IRC log of grddl-wg on 2007-02-21
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:51:18 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #grddl-wg
- 15:51:18 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/02/21-grddl-wg-irc
- 15:51:53 [John]
- John has joined #grddl-wg
- 15:55:14 [chimezie]
- chimezie has joined #grddl-wg
- 15:55:26 [chimezie]
- Zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:55:26 [Zakim]
- SW_GRDDL()11:00AM has not yet started, chimezie
- 15:55:27 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see chimezie, John, RRSAgent, danja, Zakim, Simone, DanC_lap, briansuda
- 15:56:07 [john-l]
- C'mon, man, where's the multitasking? ;-)
- 15:56:22 [john-l]
- chimezie: Good morning!
- 15:58:20 [chimezie]
- hello there
- 15:59:06 [danja]
- procedure : out of sweo => pour coffee => into grddl-wg
- 16:00:35 [Zakim]
- SW_GRDDL()11:00AM has now started
- 16:00:42 [Zakim]
- + +1.216.445.aaaa
- 16:00:56 [john-l]
- Zakim, aaaa is john-l.
- 16:00:56 [Zakim]
- +john-l; got it
- 16:01:42 [Zakim]
- +Chimezie_Ogbuji
- 16:01:52 [FabienG]
- FabienG has joined #grddl-wg
- 16:02:31 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 16:02:36 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller.a]
- 16:02:39 [briansuda]
- Zakim, IPcaller is briansuda
- 16:02:39 [Zakim]
- +briansuda; got it
- 16:02:40 [Simone]
- Zakim, IPcaller is Simone
- 16:02:41 [Zakim]
- sorry, Simone, I do not recognize a party named 'IPcaller'
- 16:02:46 [Simone]
- Zakim, IPcaller.a is Simone
- 16:02:48 [Zakim]
- +Simone; got it
- 16:02:51 [Zakim]
- + +1.919.457.aabb
- 16:03:26 [Zakim]
- + +1.913.236.aacc
- 16:03:41 [Zakim]
- +[Sophia]
- 16:03:45 [Simone]
- Zakim, mute me
- 16:03:45 [Zakim]
- Simone should now be muted
- 16:03:50 [DanC_lap]
- Zakim, take up item 1
- 16:03:50 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Convene GRDDL WG meeting of 2007-02-21T11:00-0500" taken up
- 16:03:52 [HarryH]
- HarryH has joined #grddl-wg
- 16:03:55 [DanC_lap]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:03:57 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, briansuda, Simone (muted), +1.919.457.aabb, DanC, [Sophia]
- 16:04:16 [chimezie]
- Zakim, 1.919.457.aabb is HarryH
- 16:04:16 [FabienG]
- Zakim, Sophia is FabienG
- 16:04:16 [Zakim]
- sorry, chimezie, I do not recognize a party named '1.919.457.aabb'
- 16:04:19 [Zakim]
- +FabienG; got it
- 16:04:25 [chimezie]
- Zakim, +1.919.457.aabb is HarryH
- 16:04:25 [Zakim]
- +HarryH; got it
- 16:04:29 [chimezie]
- Zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:04:29 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, briansuda, Simone (muted), HarryH, DanC, FabienG
- 16:04:44 [Simone]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 16:04:44 [Zakim]
- Simone should no longer be muted
- 16:05:17 [HarryH]
- Zakim, pick a scribe
- 16:05:17 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose john-l
- 16:05:30 [HarryH]
- Zakim, pick a scribe
- 16:05:30 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Chimezie_Ogbuji
- 16:05:44 [HarryH]
- Zakim, pick a scribe
- 16:05:44 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Simone
- 16:05:50 [chimezie]
- scribe: Chimezie_ogbuji
- 16:05:54 [Zakim]
- +??P18
- 16:06:04 [HarryH]
- Zakim, pick a scribe
- 16:06:04 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DanC
- 16:06:07 [DanC_lap]
- Regrets+ rreck
- 16:06:16 [HarryH]
- DanC to scribe for next week.
