13:01:06 logger has joined #rdfcore 13:01:06 Users on #rdfcore: @logger 13:47:15 AaronSw has joined #rdfcore 13:47:20 Zakim has joined #rdfcore 13:47:22 zakim, this is rdfcore 13:47:23 sorry, AaronSw, I do not see a conference named 'rdfcore' 13:47:28 zakim, this will be rdfc 13:47:30 ok, AaronSw 13:47:46 AaronSw has changed the topic to: f 13:47:53 AaronSw has changed the topic to: I already told Zakim. 13:49:15 bwm has joined #rdfcore 13:52:18 G'day Aaron - are we having fun yet? 13:52:25 Zakim, who is here? 13:52:26 sorry, bwm, I don't know what conference this is 13:52:27 On IRC I see bwm, Zakim, AaronSw, logger 13:55:18 fun? 13:56:19 how do we tell zakim what conference this is? 13:56:35 we have to wait till the conference starts 13:56:40 zakim, list conferences 13:56:42 I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM 13:56:54 See, it hasn't started yet. 13:57:16 SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has now started 13:57:23 +??P0 13:57:35 Aha - I wonder who that is. 13:57:46 +??P1 13:57:48 zakim, say "Who's there?" 13:57:49 I don't understand 'say "Who's there?"', AaronSw 13:57:57 Hmf. Zakim needs text2speech ;) 13:58:04 DaveB has joined #rdfcore 13:58:07 + +1.650.965.aaaa 13:58:13 - +1.650.965.aaaa 13:58:18 +Jim_Hendler 13:58:18 zakim, where is 1.650 13:58:20 AaronSw, I do not see a party named 'where'. If you meant to ask a question you need to add '?' 13:58:22 zakim, where is 1.650? 13:58:23 sorry, AaronSw, I do not understand your question 13:58:30 zakim, where is 650? 13:58:31 North American dialing code 1.650 is California 13:58:32 +??P4 13:58:43 Zakim, ??p4 is bwm 13:58:44 +Bwm; got it 13:58:52 gk has joined #rdfcore 13:59:03 em has joined #rdfcore 13:59:12 Zakim, Jim_Hendler is DaveB 13:59:14 +DaveB; got it 13:59:29 I might be joining a little late today. 13:59:38 em has changed the topic to: rdfcore teleconference 2002-09-27 13:59:46 jjc has joined #rdfcore 13:59:46 RRSAgent has joined #rdfcore 13:59:47 * RRSAgent is logging 13:59:59 Whjat's the meeting ID? 14:00:06 jang has joined #rdfcore 14:00:09 zakim, what's the passcode? 14:00:10 7332 14:00:10 the conference code is 7332, AaronSw 14:00:13 +??P2 14:00:20 +??P6 14:00:22 gk is now known as gk-scribe 14:00:32 Zakim, ??p2 is PatrickS 14:00:34 +PatrickS; got it 14:00:36 +AaronSw 14:00:41 zakim, who's here? 14:00:43 On the phone I see ??P0, ??P1, DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, ??P6, AaronSw 14:00:43 DanC has joined #rdfcore 14:00:44 On IRC I see jang, RRSAgent, jjc, em, gk-scribe, DaveB, bwm, Zakim, AaronSw, logger 14:00:47 zakim, ??p6 is GK 14:00:48 +GK; got it 14:01:00 zakim, who's talking? 14:01:02 +??P21 14:01:11 AaronSw, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P0 (21%), Bwm (19%) 14:01:14 +??P22 14:01:20 zakim, ??p21 is JosD 14:01:21 +JosD; got it 14:01:22 Zakim, ??p21 is jos 14:01:23 sorry, bwm, I do not recognize a party named '??p21' 14:01:28 zakim, ??p22 14:01:29 I don't understand '??p22', AaronSw 14:01:30 Zakim, ??P22 is JJC. 14:01:31 +JJC.; got it 14:01:34 JosD has joined #rdfcore 14:01:39 Zakim, who's talking? 14:01:43 zakim, ??p22 is ILRT 14:01:44 sorry, AaronSw, I do not recognize a party named '??p22' 14:01:48 zakim, ??p21 is jos 14:01:50 sorry, bwm, I do not recognize a party named '??p21' 14:01:50 jjc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P0 (45%), Bwm (34%), GK (5%), AaronSw (18%), JJC. (9%) 14:01:54 zakim, ??p0 is ILRT 14:01:54 +ILRT; got it 14:01:59 -ILRT 14:02:05 zakim, ILRT has JanG 14:02:06 sorry, AaronSw, I do not recognize a party named 'ILRT' 14:02:07 quiet now? 14:02:11 no 14:02:15 +EricM 14:02:16 ok, back in a tick 14:02:24 Zakim, who is on the phone? 