W3C RDF Core Working Group IRC Chat Logs for 2001-09-21

13:01:03 Users on #rdfcore: @logger_1

13:01:03 <ChanServ> ChanServ has changed the topic to:

13:01:03 <ChanServ> This channel has been registered with ChanServ.

13:43:12 <Jema> Hi. I'm Jema, the Jena meeting assistant

13:43:42 <bwm> -open

13:43:44 <Jema> RDFCore WG Telecon 2001-09-21 is now open

13:43:44 <Jema> The agenda can be found at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0288.html

13:43:44 <Jema> Agenda item 1: Allocate scribe

13:51:43 * AaronSw waves

13:51:59 * AaronSw waves

13:58:18 <spetschu-scribe> spetschu-scribe is now known as spetschu

13:58:29 <spetschu> ... don't want to give anyone ideas ;)

13:58:50 <AaronSw> :-)

13:59:07 <bwm> I's a watchin'

13:59:13 <jan> jan is now known as dajobe

13:59:29 <DanC> hmm... no ops.

13:59:32 <Jema> Hi. I'm Jema, the Jena meeting assistant

13:59:38 <DanC> Jema, help

13:59:43 <AaronSw> yeah, danbri registered the channel and didn't give any of us access.

13:59:44 <dajobe> DanC: remember danbri forgot the password :)

13:59:44 <AaronSw> -help

13:59:46 <Jema> Jema recognises the following commands:

13:59:46 <Jema> -hi // tests whether Jema is alive

13:59:46 <Jema> -help // prints this help message

13:59:46 <Jema> -open // begin the meeting

13:59:46 <Jema> -close // close the meeting

13:59:47 <Jema> -agenda [next|prev|n] // next|prev|nth agenda item

13:59:49 <Jema> -aob ... // add an item of another business

13:59:51 <Jema> -action owner/... // record an action item

13:59:53 <Jema> -decision ... // record a decision

14:00:08 <AaronSw> danbri forgot his password? sheesh

14:00:17 <AaronSw> perhaps we should ask the server ops for help....

14:00:34 <DanC> or pick another channel... say #rdf-core

14:00:53 <DanC> -agenda 1

14:01:44 * AaronSw dials

14:01:50 <AaronSw> Phone: +1 630 536 3003 room #3003

14:02:03 <AaronSw> +Aaron

14:02:27 <AaronSw> AaronSw is now known as scribe-Aaron

14:02:32 <DanC> phpht. can't set topic

14:02:36 <scribe-Aaron> ROLL CALL

14:02:41 <scribe-Aaron> danbri, regrets

14:02:45 <scribe-Aaron> eric, absent

14:02:52 <dajobe> art? you in telecon?

14:02:55 <ArtB> +ArtB

14:02:58 <DanC> tentative regrets from me.. not sure which telcon to attend.

14:03:02 <scribe-Aaron> artb, present

14:03:11 <scribe-Aaron> +daveb

14:03:16 <scribe-Aaron> -frankb

14:03:17 <Jema> command not recognised

14:03:19 <scribe-Aaron> jeremy, here

14:03:22 <scribe-Aaron> danc, regrets

14:03:24 * DanC recommends waiting a bit to call roll... it's not possible to join a W3C telcon early, so it's not really fair to consider folks late until at least xx:05

14:03:55 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: we'll pick up missing at the end

14:04:03 <scribe-Aaron> rond, absent, bill, jos here

14:04:09 <scribe-Aaron> rael, absent

14:04:16 <scribe-Aaron> jang present; ora present

14:04:24 <scribe-Aaron> martyn, regrets

14:04:25 <mdean> mdean is now known as mdean_

14:04:30 <scribe-Aaron> ykitahara, absent

14:04:32 <scribe-Aaron> gk, regrets

14:04:40 <scribe-Aaron> kopchenov, kwon, absent

14:04:42 <scribe-Aaron> ora, present

14:04:45 <scribe-Aaron> manola, present

14:04:52 <scribe-Aaron> nakamura, absent

14:04:55 <scribe-Aaron> petschulat, present

14:04:58 <scribe-Aaron> pierre, absent

14:05:00 <scribe-Aaron> aaron, scribe

14:05:05 <scribe-Aaron> miked, present

14:05:08 <scribe-Aaron> guha, missing

14:05:13 <scribe-Aaron> pat hayes, missing?!

