13:59:18 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/08/11-ldp-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/08/11-ldp-irc ←
13:59:20 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
13:59:22 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be LDP ←
13:59:22 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute ←
13:59:23 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:59:23 <trackbot> Date: 11 August 2014
13:59:50 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started ←
13:59:58 <Zakim> +Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud ←
14:00:28 <Zakim> +Matt
Zakim IRC Bot: +Matt ←
14:00:37 <deiu> Zakim, Matt is me
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, Matt is me ←
14:00:37 <Zakim> +deiu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +deiu; got it ←
14:00:38 <Zakim> +EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: +EricP ←
14:00:55 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ashok_Malhotra ←
14:01:16 <deiu> Zakim, mute me s'il te plait
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, mute me s'il te plait ←
14:01:16 <Zakim> I don't understand 'mute me s'il te plait', deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'mute me s'il te plait', deiu ←
14:01:26 <deiu> bah, learn some French then
Andrei Sambra: bah, learn some French then ←
14:01:30 <deiu> Zakim, mute me please
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, mute me please ←
14:01:30 <Zakim> deiu should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: deiu should now be muted ←
14:01:48 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
14:01:58 <Zakim> +Alexandre
Zakim IRC Bot: +Alexandre ←
14:01:59 <SteveS> Zakim, [IBM] is me
Steve Speicher: Zakim, [IBM] is me ←
14:02:00 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveS; got it ←
14:03:02 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
14:05:19 <ericP> scribenick: ericP
(Scribe set to Eric Prud'hommeaux)
<ericP> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2014.08.11
<ericP> chair: Arnaud
<ericP> regrets: johnarwe
<ericP> topic: Admin
14:05:19 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
14:05:25 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
14:05:25 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it ←
14:05:30 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:05:30 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
14:06:55 <ericP> RESOLVED: Approve the minutes of 4 Aug 2014
RESOLVED: Approve the minutes of 4 Aug 2014 ←
14:06:58 <Arnaud1> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2014-08-04
Arnaud Le Hors: http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2014-08-04 ←
14:07:42 <SteveS> I’m not going to SemTech, can make this meeting
Steve Speicher: I’m not going to SemTech, can make this meeting ←
14:07:48 <ericP> next meeting: 18 Aug
next meeting: 18 Aug ←
14:08:09 <ericP> topic: Tracking of Open Actions
14:08:46 <ericP> sandro: [re: action 145 -- figure out where JSON-LD context goes]
Sandro Hawke: [re: ACTION-145 -- figure out where JSON-LD context goes] ←
14:09:16 <Zakim> +??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←
14:09:18 <ericP> ... i need to send mail to the list saying what we're going to do
... i need to send mail to the list saying what we're going to do ←
14:09:24 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
<bblfish> Zakim, IPCaller is me
Henry Story: Zakim, IPCaller is me ←
<Zakim> +bblfish; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish; got it ←
14:09:39 <ericP> ... anyone know who will provide the @context
... anyone know who will provide the @context ←
14:09:42 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P11 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P11 is me ←
14:09:42 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
14:09:55 <nmihindu> Zakim, mute me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, mute me ←
14:09:55 <Zakim> nmihindu should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: nmihindu should now be muted ←
14:09:57 <ericP> Arnaud: iirc, nandana will provide the file and update the primer accordingly
Arnaud Le Hors: iirc, nandana will provide the file and update the primer accordingly ←
14:10:17 <nmihindu> Sandro, I can provide the context file.