14:02:26 On the phone I see ??P1, DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK, AaronSw, JosD, JJC., EricM 14:02:33 + +1.650.965.aabb 14:02:36 +??P20 14:02:44 zakim, ??P20 is JanG 14:02:45 +JanG; got it 14:02:50 zakim, 1.650 is Guha 14:02:51 sorry, AaronSw, I do not recognize a party named '1.650' 14:02:54 zakim, ??p1 is Steve 14:02:55 zakim, +1.650.965.aabb is guha 14:02:55 +Steve; got it 14:02:56 +Guha; got it 14:03:05 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:03:06 On the phone I see Steve, DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK, AaronSw, JosD, JJC., EricM, Guha, JanG 14:03:39 +DanC 14:03:40 +Manola 14:03:42 Guha_ has joined #rdfcore 14:03:49 gosh, lots today 14:03:55 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:03:57 danb_lap has joined #rdfcore 14:03:57 On the phone I see Steve, DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK, AaronSw, JosD, JJC., EricM, Guha, JanG, DanC, Manola 14:03:57 +??P26 14:04:02 perhaps we should re-vote with all these people 14:04:06 zakim, ??p26 is Sergey 14:04:08 +Sergey; got it 14:04:10 * danb_lap on his way 14:04:36 zakim, pick a victim 14:04:37 * jang isn't here next week, sorry 14:04:38 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Bwm 14:04:42 heh 14:04:44 +Mike_Dean 14:04:45 zakim, pick a victim 14:04:46 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Mike_Dean 14:05:06 zakim, pick a victim 14:05:07 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose GK 14:05:10 zakim, pick a victim 14:05:12 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DanC 14:05:20 yeah, people goingto/webont next weekend? might affect attendance? 14:05:21 zakim, pick a victim 14:05:22 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Steve 14:06:03 Scribe next week: eric 14:06:11 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:06:13 On the phone I see Steve, DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK, AaronSw, JosD, JJC., EricM, Guha, JanG, DanC, Manola, Sergey, Mike_Dean 14:06:15 mdean has joined #rdfcore 14:06:34 (that's DanC, not danbri) 14:06:40 danbri? 14:06:48 danbri said he'd dial in late 14:06:50 bwm said "Zakim sees... Dan ..." 14:06:58 Regrets: nine 14:07:03 Regrets: none 14:07:09 Agenda: OK 14:07:17 Next telecon: 20021004 14:07:26 Last meeting minutes: 14:07:36 zakim, mute jang 14:07:37 JanG should now be muted 14:07:46 Clarify, there *was* a decision last week 14:07:47 zakim, who's talking? 14:07:58 AaronSw, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: PatrickS (4%), Bwm (62%), GK (25%), DanC (4%) 14:07:59 Status completed actions: 14:08:02 OK 14:08:13 zakim, temporarily mute gk 14:08:14 GK should now be muted 14:08:16 New HLink draft: 14:08:27 zakim, unmute gk 14:08:27 GK should no longer be muted 14:08:29 GK should now be unmuted again 14:08:32 Can anyone review this? 14:08:39 * DaveB suggests AaronSw - you like html, right? 14:08:42 gk-scribe, you've got a lot of noise on your line 14:08:46 No volunteers at this time. 14:08:58 8. semantics untyped literals 14:09:01 eric's message - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0313.html 14:09:07 All have seen Eric's message 14:09:27 Summary: ask chairs to reopen decision for more discussion 14:09:35 * danb_lap phone trouble, retrying 14:09:55 (1) concern with split decision, where group is responsibe to convince others... 14:10:34 (2) Schedule -- WG is overrunning -- decision is likely to extend CR period 14:11:07 If we get back to functional requirements, we may be able to find stronger consensus. 14:11:41 zakim, unmute jang 14:11:43 JanG should no longer be muted 14:11:46 JJC: second proposal; also JosD, Sergey 14:11:53 GK, mind if I mute your line? 14:12:15 BWM: needs new information to reopen. Is reopening within W3C process, if consensus of WG? 14:12:21 q+ 14:12:23 * Zakim sees Jang on the speaker queue 14:12:25 * gk-scribe danbri: any input yet? 14:12:29 dnabri, do you have a problem with reopening the issue 14:12:41 Zakim, who's talking? 