14:05:23 <scribe-Aaron> sergey, missing

14:05:37 <scribe-Aaron> eric miller, present

14:05:55 <bwm> -aob rdf:rdf

14:06:12 <scribe-Aaron> - Dave Beckett

14:06:44 <scribe-Aaron> jema has crashed...

14:06:49 <scribe-Aaron> Next telecon: same time, next week

14:06:53 <scribe-Aaron> review minutes

14:07:00 <scribe-Aaron> APPROVED

14:07:19 <scribe-Aaron> review of actions

14:07:45 <scribe-Aaron> billD: questions 2001-09-07#6

14:07:59 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: you've done the action, we can perhaps do another item in AOB

14:08:01 * DanC joins the telcon

14:08:25 <scribe-Aaron> All actions considered completed

14:09:08 <scribe-Aaron> discussion of agenda items w/ sergey, pat missing...

14:09:16 <scribe-Aaron> moving to progress with PRIMER subgroup

14:09:44 <scribe-Aaron> eric: spent some time putting together outline, identifying core documents

14:09:54 <scribe-Aaron> ... hoping to get group of interested people on telecon

14:10:04 <scribe-Aaron> ... wants to get information out first

14:10:10 <scribe-Aaron> Trying to get people to own portions of the primer

14:10:23 <scribe-Aaron> Wednesay at 10AM

14:10:27 <scribe-Aaron> does not work for aaron

14:10:36 <scribe-Aaron> works for billd, frank manola

14:10:55 <scribe-Aaron> eric: separate telecon to kick it off, might be a large chunk of time

14:11:06 <scribe-Aaron> ... thought it'd be better use of time, report back to larger group

14:11:12 <scribe-Aaron> danc: rather do it here, at this telecon

14:11:23 <scribe-Aaron> ... recommend people volunteer by writing stuff

14:11:50 <scribe-Aaron> eric: trying to build a table of contents

14:12:01 <scribe-Aaron> ... willing to do it here, if chair wants

14:12:03 <scribe-Aaron> ... want to make sure we all agree on outline

14:12:15 <scribe-Aaron> ... might be more time than chair might have wished

14:12:24 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: I'd like it here.

14:12:47 <scribe-Aaron> jeremy: prefer not to have it in core telecon time

14:13:22 <scribe-Aaron> eric: not saying we'll have a separate list... just a kickoff conferenece

14:13:27 <scribe-Aaron> ... of course reporting back at core meeting

14:14:02 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: try and find a time that works for all, if not, we'll allocate a chunk of time

14:14:32 <scribe-Aaron> frankm: in addition, we can have a good amount of dialog via email, and drafting text

14:14:52 <scribe-Aaron> ... bit theoretical to divide ahead of time

14:15:07 <scribe-Aaron> ... can have some concrete stuff to go on

14:15:17 <scribe-Aaron> eric: i absolutely agree

14:15:28 <scribe-Aaron> ... just hoping to get it out, and we establish common base

14:15:41 <scribe-Aaron> ... using list with PRIMER: syntax and get writing

14:15:50 * DanC missed a lot of stuff from last week... goes to re-read minutes...

14:16:17 <scribe-Aaron> -action Eric Miller / Get out TOC of primer stuff

14:16:18 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#1

14:16:19 <DanC> I hope the primer TOC has pointers to existing materials.

14:17:11 <em> DanC, yes thats the goal

14:17:13 <scribe-Aaron> -action Eric Miller / Organize teleconference if needed, if not, ask for telecon time

14:17:14 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#2

14:17:24 <scribe-Aaron> +Sergey

14:17:36 <DanC> I can't find this decision about discussing the primer on the list in last week's minutes.

