W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > September 2009

Re: [ADMIN] Minutes of 1 September 09 telecon

From: Leora Morgenstern <leora@cs.nyu.edu>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:22:53 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <60431.68.174.71.185.1254234173.squirrel@webmail.cims.nyu.edu>
To: "Axel Polleres" <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Cc: leora@cs.nyu.edu, public-rif-wg@w3.org
What exactly does an addendum to the minutes mean? Can you give examples
in previous minutes?

Also, why put this as an addendum into the Sept. 1 minutes if indeed it
was discussed on August 25?

I would be happy to make the changes; I'm just not sure that the
discussion would fit into the Sept. 1 minutes, especially since both the
referenced emails, and the threads they engendered, don't seem to have any
postings between August 17 and September 15.

Leora


> wasn't meant to be put into the minutes, but indeed as
> an addendum to the minutes... I think all the issues have been
> discussed thereafter.
>
> Axel
>
> p.s.: regrets for today's call.
>
> On 29 Sep 2009, at 14:50, Leora Morgenstern wrote:
>
>> Axel,
>>
>> > For the records: There were some small changes on DTB and some
>> > discussions about it:
>> >
>> > 1) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0002.html
>> > 2) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0011.html
>> > 3) I think I asked in the last TC whether we can/shall change the
>> > non-uniformity of the list-functions in DTB, which have a
>> different format
>> > (informal mappings only) to all the other functions and predicates
>> in
>> > DTB.
>>
>> I checked the minutes of the August 25 telecon (which you scribed),
>> and
>> indeed, it seems that you did bring this up.
>>
>> However, I have no recollection of this being discussed at the Sept. 1
>> telecon, nor do my notes reflect it, so unless I hear from someone
>> that
>> they do remember this being discussed at the Sept. 1 telecon, I
>> think it
>> is best not to add this discussion to the minutes.
>>
>> > I could try to tackle that, but not before two weeks from now.
>> >
>> > With the resolution to go to CR, should I consider these
>> > resolved/accepted?
>>
>> >
>> > Axel
>> >
>> > p.s.: Belated regrets due to arrival of our child ;-).
>>
>> I have added you to the regrets list.
>> Congratulations!
>>
>> >
>> > Leora Morgenstern wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Attached are the minutes of the 1 September 2009 telecon.
>> >>
>> >> Please let me know of any corrections.
>> >>
>> >> Best regards,
>> >> Leora
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D.
>> >> Visiting Research Scientist, Courant Institute of Mathematical
>> Sciences
>> >> http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> W3C <http://www.w3.org/>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>   RIF Telecon 1-Sept-09
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>     01 Sep 2009
>> >>
>> >> Agenda
>> >> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0037.html
>> >
>> >>
>> >> See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-irc>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>     Attendees
>> >>
>> >> Present
>> >>     Harold Boley, Jos de Bruijn, Mark Dean, John Hall, Sandro
>> Hawke,
>> >>     Stella Mitchell, Leora Morgenstern, Christian de Sainte Marie,
>> >>     Chris Welty
>> >> Regrets
>> >>     Michael Kifer
>> >> Chair
>> >>     Chris Welty
>> >> Scribe
>> >>     Leora Morgenstern
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>     Contents
>> >>
>> >>     * Topics <#agenda>
>> >>          1. admin <#item01>
>> >>          2. Liaison <#item02>
>> >>          3. Action Review <#item03>
>> >>          4. Exit Criteria <#item04>
>> >>          5. Publications <#item05>
>> >>          6. Implementations <#item06>
>> >>          7. Test Cases <#item07>
>> >>     * Summary of Action Items <#ActionSummary>
>> >>
>> >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       admin
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> Scribe: LeoraMorgenstern
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       Liaison
>> >>
>> >> sandro, chris: OWL, like RIF, relies on XSD 1.1., and that is
>> still in
>> >> candidate recommendation.
>> >>
>> >> sandro: prognosis for XML schema datatypes is not promising.
>> >> ... OWL will have an appendix referring to XML schema datatypes.
>> >> ... and RIF can do something similar.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> next item
>> >>
>> >> Nothing else in liaison.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> next item
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> *ACTION:* sandro to make sure if OWL does a normative
>> >> appendix for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also
>> >> work for RIF. [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action01]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-903 - Make sure if OWL does a normative
>> >> appendix for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also
>> >> work for RIF. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-09-08].