14:12:46 zakim, mute gk-scribe 14:12:47 sorry, em, I do not see a party named 'gk-scribe' 14:12:51 jjc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Bwm (12%), GK (89%), AaronSw (30%), JJC. (25%), DanC (24%) 14:12:51 zakim, mute gk 14:12:54 GK should now be muted 14:13:06 * gk-scribe I didn't hear my noise ?-) 14:13:27 Zakim, mute Jjc. 14:13:28 DECISION: reopened on basis activity lead has so requested 14:13:30 'the conference is full, no more parties can be added at this time'! 14:13:34 JJC. should now be muted 14:13:38 heh! 14:13:39 I can't dial in. 14:13:49 we are full 14:13:52 want me to drop out, danbri? 14:13:53 I support re-opening the issue per EricM's msg, fwiw. 14:13:56 nope. 14:14:03 thank you 14:14:21 I also support it 14:14:39 is there anyway to make the telecon larger? if not, i can drop out... 14:14:58 * danb_lap investigating 14:15:11 * gk-scribe eric looking to increase size of conf 14:15:12 eric: I will take care of this here in a second 14:15:39 I'll join soon 14:15:55 +DanBri 14:16:08 wohoo! :) 14:16:27 hm, i didn't hear danbri's join beep 14:16:31 * danb_lap wonders what he missed 14:17:06 q+ to ask about process effcet on other WG 14:17:07 * Zakim sees Jang, Gk on the speaker queue 14:17:41 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:17:42 On the phone I see Steve, DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK (muted), AaronSw, JosD, JJC. (muted), EricM, Guha, JanG, DanC, Manola, Sergey, Mike_Dean, DanBri 14:18:17 * gk-scribe which document -- I missed something 14:18:34 the document is "pros and cons and look at requirement s etc" 14:18:34 the requirements doc? 14:18:53 ie, summarise the arguments rather than reiterate endlessly by email 14:19:06 Brian will assemble requirements doc 14:19:47 Steve: RDF is schizo -- trying to serve 2 communities -- AI and metadata -- and 3rd? 14:20:13 Steve own requirements, driven by metadata 14:20:42 "Inline" literals are required, don't care about model theory 14:21:22 I think that if Steve cares about the results he will get from APIs and queries, he should care about the model theory. 14:21:32 Uses for writing RDF directly, or produced by tools? The latter. But elegance / verbosity *is* an issue for bootstrapping 14:21:40 Later - less of problem. 14:21:48 I think steve might see it much as th XMP guys -- i.e. as a storage format 14:21:53 -Steve 14:22:33 DaveB: from metadata PoV. Asked by DC to talk to RDF issues. Inline and datatyped literals are required. Tidy/untidy not on radar. Mostly, need things finished. 14:22:39 Tidy is sufficient. 14:22:45 patrick: 14:23:56 From metadata perspective, consumed by machines not humans, controlling processes, etc. Need clarity of KRep aspects. Need to be able to generalize at higher levels without redundant re-specification (e.g. datatype on every instance) 14:24:24 In current data, inline literals *are* used. 14:24:24 that's an odd use of the term backwards-compatibility 14:24:30 we should retroactively reinterpret broken RDF correctly? 14:24:52 GK: 14:24:58 zakim, unmute gk 14:25:00 GK should no longer be muted 14:25:12 for myself, 14:25:22 i see no real difference in terms of functionality 14:25:25 speaking cor ccpp 14:25:41 it's clearly advantageous if the design expectations of ccpp could be satisfied 14:26:00 [can't hear this] 14:26:41 ccpp schema: change to tidy literals would need change to ccpp schema 14:26:44 don't think that's fatal 14:26:56 but there's a wg in the final throws of trying to get crec out 14:27:03 I'm unsure of the process in that case 14:27:12 finally, 14:27:23 hmm... graham, do you really need the CC/PP *schema* to not change? or just the instances? 