- 16:06:36 [HarryH]
- PROPOSED: to approve GRDDL WG Weekly -- 14 Feb 2007 as a true record
- 16:06:53 [HarryH]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/att-0135/14-grddl-wg-minutes.html
- 16:06:57 [HarryH]
- RESOLVED
- 16:06:58 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 16:07:04 [bwm]
- bwm has joined #grddl-wg
- 16:07:09 [danja]
- zakim, [IPCaller] is danja
- 16:07:09 [Zakim]
- +danja; got it
- 16:07:18 [HarryH]
- Zakim, who's on the phone
- 16:07:18 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who's on the phone', HarryH
- 16:07:28 [HarryH]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:07:28 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, briansuda, Simone, HarryH, DanC, FabienG, ??P18, danja
- 16:07:42 [bwm]
- Zakim, ??p18 is bwm
- 16:07:42 [Zakim]
- +bwm; got it
- 16:07:46 [Zakim]
- +Murray_Maloney
- 16:08:02 [HarryH]
- Zakim, next item
- 16:08:02 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "[#issue-conformance-labels]" taken up
- 16:08:24 [danja]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:08:24 [Zakim]
- danja should now be muted
- 16:08:27 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: wrote up a section on GRDDL-aware agents
- 16:08:32 [DanC_lap]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#sec_agt
- 16:08:38 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: incorporated *most* feedback
- 16:09:18 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: added JJ's security excerpt
- 16:09:26 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: tweak to item 2. not changed yet
- 16:10:03 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: WG seems supportive
- 16:10:34 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: plans to update murray suggestion for step 2
- 16:11:20 [HarryH]
- PROPOSE: to resolve close #issue-conformance-label as per Dan's text in spec as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0140.html with resulting comments edited in as appropriate.
- 16:12:21 [HarryH]
- PROPOSE: to resolve close #issue-conformance-label as per Dan's text in spec as in current text in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec with resulting comments edited in as appropriate.
- 16:12:22 [DanC_lap]
- so I guess I PROPOSE: to include "GRDDL-aware agent" as a conformance-label as described in sections 8 and 9 of http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec v: 1.227 plus Murray's suggestion to step 2
- 16:12:55 [danja]
- s/mailicious/malicious
- 16:12:59 [DanC_lap]
- so I guess I PROPOSE: to include "GRDDL-aware agent" as a conformance-label as described in sections 8 and 9 of http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec v: 1.227 plus Murray's suggestion to step 2, plus a scrub for s/GRDDL processor/GRDDL-aware agent/
- 16:13:14 [HarryH]
- Murray: "...pass documents from trusted sources through a GRDDL processor...."
- 16:13:30 [DanC_lap]
- so I guess I PROPOSE: to include "GRDDL-aware agent" as a conformance-label as described in sections 8 and 9 of http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec v: 1.227 plus Murray's suggestion to step 2, plus a scrub for s/GRDDL processor/GRDDL-aware agent/ and s/GRDDL transform/GRDDL transformation/
- 16:13:42 [HarryH]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:13:42 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, briansuda, Simone, HarryH, DanC, FabienG, bwm, danja (muted), Murray_Maloney
- 16:13:44 [chimezie]
- Murray: security section isn't using consistent language with rest of the spec
- 16:14:34 [briansuda]
- abstain
- 16:14:45 [danja]
- zakim, unmute me
- 16:14:45 [Zakim]
- danja should no longer be muted
- 16:14:53 [chimezie]
- .. we query members for comfort level of PROPOSAL ..
- 16:15:16 [HarryH]
- can't hear very well...
- 16:15:16 [danja]
- sound bad here too
- 16:15:30 [DanC_lap]
- I heard Simone say "it's ok for me" which is clear and then "the procedure may be clear" which wasn't clear
- 16:15:32 [HarryH]
- Simone?