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       Action Review
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> close action-902
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> ACTION-902 Look at message from Nick B. and check FLD
>> >> schema closed
>> >>
>> >> close action-898
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> ACTION-898 Answer faq 3.9 closed
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       Exit Criteria
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Exit_Criteria
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> zakim ??p0 is me
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> P0
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> zakim P0 is me
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> Thanks Jos
>> >>
>> >> Chris: The exit criteria for RIF are listed at
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Exit_Criteria
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: I am concerned that Chris's revision to my proposal ---
>> >> namely, reducing the requirement from implementing a dialect of
>> FLD to
>> >> merely specifying the dialect --- is putting the bar too low.
>> >> ... I don't think it's too high a burden to require an
>> implementation.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: I think it's an unnecessary burden.
>> >> ... Regarding Sandro's point that someone can just flip through FLD
>> >> and figure out how to have some sort of (trivial?) instantiation:
>> >> Someone can also just say that they have an implementation.
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: Shouldn't they at least have to show that they can read and
>> >> write XML?
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Implementation tests the dialect, not FLD.
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: I won't object; just wanted to make the point.
>> >>
>> >> Harold: Should we also require a syntax and semantics for the
>> dialect
>> >> specification?
>> >>
>> >> Chris thereupon made that change to the Exit Criteria.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799
>> >> <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799
>> >
>> >> as RIF CR Exit criteria
>> >>
>> >> <josb> +1
>> >>
>> >> <StellaMitchell> +1
>> >>
>> >> <Harold> +1
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> +1
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> +1
>> >>
>> >> <LeoraMorgenstern> +1
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> +1
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799
>> >> <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Exit_Criteria&oldid=10799
>> >
>> >> as RIF CR Exit criteria
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       Publications
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Editors need to make changes to their Last Call documents:
>> BLD,
>> >> PRD,
>> >>
>> >
>> >> , SWC, FLD, Core
>> >> ... Needs to be done by next week's meeting.
>> >> ... Assignments: Jos, SWC; Chris,
>> >>
>> >
>> >> ; Christian, PRD; Harold, BLD, FLD, Core.
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: Even if no changes have been made, one needs to note in the
>> >> document that there have been no changes since Last Call draft.
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> target publication date: Setp 17
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> try to approve WD pubs of Test and UCR on Sept 15.
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> PROPOSED: Our Last Call drafts (Core, BLD, PRD, DTB,
>> SWC, and
>> >> FLD) are ready to be published as Candidate Recommendations
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> +1
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> +1 (W3C)
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> (IBM)
>> >>
>> >> <Harold> +1 (NRC)
>> >>
>> >> <josb> +1 (FUB)
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> +1 (OMG)
>> >>
>> >> <StellaMitchell> +1 (self)
>> >>
>> >> <LeoraMorgenstern> +1 (self)
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> RESOLVED: Our Last Call drafts (Core, BLD, PRD, DTB,
>> SWC, and
>> >> FLD) are ready to be published as Candidate Recommendations
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: Note that the statement of no changes or changes to last
>> call
>> >> drafts is CRITICAL PATH, and therefore should be done today or
>> tomorrow.
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> "Change since the 3 July draft...." or "Changes since the
>> >> Second Last Call draft of 3 July..."
>> >>
>> >> <josb> tomorrow is fine for SWC changes statement
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       Implementations
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Since we have moved last call documents to candidate
>> >> recommendation, we are now in the call for implementations period.
>> >> ... We had originally talked about a two-month period for
>> >> implementations.
>> >> ... To get out of CR, we need implementations.
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: Yes, those are in the exit criteria.
>> >>
>> >> <sandro>
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/How_to_Submit_an_Implementation_Report
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: we want to point people to the above wiki page.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Now is the time to follow up with people who indicated in
>> the
>> >> comments that they would be interested in providing an
>> implementation.
>> >> ... We need to get commitments from these people that they will do
>> >> this in this period.
>> >> ... Let's begin by making a list of people who will do
>> implementations.
>> >>
>> >> csma: ILOG is working on an implementation. A month ago, we had a
>> >> first prototype running, so we probably have more going on now.
>> >>
>> >> sandro: I don't know if I'll get one done.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Someone in the XML group at IBM made a RIF-based rule
>> storage
>> >> system. Really a demo of XML X-query technology, but they did take
>> >> some rules and translated them to RIF, and stored them in RIF-
>> XML, and
>> >> queried them.
>> >> ... question: does that count as a RIF implementation?
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action02]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - try
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: Mike Dean has an implementation.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Chris to try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded
>> in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action03]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-904 - Try to dig up XML RIF store [on
>> >> Christopher Welty - due 2009-09-08].