14:27:29 there's an issue of consistency of treamtment between literal values and values represented as nodes 14:27:47 gk: don't want instances to change 14:27:54 it would be preferable if the schema doesn't have to change. 14:28:16 there's an issue of consistency of treamtment between literal values and values represented as nodes 14:28:19 zakim, mute gk 14:28:20 GK should now be muted 14:28:22 (that's a desirable if not a requirement) 14:28:25 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:28:26 On the phone I see DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK (muted), AaronSw, JosD, JJC. (muted), EricM, Guha, JanG, DanC, Manola, Sergey, Mike_Dean, DanBri 14:28:37 Aaron: 14:28:57 need simplicity. Don't add more things to explain. 14:29:26 No real need for datatyping 14:29:28 Jos: 14:29:43 Requirement - getting at meaningful mechanized derivations 14:29:51 monoton, sound, not completeness 14:29:52 also: don't add more things to implement 14:30:03 things should be optional to those who don't need them 14:30:36 Zakim, unmute jjc. 14:30:36 Jeremy: 14:30:38 JJC. should no longer be muted 14:31:30 No clear *requirements* -- work currently focused in infrastructure issues 14:31:34 [jjc puts foot in mouth. details shall be lost to posterity :-) ] 14:32:04 Eric: 14:32:11 Zakim, mute Jjc. 14:32:13 JJC. should now be muted 14:32:28 Simplicity, listen to customers, interop across APIs 14:32:32 Guha: 14:32:59 yeah, simple 14:33:11 k.i.s.s. 14:33:16 (from guha) 14:33:17 API tends to work on data model, prefer simple model easy to explain, prefer tidy 14:33:26 Jang: 14:33:32 jang is 18 14:33:36 lol 14:33:38 guha, you don't need any datatyping functionality at all? 14:34:07 Like a consistent story; prefer consistent simple to complete; implementation simplicity; would like to see demo that untidy is straightforwardly implementable 14:34:11 DanC: 14:34:16 (1) interoperability between APIs and query systems, with a clear logical justification behind it (e.g. a model theory) 14:34:18 I don't see untidy impls appearing soon; since IMHO existing impls are tidy or abivilant 14:34:30 (2) buy-in and understanding from DAML/WebOnt, CC/PP, RSS, and Dublin Core. 14:34:31 ... and Adobe/XMP, and DMOZ, and mozilla. And Jena. 14:34:32 -AaronSw 14:34:59 (g1) the ability to put, in a schema, constraints on the *lexical form* of values 14:35:09 +AaronSw 14:35:22 (g2) an endorsement of the practice of using datatype properties, i.e. [ dc:date "2002-09-23"]. 14:35:35 g1 == gravey-1; g2 == gravey2 14:35:41 gravy/goal. 14:36:18 Frank: 14:36:25 zakim, who is here? 14:36:26 On the phone I see DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK (muted), JosD, JJC. (muted), EricM, Guha, JanG, DanC, Manola, Sergey, Mike_Dean, DanBri, AaronSw 14:36:27 On IRC I see mdean, danb_lap, Guha_, JosD, DanC, jang, RRSAgent, jjc, em, gk-scribe, DaveB, bwm, Zakim, AaronSw, logger 14:36:42 wanto to be able to reflect datatyped information from databases and other typed sources like XML schema 14:36:52 oops.. s/dc:date/xsdt:date/ 14:37:03 support and annotate type info as metadata 14:37:17 support SWeb layers above RDF 14:37:29 type inference on a global as well as local basis 14:37:38 want to be able to infer type information globally and locally 14:37:48 means to deal with legacy data/code 14:38:56 Judge in terms of simple vs complex explanations. tidy/untidy no difference. Need to be clearer about what we mean. 14:39:15 er... the 10 test case isn't clear enough? 14:39:19 Sergey: 14:39:33 * DaveB also supports sergey's email, frankm's comments, aaron's comments 14:39:36 1. simplicity, understandability for developers 14:39:45 2. correctness for modelling 14:40:05 3. backward compatibility (existing apps, specs, APIs) 14:40:08 MikeD: 14:40:20 1. support for global typing 14:41:24 2. avoid requiring apps to maintain lookup of ??? [literal?] values 14:41:28 in defense of mike, our implementation of tidy literals does have such a hash table. 