila> ... back on vocabs next week. Probably DQV next week, but as always editors, please think about what you most want
15:01:15 <MTCarrasco> bye
15:01:15 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:01:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/06-dwbp-minutes.html phila
15:01:22 <annette_g> annette_g has left #dwbp
15:01:25 <gatemezi> Bye 1
15:01:35 <gatemezi> s/ 1/!
15:01:47 <yaso> bye all!
15:02:02 <phila> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:02:05 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:02:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/06-dwbp-minutes.html phila
15:02:51 <phila> chair: hadley
15:03:02 <phila> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20151106
15:03:08 <phila> regrets+ Dee
15:03:12 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:03:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/06-dwbp-minutes.html phila
15:29:26 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
15:31:20 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
15:34:29 <newton_> newton_ has joined #dwbp
15:35:37 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
15:38:30 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
16:09:24 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
17:05:55 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
17:58:51 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dwbp
18:00:40 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
18:15:31 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
18:26:12 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
19:53:36 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
19:54:45 <newton_> newton_ has joined #dwbp
20:23:41 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:25:01 <newton_> newton_ has joined #dwbp
20:25:48 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:27:41 <newton__> newton__ has joined #dwbp
20:28:45 <newton___> newton___ has joined #dwbp
20:29:43 <newton__> newton__ has joined #dwbp
20:30:45 <newton___> newton___ has joined #dwbp
20:32:08 <newto____> newto____ has joined #dwbp
20:33:01 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:34:17 <newton_> newton_ has joined #dwbp
20:35:20 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:36:18 <newton_> newton_ has joined #dwbp
20:37:21 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:38:24 <newton_> newton_ has joined #dwbp
20:39:26 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:40:25 <newton__> newton__ has joined #dwbp
20:41:18 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:51:22 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp
20:54:05 <newton_> newton_ has joined #dwbp
20:57:19 <newton__> newton__ has joined #dwbp
22:15:56 <newton> newton has joined #dwbp