14:17:44 <scribe-Aaron> 7: Issue: rdfs-no-cycles-in-subClassOf Frank Manola

14:17:52 <scribe-Aaron> -item 7

14:17:53 <Jema> command not recognised

14:17:56 <scribe-Aaron> -help

14:17:56 <Jema> Jema recognises the following commands:

14:17:56 <Jema> -hi // tests whether Jema is alive

14:17:56 <Jema> -help // prints this help message

14:17:57 <Jema> -open // begin the meeting

14:17:57 <Jema> -close // close the meeting

14:17:57 <Jema> -agenda [next|prev|n] // next|prev|nth agenda item

14:17:59 <Jema> -aob ... // add an item of another business

14:18:01 <Jema> -action owner/... // record an action item

14:18:02 <scribe-Aaron> -agenda 7

14:18:03 <Jema> -decision ... // record a decision

14:18:18 <scribe-Aaron> Sergey: at F2F, I argued against dropping the restriction... company relied on it

14:18:28 <scribe-Aaron> came to conclusion that having the restriction is not essential

14:18:40 <scribe-Aaron> ... the tool can have a policy independent of the language

14:18:50 <scribe-Aaron> ... enforced by the specific application

14:18:58 <scribe-Aaron> ... Now, i'd go ahead with removing restriction

14:19:03 * DanC cheers

14:19:13 <scribe-Aaron> Proposal: to resolve issue rdfs-no-cycles-in-subClassOf by allowing cycles

14:19:13 <scribe-Aaron> of subClassOf properties. The meaning of a cycle of subClassOf

14:19:13 <scribe-Aaron> properties being an assertion that the classes involved have the same

14:19:13 <scribe-Aaron> members. A more formal specification of the meaning will be given

14:19:13 <scribe-Aaron> in the model theory.

14:19:48 <scribe-Aaron> +Pat

14:20:08 * DanC seconds the proposal

14:20:24 <scribe-Aaron> Frank: slight change to the wording, after talking to Pat

14:20:39 <scribe-Aaron> s/allowing cycles/deleting restriction prohibiting cycles/

14:21:10 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: test cases decision separate from wording

14:21:13 <scribe-Aaron> Any dissent?

14:21:23 <scribe-Aaron> Any dissent to the no dissent?

14:21:32 <scribe-Aaron> Unanimous decision.

14:21:37 <scribe-Aaron> No abstentions.

14:21:47 <DanC> RESOLVED.

14:21:49 <scribe-Aaron> -decision restriction subclass cycles are removed

14:21:59 * OL congratulates the wg

14:22:05 * em raises hand

14:22:39 * em just wants to make sure Pat will reflect this decision back to the JC

14:22:42 <scribe-Aaron> jeremy: syntactic issues should be separate from semantic ones

14:22:50 <scribe-Aaron> ... now just looks like a syntactic issue

14:22:53 * scribe-Aaron agrees

14:23:14 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: let's separate approval of test case, from test case directory structure

14:23:22 <scribe-Aaron> danc: except that test case includes its name

14:23:29 * OL is sure that Pat and Ora both will (reflect the decision, that is)

14:23:31 <scribe-Aaron> ... bit weird to approve it and then change it's name...

14:23:43 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: editorial change not much of a problem

14:24:10 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: would sure be nice to have.... kinda hard to ascertain status from minutes, and links, etc.

14:24:16 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: let's put it off to next week

14:24:41 <scribe-Aaron> daveb, frankm, jos, i agree

14:24:45 <scribe-Aaron> jos: perhaps a more complex cycle

14:25:17 <scribe-Aaron> -action DanC / Place testcase in the proper place in directory structure once that place is decided

14:25:18 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#3

14:26:06 <scribe-Aaron> -action Pat Hayes / Take the subclassof decision back to DAML Joint Committee

14:26:06 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#4

14:26:30 <scribe-Aaron> pat: were loops in subpropertyof prohibited?

14:26:42 <scribe-Aaron> danc: i think so...

14:27:03 <DanC> "A property can never be declared to be a subproperty of itself, nor of any of

14:27:03 <scribe-Aaron> A property can never be declared to be a subproperty of itself, nor of any of its own subproperties.