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Sandro, I can provide the context file. ←
14:10:57 <ericP> ericP: [re: action 147]
Eric Prud'hommeaux: [re: ACTION-147] ←
14:11:02 <Arnaud> action-147
14:11:03 <trackbot> action-147 -- Eric Prud'hommeaux to Follow up on yves's way to turn 2nn into a number without waiting for the draft to go to rfc -- due 2014-08-04 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-147 -- Eric Prud'hommeaux to Follow up on yves's way to turn 2nn into a number without waiting for the draft to go to rfc -- due 2014-08-04 -- OPEN ←
14:11:03 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/147
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/147 ←
14:11:12 <ericP> ... anyone ahve contacts within the IETF Applications WG
... anyone ahve contacts within the IETF Applications WG ←
14:12:46 <ericP> action: ericP to ask John Arwe (on a Wednesday) how to switch to IETF applications WG
ACTION: ericP to ask John Arwe (on a Wednesday) how to switch to IETF applications WG ←
14:12:46 <trackbot> Created ACTION-149 - Ask john arwe (on a wednesday) how to switch to ietf applications wg [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2014-08-18].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-149 - Ask john arwe (on a wednesday) how to switch to ietf applications wg [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2014-08-18]. ←
14:13:28 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
14:13:37 <codyburleson> zakim, IPcaller.a is me
Cody Burleson: zakim, IPcaller.a is me ←
14:13:37 <Zakim> +codyburleson; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +codyburleson; got it ←
14:13:55 <ericP> topic: Paging Spec
14:14:14 <ericP> Arnaud: we were almost ready to publish last week.
Arnaud Le Hors: we were almost ready to publish last week. ←
14:14:40 <ericP> ... but John pointed out that we forget to set and end date for the review period
... but John pointed out that we forget to set and end date for the review period ←
14:15:28 <ericP> ... there's one outstanding comment on the paging size: commenter would rather control the number of resources rather than triples
... there's one outstanding comment on the paging size: commenter would rather control the number of resources rather than triples ←
14:15:51 <ericP> Ashok: agree with commenter
Ashok Malhotra: agree with commenter ←
14:16:01 <ericP> ... what if it's a non-RDF resource?
... what if it's a non-RDF resource? ←
14:17:36 <TallTed> +1 limit really *should* be based on bytes, not triples, not resources
Ted Thibodeau: +1 limit really *should* be based on bytes, not triples, not resources ←
14:17:51 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:17:51 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
14:17:53 <ericP> sandro: i hadn't thought about Ashok's point, but I think that the original comment is not that big a deal because the number of triples and number of resoruces in a basic container is either 1:1 or 2:1
Sandro Hawke: i hadn't thought about Ashok's point, but I think that the original comment is not that big a deal because the number of triples and number of resoruces in a basic container is either 1:1 or 2:1 ←
14:18:23 <ericP> ... but i strongly believe we should use bytes 'cause that's what machine's have to allocate
... but i strongly believe we should use bytes 'cause that's what machine's have to allocate ←
14:18:41 <SteveS> I wonder why we are opening this up, as commentor isn’t suggesting we change to bytes
Steve Speicher: I wonder why we are opening this up, as commentor isn’t suggesting we change to bytes ←
14:18:49 <ericP> Arnaud: the mechanism allows us to use different units
Arnaud Le Hors: the mechanism allows us to use different units ←
14:19:25 <ericP> sandro: my arg is that the client only knows the amount of available memory.
Sandro Hawke: my arg is that the client only knows the amount of available memory. ←
14:20:00 <sandro> sandro: my arg is that paging is offered because of limits on bandwidth and storage, both of which are allocated in bytes
Sandro Hawke: my arg is that paging is offered because of limits on bandwidth and storage, both of which are allocated in bytes [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:20:03 <ericP> ... counter arg is that the server has an easier time calculating the number of triples
... counter arg is that the server has an easier time calculating the number of triples ←
14:20:59 <codyburleson> Speaking is Miguel.