>> >>
>> >> mdean: RIF implementation is in progress.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Silk will be an implementation of BLD.
>> >>
>> >> csma: Gary mentioned he was doing something, but I don't know the
>> >> status of it now.
>> >> ... will send Gary a message, asking for status.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to ask Gary about status of
>> >> implementation [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action04]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-905 - Ask Gary about status of
>> >> implementation [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08].
>> >>
>> >> csma: I think Adrian is working with tibco on an implementation
>> of PRD.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: maybe we should have a RIF Dev mailing list, similar to
>> OWL dev?
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> *ACTION:* sandro request creation of public-rif-dev
>> [recorded
>> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action05]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-906 - Request creation of public-rif-
>> dev [on
>> >> Sandro Hawke - due 2009-09-08].
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Rolf Gruetter has said that his group at WSL needs to have
>> >> disjunction in rule heads.
>> >>
>> >> Note: Gruetter did not say anything about his group actually
>> >> developing an implementation
>> >>
>> >> csma: OntoBroker has some sort of implementation of BLD
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Alexander Riazanov working on an implementation that
>> converts
>> >> BLD to TPTP.
>> >>
>> >> Harold: He has been on vacation; but I'll try to talk to him
>> about that.
>> >> ... There needs to be some web page on implementation of OntoBroker
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: Or better yet, send in an implementation report, as my wiki
>> >> page specifies.
>> >> ... Doing that is very quick.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Currently the public information about OntoBroker's
>> >> implementation is inconsistent. ontoprise web page says there's a
>> RIF
>> >> implementation and links to OntoBroker web page, but OntoBroker's
>> web
>> >> page says nothing.
>> >> ... What about Tom Gordon. Is he an implementor?
>> >>
>> >> Harold: I don't think he's an implementor. He has a system LKIF,
>> which
>> >> is for legal knowledge.
>> >> ... I don't believe he will implement RIF: he has more of a
>> >> theoretical interest in whether one can represent legal knowledge
>> >> using RIF.
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> Chime
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> Chimezie Ogbuji
>> >>
>> >> Discussion also on Adreas Abecker's comments and Chimezie Ogbuji's
>> >> comments.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> Nick Bassiliades
>> >>
>> >> Harold: Nick Bassiliades has been following RIF; does defeasible
>> >> rules; unclear as to whether he'll actually do an implementation
>> of RIF.
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> CR dreadline Oct 23rd, friday before the conferences....
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: Let's make deadline for implementations October 23, so
>> people
>> >> will be able to announce it before the rules conferences.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: We'll revisit this topic at each telecon.
>> >>
>> >> csma: will restart work on RIF XML soon.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>       Test Cases
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Axel had made an all built-ins test case
>> >> ... And that test case seems to indeed include /all/ built-ins
>> >>
>> >> Stella: I think it would be better to split it up somehow.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Perhaps by data-type?
>> >> ... There are definitely some typos, like "listeral" instead of
>> >> "literal"
>> >>
>> >> Stella: Perhaps organize it by string predicates, number
>> predicates,
>> >> etc?
>> >>
>> >> <josb> (I wanted to say exactly what Chris just said)
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: what's the problem with it being so big?
>> >>
>> >> Stella: If it fails, it's hard to figure out why.
>> >> ... can we split it by positive guards, negative guards, etc?
>> >>
>> >> Sandro: We can group it by the things people are most likely to
>> >> implement
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Stella to refactor All Builtins testcase
>> [recorded
>> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action06]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-907 - Refactor All Builtins testcase [on
>> >> Stella Mitchell - due 2009-09-08].
>> >>
>> >> Stella: I can refactor the all built-ins case
>> >> ... There are all sorts of issues still to be dealt with, with
>> respect
>> >> to the test cases.
>> >> ... Especially with all the changes in the documents, the
>> >> specifications, etc.
>> >> ... We need more than 15 minutes to go through this.
>> >>
>> >> <StellaMitchell>
>> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jul/0026.html
>> >>
>> >> Chris: Let's make this a priority for the next telecon, since the
>> set
>> >> of test cases will be very important to the implementors.
>> >> ... What do we do with unapproved test cases? Require changes? Drop
>> >> them?
>> >> ... We do need an Assert/Retract case
>> >>
>> >> csma: We need an Assert /Retract case that is different from a
>> Modify.
>> >> ... I don't have a case in mind, but it probably should be a
>> negative
>> >> case; that you can't assert something about an object that you've
>> >> retracted.