14:27:03 <DanC> its own subproperties. " -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/#s2.3.3

14:27:32 <scribe-Aaron> the subpropertyOf decision should also be removed... needs testcase and formal proposal

14:27:46 <scribe-Aaron> -action Frank Manola / present similar resolution and test case for subPropertyOf cycles

14:27:47 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#5

14:27:57 <scribe-Aaron> -next

14:28:00 <Jema> command not recognised

14:28:04 <scribe-Aaron> -agenda next

14:28:17 <scribe-Aaron> 8: Model Theory WD

14:28:17 <scribe-Aaron> Propose: Authorize publication of the Model theory WD at:

14:28:25 <scribe-Aaron> sergey: what does this change?

14:28:32 <scribe-Aaron> danc: we all have different ideas of the current situation

14:28:43 <scribe-Aaron> ... is there an explicit enumeration of changes to the spec?

14:28:54 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: I don't think it changes the spec at all... afaik

14:29:32 <scribe-Aaron> ... it says that treatment of domain and range is different than RDFS, but we've agreed that should change

14:29:48 <scribe-Aaron> JanG: the model theory is in agreement with the previous point we agreed on

14:30:06 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: we'll have it on the web forever, and obliged to accept comments on it

14:30:11 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: perfectly happy with that

14:30:28 <scribe-Aaron> FrankM: One comment people might make is inconsistency with MT and specs

14:30:38 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: later versions OK?

14:30:40 <scribe-Aaron> Absolutely.

14:30:46 <scribe-Aaron> BillD: Will this be a REC?

14:31:15 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: you get questions from weirdos in perpituity

14:31:19 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: I'm used to that.

14:31:34 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: I hope this eventually replaces RDF M&S 1.0...

14:31:42 <scribe-Aaron> Sergey: I think I got it... it's early in the morning, tho

14:31:58 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: Purpose of W3C is to get people to put there names on documents

14:32:08 <scribe-Aaron> FrankM: you can go on another vacation, sergey

14:32:13 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: anyone not happy publishing?

14:32:20 <scribe-Aaron> -decision publish the model theory draft

14:32:21 <scribe-Aaron> Woohoo!

14:32:24 * ArtB applauds Pat!

14:32:35 <scribe-Aaron> ...might need a slightly better drawing, some say

14:32:44 <scribe-Aaron> Bwm: a work of art, no changes!

14:33:02 <scribe-Aaron> -action DanC / Take Model Theory thru publication process as Staff Content

14:33:02 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#6

14:33:17 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: Acknowledgements can't be on top of the document

14:33:24 <scribe-Aaron> ... minor tidying up

14:33:40 <scribe-Aaron> ... don't expect it out today, probably Wednesday... but maybe today

14:34:24 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: prettier picture is just fine

14:34:39 <scribe-Aaron> -decision minor editorial changes are allowed to MT before publication

14:34:42 <scribe-Aaron> -agenda 10

14:34:55 <scribe-Aaron> DanBri, absent... did report by email

14:35:05 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: reported that he expected to have WD next weds...

14:35:09 <scribe-Aaron> may be too late to review it on Fri

14:35:19 <scribe-Aaron> ... will go on agenda, if it arrives

14:35:23 <scribe-Aaron> -agenda 11

14:35:33 <scribe-Aaron> 11: Propose: approve test case given in

14:35:34 <scribe-Aaron> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0109.html

14:35:43 <scribe-Aaron> Jeremy: it's an XML error, rather than an RDF error

14:35:53 <scribe-Aaron> ... should have a few to catch people who don't use XML infrastructure

14:36:05 <scribe-Aaron> jos, daveb, bwm have looked at test case

14:36:22 <scribe-Aaron> aaron has looked at test case

14:36:40 <scribe-Aaron> -action Jeremy Caroll / Add a comment to explain why it's an error in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/att-0109/01-error001.rdf

14:36:41 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#7

14:36:50 <scribe-Aaron> -decision test case http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/att-0109/01-error001.rdf is approved

14:37:01 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: is the complementing test case approved