- 16:15:37 [DanC_lap]
- Zakim, who's talking?
- 16:15:47 [HarryH]
- To you think Dan's text editing is okay? Close the issue?
- 16:15:48 [Zakim]
- DanC_lap, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: briansuda (25%), bwm (20%), danja (29%)
- 16:16:07 [HarryH]
- Simone - can you respond in IRC, as I am having difficulty hearing you.
- 16:16:10 [DanC_lap]
- Simone, I'm having trouble hearing; perhaps you could type what you said?
- 16:16:43 [HarryH]
- Fabien?
- 16:16:56 [HarryH]
- abstain
- 16:16:57 [chimezie]
- FabienG: abstains
- 16:17:00 [HarryH]
- bwm?
- 16:17:18 [HarryH]
- bwm doesn't address issue raised....still ambiguous.
- 16:17:28 [chimezie]
- bwm: could you restate the issue?
- 16:17:31 [chimezie]
- if you don't mind?
- 16:18:03 [Zakim]
- -Simone
- 16:18:11 [HarryH]
- Murray?
- 16:18:12 [chimezie]
- danja: should not verbage meant to be informative/normative?
- 16:18:22 [chimezie]
- Murray: minor editorial issues..
- 16:18:28 [Zakim]
- -briansuda
- 16:18:55 [chimezie]
- HarryH: get objections out on table
- 16:19:32 [chimezie]
- bwm: what is the specific criteria for GRDDL-aware agent label
- 16:20:18 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: the text is clear..
- 16:20:19 [danja]
- a triangle is a three-sided triangle?
- 16:20:30 [chimezie]
- bwm: WG members misread the intent of the label defn..
- 16:20:46 [Zakim]
- +??P12
- 16:20:54 [Simone]
- Zakim, +??P12 is Simone
- 16:20:54 [Zakim]
- sorry, Simone, I do not recognize a party named '+??P12'
- 16:20:57 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 16:21:04 [briansuda]
- Zakim, IPcaller is briansuda
- 16:21:04 [Zakim]
- +briansuda; got it
- 16:21:05 [Simone]
- Zakim, P12 is Simone
- 16:21:06 [Zakim]
- sorry, Simone, I do not recognize a party named 'P12'
- 16:21:31 [Simone]
- Zakim, +??P12 is Simone
- 16:21:31 [Zakim]
- sorry, Simone, I do not recognize a party named '+??P12'
- 16:21:41 [Simone]
- Zakim, who's on call please?
- 16:21:41 [Zakim]
- I don't understand your question, Simone.
- 16:21:52 [HarryH]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:21:52 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, HarryH, DanC, FabienG, bwm, danja, Murray_Maloney, ??P12, briansuda
- 16:22:03 [chimezie]
- +q
- 16:22:06 [HarryH]
- Zakim, ??P12 is Simone
- 16:22:06 [Zakim]
- +Simone; got it
- 16:22:21 [chimezie]
- bwm: do the policies confuse the conformance definition...
- 16:23:21 [chimezie]
- Murrays: suggestion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0188.html
- 16:23:32 [DanC_lap]
- so I guess I PROPOSE: to include "GRDDL-aware agent" as a conformance-label as described in sections 8 and 9 of http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec v: 1.227 plus Murray's suggestion to step 2, plus a scrub for s/GRDDL processor/GRDDL-aware agent/ and s/GRDDL transform/GRDDL transformation/
- 16:23:32 [HarryH]
- ack Chime
- 16:23:47 [DanC_lap]
- Murray's suggestion re step 2 is [[ Selectively apply any or all discovered transformations to obtain GRDDL results.
- 16:23:47 [DanC_lap]
- [N.B. Selection may be guided by the agent's capabilities, local security policies
- 16:23:47 [DanC_lap]
- and possibly user/client intervention. ]]
- 16:25:37 [chimezie]
- chimezie: what happens if a local policy prevents the application of any transform - is it a GRDDL-aware agent?
- 16:25:50 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: not too concerned...