14:42:00 3. ability to merge duplicate statements (jenny age "10") in different documents [self-entailment?] 14:42:27 ... idependently on range constrains on "age" 14:42:50 4. minimizing nodes and arcs -- avoiding extra bNodes Jenny age "10" prefer just one arc. 14:43:01 5. support XMLschema built-in datatypes 14:43:04 DanBri: 14:43:06 requirement: something well understood, and simple to implement, soon. 14:43:06 datatyping: I want my database to be able to answer questions based on datatypes (before, after, during re dates; lessthan, gtr than) so need some conventions (almost doesn't matter which) to support this 14:44:16 As a consumer of RDF content, I want my db to not have to keep track of each different occurance of some literal. As a producer and consumer I need datatyped literals. 14:44:39 As a consumer of content... want database to NOT keep track of different occurrences of a literal. 14:44:57 +1 on all danbri says 14:45:16 [ I'm building query and storage systems for 'metadata' and data aggregation apps. For non-datatyped literals, tidyness works for me, and untidyness rings alarm bells. My main concern currently is that we get done soon. While my technical judgement is pro-tidy, I fear a decision to go untidy will mire us in months more discussion and debate. Tidy can seem inelegant/graceless, but is in my implementation experience both simple and deployable. I can't say the s 14:45:19 Tidy may seem inelegant and graceless, but is also simple and deployable. 14:45:35 ACTION, bwm: summarize requirements into next iteration of rationale document 14:45:45 Zakim, unmute jjc. 14:45:48 JJC. should no longer be muted 14:45:50 gk-scribe, just to note I pretty much read out from text I pasted above; shouldn't be missing anything important 14:45:58 Item 10 -- abstract syntax for untidy literals 14:46:16 Do untidy literals have a "sysID"? 14:47:21 JJC: position - No untidy literal is ever the object of two statements. But reification is then odd. 14:47:56 ... i.e. every occurrence of a literal is a distinct node -- distinct by triple/position it occurs in 14:48:10 "10" . 14:48:12 "10" . 14:48:18 one triple or two in this case, jjc? 14:48:24 ... in N-triples, distinguish by (e.g.) line number. 14:48:32 holy cow... this ["each literal occurs in exactly one triple"] cuts off the possibility of an RDF/XML syntax that allows literals as subject. phpht. 14:48:40 yeah, sort of 14:49:52 e.g. for Jena, do lexical compare without type info, but value if type available, but this is non-mon. 14:50:48 Jenny age "10" . Film title "10" . does not entail ... age _:x ... title _:x 14:51:45 that (hypothetical) behaviour by Jena is exactly the sort of thing that's counter to my #1 requirement for datatypes: that the behaviour of APIs have a good logical basis. Jeremy just said it's nonmon. 14:52:11 Possible future decision to have sysID on literals -- this is implementation issue, not MT 14:53:19 Guha, don't understand this -- breaking existing large implementations (Mozilla, ...) 14:54:58 Brian: clarifies that the point of this is to be clear about what untidy means when making decision. 14:55:26 q+ to ask for meeting extension to get some decisions :) 14:55:27 Guha: Difference between "could be differnt" and "have to be different". 14:55:27 * Zakim sees Jang, Gk, DaveB on the speaker queue 14:55:33 the implementation Guha mentioned was XUL, part of the mozilla project. 14:55:37 q- 14:55:38 q- 14:55:38 * Zakim sees Gk, DaveB on the speaker queue 14:55:40 * Zakim sees DaveB on the speaker queue 14:56:29 -AaronSw 14:56:35 then daveb 14:56:37 I consider guha's point in part considering XUL, Mozilla an important 'customer' and any decision we make re tidy/untidy should take the impact of this customer into account... 