14:37:05 <scribe-Aaron> ... apparently so

14:37:50 <scribe-Aaron> http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/amp-in-url/test001 is approved

14:38:17 <scribe-Aaron> err, http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/amp-in-url/test001.rdf

14:39:45 <scribe-Aaron> FrankM leaves

14:40:10 <scribe-Aaron> -action Art Barstow / action to update http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/amp-in-url/test001.rdf to include comment explaining that & needs to be viewed as &amp;

14:40:11 <Jema> Jema notes action 2001-09-21#8

14:40:15 <scribe-Aaron> -decision http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/amp-in-url/test001.rdf is approved with above caveat

14:40:21 <scribe-Aaron> no dissent

14:40:33 <DanC> RESOLVED unanimously.

14:40:33 <scribe-Aaron> -agenda 12

14:40:42 <scribe-Aaron> 12: Test cases that don't fit the RDF/XML to

14:40:43 <scribe-Aaron> paradigm.

14:40:43 <DanC> does jema note decisions?

14:40:43 <scribe-Aaron> Jos has volunteered to write up a proposal for entailment tests.

14:40:57 <scribe-Aaron> yes, apparently ... they get emailed to the list after the meeting

14:41:16 <scribe-Aaron> Jos: I think this is a simple problem... i guess we need some conventions

14:41:21 <DanC> have you been telling jema about decisions we're making?

14:41:29 <scribe-Aaron> yes.

14:41:33 <scribe-Aaron> ... i'm so glad we have model theory to refer to

14:41:46 <scribe-Aaron> ... we just need some way to combine the pieces together... we need a way to describe that

14:42:03 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: when you use the model theory in this context, you need to be careful about RDF/RDFS distinciton

14:42:26 <scribe-Aaron> ... just replied to Jeremy Carroll about RDFS entailments which are not RDF entailments

14:42:40 <scribe-Aaron> Jos: I understand... added -rdfcore switch to do that in our software

14:42:58 <scribe-Aaron> ... the structure we have now has no problem

14:43:11 <scribe-Aaron> ... schema issues require this kind of functionality in my opinion

14:43:19 <scribe-Aaron> ... lots of cross combinations

14:43:41 <scribe-Aaron> ... we need to reuse things... just need descriptions of entailment

14:43:45 <scribe-Aaron> ... and tools with the same interface

14:44:02 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: my reaction was that meaning is not obvious to me, not a logic geek

14:44:08 <scribe-Aaron> ... I was asking "what is this?"

14:44:46 <scribe-Aaron> Jos: the abstraction of the axioms was confusing

14:44:56 <scribe-Aaron> ... we just need 1, 2, 3, 4... with different range and domain

14:45:02 <scribe-Aaron> ... and say it's valid... it's possible

14:45:11 <scribe-Aaron> Bwm: I just want you to write up clearly how they work

14:45:29 <scribe-Aaron> Jos: two steps... 1-1 mapping

14:45:50 <scribe-Aaron> ... I agree... machine understanable description

14:46:12 <scribe-Aaron> Jeremy: I have a program that goes thru the zip and knows what to do

14:46:26 <scribe-Aaron> ... if we have different instructions... clear to a program... it's much hard to write regression test software

14:46:33 <scribe-Aaron> ... we need this for high quality RDF tools

14:46:37 <scribe-Aaron> ... it's a must

14:46:53 <scribe-Aaron> Jos: description of A, B, C entails D... not too difficult

14:46:56 <scribe-Aaron> ... we need that, tho

14:47:06 <scribe-Aaron> JanG: we need machine-readable manifest

14:47:12 <scribe-Aaron> ... to see if it's parser tests, or entailment

14:47:46 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: seems like two issues. one is what they are and how they work

14:48:02 <scribe-Aaron> Jos: it refers to the model theory.... i think it's good for the model theory

14:48:35 <scribe-Aaron> -action Jos / write up something to describe these entailment tests (with help from Pat)

14:48:45 <scribe-Aaron> Jeremy: quite happy with Jan's proposal to have a manifest

14:49:02 <scribe-Aaron> JanG: just have a machine readable manifest with a list of parser tests

14:49:12 <scribe-Aaron> ... could call it manifest.rdf ... it could be in RDF!