- 16:26:10 [DanC_lap]
- 1.228 has the tweak to step 2 applied.
- 16:26:17 [chimezie]
- I think if we describe the conformance criteria in the context of policies (as completely as we can) we will be consistent
- 16:26:29 [DanC_lap]
- so I guess I PROPOSE: to include "GRDDL-aware agent" as a conformance-label as described in sections 8 and 9 of http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec v: 1.228, plus a scrub for s/GRDDL processor/GRDDL-aware agent/ and s/GRDDL transform/GRDDL transformation/
- 16:29:25 [HarryH]
- s/A GRDDL-aware agent is a software module that computes GRDDL results of information resources./A GRDDL-aware agent is a software module that computes GRDDL results of information resources given a local policy..
- 16:31:09 [HarryH]
- A local policy SHOULD allow one to produce one or more GRDDL results on at least one source document.
- 16:31:13 [HarryH]
- ?
- 16:35:13 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: serves editorial right to make changes adhoc as long as they don't violate WG consensus
- 16:35:24 [HarryH]
- PROPOSE: to include "GRDDL-aware agent" as a conformance-label as described in sections 8 and 9 of http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec v: 1.228, plus a scrub for s/GRDDL processor/GRDDL-aware agent/ and s/GRDDL transform/GRDDL transformation/.
- 16:35:58 [HarryH]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:35:58 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, HarryH, DanC, FabienG, bwm, danja, Murray_Maloney, Simone, briansuda
- 16:36:01 [briansuda]
- yes
- 16:36:19 [chimezie]
- sweet
- 16:36:28 [HarryH]
- RESOLVED: to include "GRDDL-aware agent" as a conformance-label as described in sections 8 and 9 of http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec v: 1.228, plus a scrub for s/GRDDL processor/GRDDL-aware agent/ and s/GRDDL transform/GRDDL transformation/.
- 16:37:01 [DanC_lap]
- MM notes in section 8 "step 4 and 5" is tricky.
- 16:37:05 [HarryH]
- We will have the possibility this week of editorial changes, including sharpening definition of local policy and GRDDL-aware agent.
- 16:37:13 [DanC_lap]
- Danc: yes, I'll look into more clear numbering
- 16:37:36 [HarryH]
- Zakim, next item
- 16:37:36 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "[#issue-http-header-links]" taken up
- 16:39:51 [HarryH]
- ACTION: HarryH to bring #issue-http-header-links test with dajobe.
- 16:41:02 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: added IanD's text, cited IETF draft, ...
- 16:41:10 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: done as far as I know
- 16:41:59 [HarryH]
- Zakim, next item
- 16:41:59 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "GRDDL Spec: Last Call" taken up
- 16:42:28 [HarryH]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:42:28 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, HarryH, DanC, FabienG, bwm, danja, Murray_Maloney, Simone, briansuda
- 16:43:16 [briansuda]
- yes
- 16:43:51 [chimezie]
- .. a vote for draft last call is taken up ..
- 16:44:03 [chimezie]
- 1 abstain, 2 nos.. all else: yes..
- 16:44:17 [chimezie]
- bwm: high rate of change, now stable period before last call is taken up
- 16:44:21 [chimezie]
- s/now/no
- 16:45:11 [danja]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:45:11 [Zakim]
- danja should now be muted
- 16:45:24 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: happy to not touch spec..
- 16:45:54 [chimezie]
- Murary: a week to review, incorporate comments, and voete
- 16:45:57 [chimezie]
- s/voete/vote
- 16:47:07 [chimezie]
- Murray: fine with monday as editorial cut off..
- 16:47:48 [chimezie]
- bwm: 2 kinds of comment: editorial and substantitive
- 16:48:04 [chimezie]
- bwm: we will need telecon time to discuss substantial comments. Add editorial comments to after last call
- 16:48:20 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: concurrs with me
- 16:48:25 [danja]
- +1
- 16:48:53 [chimezie]
- bwm: can't review by friday
- 16:49:01 [danja]
- zakim, unmute me
- 16:49:01 [Zakim]
- danja should no longer be muted
- 16:49:31 [chimezie]
- Murray: current draft?