Cody Burleson: Speaking is Miguel. ←
14:21:00 <ericP> codyburleson: client can set limits on both
Cody Burleson: client can set limits on both ←
14:21:39 <ericP> sandro: we don't say in the spec what happens if you provide multiple limits. logical choice is the stop at the first limit the server hits
Sandro Hawke: we don't say in the spec what happens if you provide multiple limits. logical choice is the stop at the first limit the server hits ←
14:22:07 <ericP> Arnaud: these things can be fine-tuned in another version of the spec, but if we want it in this version, now's the time
Arnaud Le Hors: these things can be fine-tuned in another version of the spec, but if we want it in this version, now's the time ←
14:22:18 <ericP> ... we can also add it as "at risk"
... we can also add it as "at risk" ←
14:24:16 <bblfish> makes sense to me that one should be able to use bytes for client
Henry Story: makes sense to me that one should be able to use bytes for client ←
14:24:27 <ericP> PROPOSED: client and send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits.
PROPOSED: client can send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits. ←
14:24:42 <TallTed> s/client and send/client can send/
14:24:55 <ericP> PROPOSED: marked at risk: client can send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits.
PROPOSED: marked at risk: client can send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits. ←
14:26:19 <ericP> PROPOSED: marked at risk: client can send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits. At-risk fallback is to have only triple limits.
PROPOSED: marked at risk: client can send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits. At-risk fallback is to have only triple limits. ←
14:27:13 <sandro> sandro: and we'll ask the commenter if this is what they meant / really want
Sandro Hawke: and we'll ask the commenter if this is what they meant / really want [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:28:11 <ericP> +1
+1 ←
14:28:12 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
14:28:21 <deiu> +0
Andrei Sambra: +0 ←
14:28:22 <MiguelAraCo> +1
Miguel Aragón: +1 ←
14:28:26 <nmihindu> +0
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +0 ←
14:28:28 <betehess> +0.0
Alexandre Bertails: +0.0 ←
14:28:30 <SteveS> +0
Steve Speicher: +0 ←
14:28:36 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
14:28:41 <bblfish> +0.7
Henry Story: +0.7 ←
14:29:18 <ericP> Ashok: can we add resouce-count limits?
Ashok Malhotra: can we add resouce-count limits? ←
14:29:29 <ericP> Arnaud: we can invent all sorts of units
Arnaud Le Hors: we can invent all sorts of units ←
14:29:32 <ericP> RESOLVED: Marked at risk: client can send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits. At-risk fallback is to have only triple limits.
RESOLVED: Marked at risk: client can send both triple and byte-count limits. server advised to stop at first one it hits. At-risk fallback is to have only triple limits. ←
14:29:32 <bblfish> What's the point?
Henry Story: What's the point? ←
14:31:06 <ericP> ericP: can the client calculate the number of triples for any member limit?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: can the client calculate the number of triples for any member limit? ←
14:31:13 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
14:31:24 <ericP> Arnaud: no, on the first page, you might get lots of non-member triples
Arnaud Le Hors: no, on the first page, you might get lots of non-member triples ←
14:32:25 <ericP> sandro: do we have a standard terminology for this?
Sandro Hawke: do we have a standard terminology for this? ←
14:32:29 <sandro> PROPOSED: Also include at risk, item-count (which is member or contained resource)
PROPOSED: Also include at risk, item-count (which is member or contained resource) ←
14:32:30 <ericP> ... propose "item count"
... propose "item count" ←
14:33:11 <ericP> SteveS: we're adding two features for one comment. concearned about feature creep.
Steve Speicher: we're adding two features for one comment. concearned about feature creep. ←
14:33:31 <ericP> Arnaud: true, but we are responding to other concearns within the WG.
Arnaud Le Hors: true, but we are responding to other concearns within the WG. ←
14:33:45 <sandro> PROPOSED: Also include at risk, item-count (which is members / contained resources, only defined for containers)
PROPOSED: Also include at risk, item-count (which is members / contained resources, only defined for containers) ←
14:33:46 <ericP> ... i'd rather have more stuff At-Risk than do another last call
... i'd rather have more stuff At-Risk than do another last call ←
14:34:27 <ericP> bblfish: the word that you're looking for is the rows in SPARQL result sets.
Henry Story: the word that you're looking for is the rows in SPARQL result sets. ←
14:34:38 <sandro> Or member-count, knowing what we mean.