14:49:21 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: we need someone to work this up

14:49:25 <scribe-Aaron> ... art?

14:49:38 <scribe-Aaron> Art: can jan do a proposal

14:49:40 <scribe-Aaron> jan: sure

14:49:49 <scribe-Aaron> -action Jan Grant / write up a proposal for a parser test manifest

14:50:08 <scribe-Aaron> daveb, i have some stuff with the parser tests work

14:50:16 <scribe-Aaron> Aaron: I have some software

14:50:29 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: I'd like Art to collect the stuff and point to it from test cases spec

14:51:25 * OL thinks it is the RDF stalker

14:51:47 <scribe-Aaron> bwm: end of the agenda... i didn't give you enough work to do

14:51:53 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: Chair is to be congratulated!

14:52:14 <scribe-Aaron> AOB: Bill on parseTypes

14:52:26 <scribe-Aaron> ... sent to the list, had some feedback (mainly from GK)

14:52:33 <scribe-Aaron> ... want to write it up now, in a less-featured form

14:52:43 <scribe-Aaron> ... it should be on the list Mon, we should have a yes/no on Friday

14:53:39 <scribe-Aaron> BillD: What we have in current M&S stands

14:53:46 <scribe-Aaron> ... future implementors namespace-qualify

14:53:51 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: just for new parseTypes?

14:54:02 <scribe-Aaron> BillD: yes... or make it look so

14:54:10 <scribe-Aaron> Jeremy: might influence daml:collection

14:54:18 <scribe-Aaron> BillD: Is that a namespace?

14:54:36 <scribe-Aaron> Jeremy: parsers tend to hard-code the prefix 'daml:'

14:54:47 <scribe-Aaron> ... whatever the current state of the namespace binding... they tend to do that

14:54:56 <scribe-Aaron> ... the proposal changes the behavior, as I understand it

14:55:06 <scribe-Aaron> ... it needs to look at the namespace binding

14:55:12 <scribe-Aaron> ... i'm happy, but it is a significant change

14:55:24 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: You've actually seen code?

14:55:32 <scribe-Aaron> Jeremy: I've written it

14:55:39 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: that's a sin against the world!

14:55:53 <scribe-Aaron> BillD: I haven't find anything that says it is namespace-qualified

14:56:08 <scribe-Aaron> Jeremy: it never says anything about namespace

14:56:27 <scribe-Aaron> DanC:.. yuck, it does say that... that's a crime!

14:56:44 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: I don't think there's a great deal of code that this will destroy

14:56:54 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: I think the JC will say "What?"

14:57:10 <scribe-Aaron> MikeD: there are about 7 parsers... i think they hard-code it

14:57:20 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: parser at W3C doesn't hard code it

14:57:48 <scribe-Aaron> DaveB: daml:collection space was donated to my parser by a DAML researcher

14:58:27 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: I wanted to as Mike if he thinks parsers are in deep dodo

14:58:34 <scribe-Aaron> Mike: probably relatively easy to fix

14:58:55 <scribe-Aaron> DanC: if daml is bound to something else, you can't pay attention to it!

14:59:13 <scribe-Aaron> -action BillD / Take proposal to the list next week on parseType

14:59:21 <scribe-Aaron> BillD: are you busy next week, Pat?

14:59:25 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: What a silly question...

14:59:35 <scribe-Aaron> BillD: I'd like a model theory bit for the primer

14:59:52 <scribe-Aaron> Pat: tried to find a web resource, but couldn't find a good one... all too simple or too esoteric

15:00:16 <scribe-Aaron> -action BillD / annoy pat until there's a Model theory primer piece

15:00:23 <scribe-Aaron> -close

15:00:41 <ArtB> -help

15:01:27 <bwm> she's not listening - she's trying to connect to the mail server - our mail servers have recently ben failing intermittently

15:04:55 <bwm> -help

15:04:59 <bwm> -hi

15:05:03 <bwm> -close

15:05:05 <bwm> -close

15:05:07 <bwm> -close