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

Re: [ADMIN] Minutes of 1 September 09 telecon

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:48:23 +0100
Cc: "RIF (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <52933F9B-DCC6-4346-AC94-60D1C4B1067F@deri.org>
To: <leora@cs.nyu.edu>

On 29 Sep 2009, at 15:22, Leora Morgenstern wrote:

> What exactly does an addendum to the minutes mean? Can you give  
> examples
> in previous minutes?
>

I meant, it is enough that it was on the list, and all these issues  
have been discussed (and assigned with actions) here:
http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-rif-minutes.html

so, no need to bother further.

thanks,
Axel

> 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
>
>

-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland,  
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 14:49:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 29 September 2009 14:49:11 GMT