Sandro Hawke: Or member-count, knowing what we mean. ←
14:34:56 <ericP> ... and the next version can [require SPARQL and] include special requests on graph parts
... and the next version can [require SPARQL and] include special requests on graph parts ←
14:35:19 <Ashok> +1 to member count
Ashok Malhotra: +1 to member count ←
14:35:32 <sandro> PROPOSED: Also include at risk, member-count (which is members / contained resources, only defined for containers)
PROPOSED: Also include at risk, member-count (which is members / contained resources, only defined for containers) ←
14:35:46 <ericP> +1
+1 ←
14:35:46 <codyburleson> +1 to member count
Cody Burleson: +1 to member count ←
14:36:01 <sandro> ... Prefer: return=representation; page-size="500 rdf-triples"
Sandro Hawke: ... Prefer: return=representation; page-size="500 rdf-triples" ←
14:36:04 <SteveS> -0 Thinking rdf-triples is a close enough approx, bytes helps for other needs, adding yet another doesn’t fix too much in my mind
Steve Speicher: -0 Thinking rdf-triples is a close enough approx, bytes helps for other needs, adding yet another doesn’t fix too much in my mind ←
14:36:12 <sandro> ... Prefer: return=representation; page-size="500 members"
Sandro Hawke: ... Prefer: return=representation; page-size="500 members" ←
14:36:18 <sandro> ... Prefer: return=representation; page-size="500000 bytes"
Sandro Hawke: ... Prefer: return=representation; page-size="500000 bytes" ←
14:36:36 <sandro> kB
Sandro Hawke: kB ←
14:36:39 <sandro> kbytes
Sandro Hawke: kbytes ←
14:36:44 <bblfish> -0.4
Henry Story: -0.4 ←
14:36:49 <TallTed> +0.5
Ted Thibodeau: +0.5 ←
14:36:50 <betehess> +0
Alexandre Bertails: +0 ←
14:36:56 <nmihindu> +0
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +0 ←
14:37:11 <Ashok> +1
Ashok Malhotra: +1 ←
14:37:13 <sandro> +1 members
Sandro Hawke: +1 members ←
14:38:24 <sandro> RESOLVED: We'll add text saying that if muliple page-size arguments are present, the server is advised to take the first reached. We also add AT RISK two new unites "members" and "kbytes".
RESOLVED: We'll add text saying that if muliple page-size arguments are present, the server is advised to take the first reached. We also add AT RISK two new unites "members" and "kbytes". ←
14:38:29 <deiu> +0
Andrei Sambra: +0 ←
14:39:06 <Arnaud> Proposal: Publish 2nd Last Call with end date for the review period on 15 September 2014
PROPOSED: Publish 2nd Last Call with end date for the review period on 15 September 2014 ←
14:40:11 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
14:40:13 <ericP> +1
+1 ←
14:40:17 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
14:40:20 <nmihindu> +1
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +1 ←
14:40:56 <betehess> +0 ship it!
Alexandre Bertails: +0 ship it! ←
14:41:00 <SteveS> +1
Steve Speicher: +1 ←
14:41:09 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
14:41:26 <Arnaud> Resolved: Publish 2nd Last Call with end date for the review period on 15 September 2014
RESOLVED: Publish 2nd Last Call with end date for the review period on 15 September 2014 ←
14:41:49 <ericP> topic: Access Control
14:42:05 <ericP> Ashok: disagreement on one issue: ACLs on triples
Ashok Malhotra: disagreement on one issue: ACLs on triples ←
14:42:12 <betehess> I think the requirement (on triple) is a valid requirement
Alexandre Bertails: I think the requirement (on triple) is a valid requirement ←
14:42:24 <ericP> ... i feel this has to be included, possibly as OPTIONAL
... i feel this has to be included, possibly as OPTIONAL ←
14:42:32 <sandro> teach the controversy :-)
Sandro Hawke: teach the controversy :-) ←
14:42:39 <ericP> ... after that, we're ready to go
... after that, we're ready to go ←
14:43:28 <ericP> Arnaud: pushback has been that in HTTP-land, we use resource-level ACLs
Arnaud Le Hors: pushback has been that in HTTP-land, we use resource-level ACLs ←
14:43:57 <ericP> sandro: since this is a Note, let's "teach the controversy", i.e. say that the WG doesn't agree on this and here are the arguments.