14:56:45 yup 14:56:59 and breaking the largest customers implementation should not be taken lightly 14:57:02 * DanC q+ to make the point that the behavour of APIs is how end-users will understand our spec; in particular, our model theory 14:57:03 * Zakim sees DaveB, DanC on the speaker queue 14:58:07 q+ 14:58:08 * Zakim sees DaveB, DanC, Jang on the speaker queue 14:58:17 ack daveb 14:58:18 DaveB, you wanted to ask for meeting extension to get some decisions :) 14:58:19 * Zakim sees DanC, Jang on the speaker queue 14:58:22 DaveB: Proposed to extend meeting, to make decision on sysIDs. Not granted. 14:58:27 Guha_ has quit 14:58:49 ack jan 14:58:50 * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue 14:58:54 bah, no more decisions this week 14:59:13 JanG: how fast to get untidy implementation to see how it works? 14:59:26 ... ergo no docs change, no test changes, no code changes 14:59:30 JosD: done as experiment -- is a nightmare. 14:59:35 Jos, if you could mail the results of your untidy experiemnt, that would be nifty. 15:00:03 Sergey: hard to assess with 24000 lines of code that assume tidiness. 15:00:41 q+ to comment on mozilla api 15:00:42 * Zakim sees DanC, Danb on the speaker queue 15:00:43 summary: API changes are easy, application changes are hard 15:00:49 ... Do it in the API is one thing (easy?), do it in the calling application is harder 15:00:55 q- 15:00:56 * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue 15:00:56 * DanC q- 15:00:57 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue 15:01:01 well DanC the whole point is that I got nothing but "No Proof Founds" so there is not much to explain further 15:01:03 -Guha 15:01:05 ACTION, Sergey, write up what he just said 15:01:24 -JJC. 15:01:29 --------meeting closed------ 15:01:33 yes, well, showing all the "no proof found" stuff is likely to help folks understand. 15:02:03 -DanC 15:02:14 ...I tried to fix by all kinds of "extra wires" and that was the nightmare 15:02:32 again, very useful implementation experience to share. 15:03:08 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:03:09 On the phone I see DaveB, Bwm, PatrickS, GK (muted), JosD, EricM, JanG, Manola, Sergey, Mike_Dean, DanBri 15:04:12 ... the only thing that is reasonable is make it <#foo> <#bar> (<#bar> "abc") but only for <#foo> a rdfs:Datatype . 15:04:55 JosD: what if there were a common superproperty for all rdf properties 15:04:56 -JosD 15:05:34 oops, sorry Brian I had to hang up, but w.r.t. your questio 15:06:07 * danb_lap has to head off; cu 15:06:21 -Mike_Dean 15:06:30 danb_lap has left #rdfcore 15:07:14 ... I don't think that is a problem at all i.e. it is not breaking inferencing, but I think further and put something on the list 15:08:06 it means that "foo" entails "foo" for all , and hence all must have some datatype 15:08:15 zakim, unmute gk 15:08:15 GK should no longer be muted 15:12:32 OK I see your point but is a Datatype and so are it's superproperties; Ireally think this is no problem 15:12:35 -DanBri 15:13:25 * DaveB drops out, bye chaps 15:13:29 -DaveB 15:13:31 xsd:integer"10" =? xsd:integer"010" 15:14:20 ... at least according to our tests using http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules 15:25:39 bwm_ has joined #rdfcore 15:30:07 -EricM 15:31:17 -GK 15:31:48 bwm has quit 15:35:10 -Bwm 15:38:27 DanC has left #rdfcore 15:40:30 bwm__ has joined #rdfcore 15:41:40 bwm_ has quit 15:49:02 DaveB has quit 15:50:06 gotta adash 15:50:20 -JanG 15:51:08 -Sergey 15:51:10 -PatrickS 15:51:13 -Manola 15:51:14 SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended 15:52:28 gk-scribe has quit 16:00:44 jjc has quit 16:05:17 JosD has quit 16:15:34 bwm__ has quit