- 16:49:38 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: prefers review of current draft
- 16:49:49 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: 1.228
- 16:49:50 [DanC_lap]
- 1.228
- 16:51:16 [HarryH]
- PROPOSAL: To freeze GRDDL spec draft at 1.228 for a week of reviews, clearly label reviews comments substantive or editorial and go for Last Call next telecon..
- 16:52:28 [HarryH]
- RESOLVED: To freeze GRDDL spec draft at 1.228 for a week of reviews, clearly label reviews comments substantive or editorial and go for Last Call next telecon.
- 16:52:33 [chimezie]
- HarryH: release as a WD?
- 16:52:35 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: no..
- 16:52:51 [Zakim]
- -Murray_Maloney
- 16:53:12 [HarryH]
- Zakim. next item
- 16:53:16 [Zakim]
- +Murray_Maloney
- 16:53:23 [HarryH]
- Zakim, next item
- 16:53:23 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "Primer Document: Going To Last Call?" taken up
- 16:53:48 [chimezie]
- HarryH: bug in RDFa example... no approval from danja
- 16:54:12 [chimezie]
- danja: satisfied..
- 16:54:32 [DanC_lap]
- (danja, you did send comments? Harry and I seem to have missed them in preparing the agenda)
- 16:55:02 [HarryH]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0198.html
- 16:55:31 [HarryH]
- ACTION: Fabien to see what causes this bug in RDFa http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0198.html
- 16:55:36 [HarryH]
- Zakim, next item
- 16:55:36 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "Use-Case Document: Going To Last Call?" taken up
- 16:55:37 [DanC_lap]
- (oh. duh. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0126.html 14 Feb from danja re primer)
- 16:56:04 [danja]
- hmm, can't see it now, but I broke that out in another thread
- 16:56:14 [FabienG]
- GRDDL Use Cases: Scenarios of extracting RDF data from XML documents, v 1.75 2007/02/21 16:32:07 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc43/scenario-gallery.htm
- 16:56:42 [HarryH]
- DanC: Workload reason for taking it to rec track.
- 16:56:43 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: prefer not to take usecases to rec track
- 16:57:57 [chimezie]
- HarryH: if editor wants to go to rec track, we should go..
- 16:58:05 [danja]
- (re. primer the problem I saw was just down to non-sync between text & linked data, now I believe resolved)
- 16:58:33 [chimezie]
- Murray: desire to take usecase doc to rec track..
- 16:59:30 [HarryH]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/
- 16:59:49 [chimezie]
- we should take both or neither to rec track.. (there are dependencies)..
- 16:59:54 [HarryH]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-dawg-uc/
- 17:00:19 [chimezie]
- DanC_lap: when usecases went rec track they had *requirements*...
- 17:02:55 [danja]
- zakim, mute me
- 17:02:55 [Zakim]
- danja should now be muted
- 17:03:30 [chimezie]
- we don't seem to be on the same page about what is going rec track
- 17:04:05 [chimezie]
- HarryH: resource issues with taking test doc to rec track
- 17:04:13 [chimezie]
- Murray: what if test doc and spec conflict?
- 17:04:30 [danja]
- brb, shoe to retrieve (no strong feelings on rec track for aux docs)
- 17:04:53 [HarryH]
- Zakim's who's on the phone?
- 17:04:59 [HarryH]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 17:04:59 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, HarryH, DanC, FabienG, bwm, danja (muted), Simone, briansuda, Murray_Maloney
- 17:05:12 [HarryH]
- The questions are:
- 17:05:14 [DanC_lap]
- (that the tests might say something spec doesn't say is a concern of mine; I'm not aware of any crystal-clear cases.)
- 17:05:15 [HarryH]
- Primer Rec Track?