Sandro Hawke: since this is a Note, let's "teach the controversy", i.e. say that the WG doesn't agree on this and here are the arguments. ←
14:44:19 <ericP> ... specifically adding that some people feel that it's a bad practice.
... specifically adding that some people feel that it's a bad practice. ←
14:45:13 <betehess> I completely agree with TallTed
Alexandre Bertails: I completely agree with TallTed ←
14:45:39 <ericP> TallTed: we only say "triple-level" once. after that it's a hand-wave. we don't need to specify this.
Ted Thibodeau: we only say "triple-level" once. after that it's a hand-wave. we don't need to specify this. ←
14:46:37 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
14:47:26 <betehess> since when gathering valid use-cases became something controversial???
Alexandre Bertails: since when gathering valid use-cases became something controversial??? ←
14:47:39 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish ←
14:47:42 <ericP> ericP: we're disagreeing about whether to mention the arguments on either side
Eric Prud'hommeaux: we're disagreeing about whether to mention the arguments on either side ←
14:47:59 <ericP> Ashok: i'd rather not as this is a high-level, abstract document
Ashok Malhotra: i'd rather not as this is a high-level, abstract document ←
14:48:19 <ericP> bblfish: there are many ways to read "fine-graind", e.g. per-triple graphs
Henry Story: there are many ways to read "fine-graind", e.g. per-triple graphs ←
14:49:23 <TallTed> q+
Ted Thibodeau: q+ ←
14:49:35 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
Arnaud Le Hors: ack TallTed ←
14:49:45 <ericP> Arnaud: if you look into the document, there are lots of things where we might want to spell out technical points
Arnaud Le Hors: if you look into the document, there are lots of things where we might want to spell out technical points ←
14:49:54 <ericP> TallTed: this feels like implementation details.
Ted Thibodeau: this feels like implementation details. ←
14:50:51 <ericP> sandro: [we should say more because] this is the first time we're having a substantive conversation about ACLs.
Sandro Hawke: [we should say more because] this is the first time we're having a substantive conversation about ACLs. ←
14:51:25 <ericP> bblfish: we have three impls at the resource level
Henry Story: we have three impls at the resource level ←
14:51:31 <ericP> ... doing further could be a lot more work
... doing further could be a lot more work ←
14:51:51 <ericP> Ashok: it could be more work but if it's worthwhile...
Ashok Malhotra: it could be more work but if it's worthwhile... ←
14:52:00 <betehess> doing nothing works as well, but it doesn't solve any use-case
Alexandre Bertails: doing nothing works as well, but it doesn't solve any use-case ←
14:54:25 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Publish Access Control draft as FPWD, as is
PROPOSED: Publish Access Control draft as FPWD, as is ←
14:54:48 <ericP> +0.8
+0.8 ←
14:54:50 <betehess> +1
Alexandre Bertails: +1 ←
14:54:56 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
14:54:58 <Ashok> +1
Ashok Malhotra: +1 ←
14:54:59 <nmihindu> +1
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +1 ←
14:55:04 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
14:55:06 <codyburleson> +0
Cody Burleson: +0 ←
14:55:10 <SteveS> +1
Steve Speicher: +1 ←
14:55:25 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Publish Access Control draft as FPWD, as is
RESOLVED: Publish Access Control draft as FPWD, as is ←
14:55:37 <TallTed> different people seeing different things falls right into Open World -- you have to always expect that you're not seeing everything there is to know about Entity:X
Ted Thibodeau: different people seeing different things falls right into Open World -- you have to always expect that you're not seeing everything there is to know about Entity:X ←
14:55:58 <ericP> topic: Status update
14:56:20 <ericP> Arnaud: BP doc still waiting for approval -- team help please
Arnaud Le Hors: BP doc still waiting for approval -- team help please ←
14:56:38 <ericP> Arnaud: LDP is stuck in CR until we get implementation reports
Arnaud Le Hors: LDP is stuck in CR until we get implementation reports ←
14:57:07 <ericP> topic: LDP Patch
14:57:36 <betehess> strawpoll?