>> >> ... I had a discussion with Adrian about this. He initially didn't
>> >> agree; then we had a discussion, including Changhai Ke and Gary,
>> who
>> >> agreed with me. But Adrian has not replied, and therefore there has
>> >> been no conclusion.
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to fix/update AssertRetract test case
>> >> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-
>> minutes.html#action07]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-908 - Fix/update AssertRetract test
>> case [on
>> >> Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08].
>> >>
>> >> csma: I need to get a consensus on this, and then either modify the
>> >> test case myself, or get someone to do it.
>> >> ... I think the assert test case is fine.
>> >> ... However, there is no XML for it.
>> >>
>> >> Chris: do we have anything to generate XML for PRD?
>> >>
>> >> csma: Not yet.
>> >>
>> >> <StellaMitchell> jacc
>> >>
>> >> Stella: can the XML be generated automatically using a tool like
>> jacc?
>> >>
>> >> Chris: What about the other PRD test cases? Won't this be a problem
>> >> for all of them?
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> *ACTION:* Christian to check into XML syntax for PRD test
>> >> cases [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action08]
>> >>
>> >> <trackbot> Created ACTION-909 - Check into XML syntax for PRD test
>> >> cases [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-09-08].
>> >>
>> >> Chris: 2 remaining open issues in Working Group:
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> PROPOSED: close issue-37 as it is addressed by the draft
>> note
>> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
>> >>
>> >> <StellaMitchell> +1
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> +1
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> +1
>> >>
>> >> <csma> +1
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> +1
>> >>
>> >> <josb> +1
>> >>
>> >> <mdean> +1
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: close issue-37 as it is addressed by the draft
>> note
>> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> PROPOSED: close issue-38 as it is addressed by the draft
>> note
>> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> +1
>> >>
>> >> <csma> +1
>> >>
>> >> <sandro> +1
>> >>
>> >> <mdean> +1
>> >>
>> >> <johnhall> +1
>> >>
>> >> <LeoraMorgenstern> +1
>> >>
>> >> <josb> +1
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> RESOLVED: close issue-38 as it is addressed by the draft
>> note
>> >> on RIF combination with XML Data
>> >>
>> >> <StellaMitchell> +1
>> >>
>> >> <ChrisW> NEXT MEETING IN TWO WEEKS!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>     Summary of Action Items
>> >>
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Chris to try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action03]
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to ask Gary about status of
>> implementation
>> >> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-
>> minutes.html#action04]
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to check into XML syntax for PRD test
>> >> cases [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action08]
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Christian to fix/update AssertRetract test case
>> >> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-
>> minutes.html#action07]
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* sandro request creation of public-rif-dev
>> [recorded
>> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action05]
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* sandro to make sure if OWL does a normative
>> appendix
>> >> for XSD 1.1, that it's phrased in a way that makes it also work for
>> >> RIF. [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action01]
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* Stella to refactor All Builtins testcase
>> [recorded
>> >> in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action06]
>> >> *[NEW]* *ACTION:* try to dig up XML RIF store [recorded in
>> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html#action02]
>> >>
>> >> [End of minutes]
>> >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl
>> >> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm>
>> >> version 1.135 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
>> >> $Date: 2009/09/01 16:31:33 $
>> >>
>> >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>     Scribe.perl diagnostic output
>> >>
>> >> [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
>> >> This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
>> >> Check for newer version at
>> >> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
>> >> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/>
>> >>
>> >> Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
>> >>
>> >> Succeeded: s/tipco/tibco/
>> >> Found Scribe: LeoraMorgenstern
>> >> Inferring ScribeNick: LeoraMorgenstern
>> >> Default Present: Leora_Morgenstern, ChrisW, Sandro, Harold,
>> >> Stella_Mitchell, +39.047.101.aaaa, josb, johnhall, csma, Mike_Dean
>> >> Present: Leora_Morgenstern ChrisW Sandro Harold Stella_Mitchell
>> >> +39.047.101.aaaa josb johnhall csma Mike_Dean
>> >> Regrets: MichaelKifer
>> >> Agenda:
>> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Aug/0037.html
>> >> Got date from IRC log name: 01 Sep 2009
>> >> Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/09/01-rif-minutes.html
>> >> People with action items: chris christian sandro stella try
>> >>
>> >> WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
>> >> You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> [End of scribe.perl
>> >> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm>
>> >> diagnostic output]
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Dr. Axel Polleres
>> > Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of
>> Ireland,
>> > Galway
>> > email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D.
>> http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora
>>
>>
>
> --
> Dr. Axel Polleres
> Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland,
> Galway
> email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D.
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 14:23:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 29 September 2009 14:23:42 GMT