- 17:05:19 [HarryH]
- Use-case Rec Track?
- 17:05:22 [HarryH]
- Test-Case Rec Track?
- 17:06:07 [chimezie]
- john-l: what is criteria for Rec..
- 17:07:11 [DanC_lap]
- (the main criterion for whether something is a REC is that the WG decides that it should be a REC. Different WGs have different styles. It's up to this WG to decide our approach to what to do with what documents.)
- 17:08:30 [briansuda]
- Primer: (preferably), Use-case: abstain, Test: abstain
- 17:08:47 [danja]
- zakim, unmute me
- 17:08:47 [Zakim]
- danja should no longer be muted
- 17:12:17 [chimezie]
- I intend to clearly express the problem with not know what the criteria for REC track is via email. (beyond 'functional requirements')
- 17:12:58 [chimezie]
- Murray: we benefit more from bringing spec to REC status.. we are short on resources... pushing for 'name recognition'.. we should focus on the spec and test cases...
- 17:13:03 [DanC_lap]
- chime, there are no criteria more important than the preference of WG members. I hope you can give an opinion.
- 17:13:17 [chimezie]
- I don't think we have enough of a 'tutorial' , low learning curve approach to GRDDL w/out the other 2
- 17:16:35 [HarryH]
- We'll do a questionnaire and continue discussion on listserv.
- 17:16:41 [HarryH]
- Zakim, next item
- 17:16:41 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "Test Cases as Rec?" taken up
- 17:16:46 [HarryH]
- Zakim, next item
- 17:16:46 [Zakim]
- agendum 7 was just opened, HarryH
- 17:16:51 [HarryH]
- Zakim open item 8
- 17:16:55 [HarryH]
- Zakim, open item 8
- 17:16:55 [Zakim]
- agendum 8. "Misc Test-Cases nominated for approval" taken up
- 17:18:22 [danja]
- (I got sidetracked making a profile for XSPF without seeing their no-derivs license)
- 17:18:41 [Zakim]
- -DanC
- 17:18:43 [Zakim]
- -Chimezie_Ogbuji
- 17:18:44 [Zakim]
- -bwm
- 17:18:46 [Zakim]
- -Murray_Maloney
- 17:18:48 [Zakim]
- -HarryH
- 17:18:49 [Zakim]
- -john-l
- 17:18:52 [Zakim]
- -briansuda
- 17:18:54 [Zakim]
- -danja
- 17:18:57 [HarryH]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 17:18:57 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/02/21-grddl-wg-minutes.html HarryH
- 17:18:58 [Zakim]
- -Simone
- 17:19:01 [Zakim]
- -FabienG
- 17:19:02 [Zakim]
- SW_GRDDL()11:00AM has ended
- 17:19:03 [Zakim]
- Attendees were +1.216.445.aaaa, john-l, Chimezie_Ogbuji, briansuda, Simone, +1.913.236.aacc, DanC, FabienG, HarryH, danja, bwm, Murray_Maloney
- 17:19:09 [HarryH]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 17:19:09 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/02/21-grddl-wg-minutes.html HarryH
- 17:20:05 [chimezie]
- rrsagent, set logs world-visible
- 17:48:02 [danja]
- danja has joined #grddl-wg
- 18:01:20 [DanC_lap]
- harry, good job on handling the scheduling issues today. I think you provided some leadership and enouraged the WG to stay on the schedule we've agreed with others, but also listened to reasons why we might do otherwise.
- 18:11:38 [danja]
- danja has left #grddl-wg
- 18:23:38 [HarryH]
- HarryH has joined #grddl-wg
- 18:43:49 [DanC_lap]
- harry, good job on handling the scheduling issues today. I think you provided some leadership and enouraged the WG to stay on the schedule we've agreed with others, but also listened to reasons why we might do otherwise.
- 19:30:26 [HarryH]
- Thanks Dan - just hope we got to consensus on GRDDL spec Last Call next telecon :)