Alexandre Bertails: strawpoll? ←
14:59:33 <ericP> sandro: can we poll more widely?
Sandro Hawke: can we poll more widely? ←
14:59:38 <betehess> this approach was focused on the requirements we agreed on. I would be ok with the other solutions if the requirements were different
Alexandre Bertails: this approach was focused on the requirements we agreed on. I would be ok with the other solutions if the requirements were different ←
14:59:50 <ericP> ... who do we want to ask who would understand the poll with less than 10 mins study?
... who do we want to ask who would understand the poll with less than 10 mins study? ←
15:00:07 <ericP> ... sparql vendors would be natural to ask but they would be biased
... sparql vendors would be natural to ask but they would be biased ←
15:00:32 <ericP> Arnaud: LDPatch representes the status quo so the burden is on other proposals
Arnaud Le Hors: LDPatch representes the status quo so the burden is on other proposals ←
15:01:11 <ericP> sandro: we didn't give a blank check, more conditional based on it being simple
Sandro Hawke: we didn't give a blank check, more conditional based on it being simple ←
15:01:42 <ericP> Arnaud: paging is out of the way. next week we'll focus on LDP Patch.
Arnaud Le Hors: paging is out of the way. next week we'll focus on LDP Patch. ←
15:02:53 <ericP> sandro: i would like see how complicated use cases are handled in LDPatch
Sandro Hawke: i would like see how complicated use cases are handled in LDPatch ←
15:03:12 <bblfish> Sounds good, there could be a number of these, with results in the different formats
Henry Story: Sounds good, there could be a number of these, with results in the different formats ←
15:03:15 <ericP> Arnaud: can you post challenges to the LDP Patch folks and we can use those to decide?
Arnaud Le Hors: can you post challenges to the LDP Patch folks and we can use those to decide? ←
15:03:19 <Zakim> -SteveS
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveS ←
15:03:20 <Zakim> -nmihindu
Zakim IRC Bot: -nmihindu ←
15:03:20 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ashok_Malhotra ←
15:03:21 <Zakim> -Alexandre
Zakim IRC Bot: -Alexandre ←
15:03:21 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
15:03:24 <Zakim> -TallTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed ←
15:03:25 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
15:03:27 <Zakim> -deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: -deiu ←
15:03:29 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
15:03:56 <Zakim> -EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: -EricP ←
15:04:01 <Zakim> -codyburleson
Zakim IRC Bot: -codyburleson ←
15:04:01 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
15:04:01 <Zakim> Attendees were Arnaud, deiu, EricP, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, SteveS, Sandro, TallTed, bblfish, nmihindu, codyburleson
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were Arnaud, deiu, EricP, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, SteveS, Sandro, TallTed, bblfish, nmihindu, codyburleson ←
<ericp> present: Arnaud, deiu, EricP, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, SteveS, Sandro, TallTed, bblfish, nmihindu, codyburleson
15:20:16 <betehess> sandro, any estimate when you'll send the examples or challenge how "simple" LD Path for users and implementers?
(No events recorded for 16 minutes)
Alexandre Bertails: sandro, any estimate when you'll send the examples or challenge how "simple" LD Path for users and implementers? ←
15:20:30 <sandro> In about five minutes
Sandro Hawke: In about five minutes ←
15:20:33 <betehess> cool
Alexandre Bertails: cool ←
15:20:37 <betehess> I appreciate
Alexandre Bertails: I appreciate ←
Formatted by CommonScribe