IRC log of json-ld on 2019-09-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:28:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #json-ld
15:28:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/09/06-json-ld-irc
15:28:08 [ivan]
rrsagent, set log public
15:28:08 [ivan]
Meeting: JSON-LD Working Group Telco
15:28:08 [ivan]
Date: 2019-09-06
15:28:08 [ivan]
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2019Sep/0000.html
15:28:08 [ivan]
ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2019-09-06: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2019Sep/0000.html
15:28:09 [ivan]
Regrets+
15:28:09 [ivan]
Chair: azaroth
15:31:37 [azaroth]
azaroth has joined #json-ld
15:35:36 [azaroth]
present+
15:46:06 [rubensworks]
rubensworks has joined #json-ld
15:46:39 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #json-ld
15:50:33 [pchampin]
pchampin has joined #json-ld
15:52:20 [ajs6f]
ajs6f has joined #json-ld
15:59:24 [ivan]
present+
16:00:26 [dlongley]
present+
16:00:30 [rubensworks]
present+
16:00:35 [bigbluehat]
present+
16:00:40 [gkellogg]
present+
16:02:03 [ajs6f]
present+
16:02:24 [ivan]
chair+ bigbluehat
16:02:24 [pchampin]
present+
16:02:37 [ajs6f]
I can!@
16:02:43 [bigbluehat]
scribenick: ajs6f
16:02:51 [bigbluehat]
Topic: Approve minutes of previous call
16:02:56 [bigbluehat]
https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2019/2019-08-30-json-ld
16:03:01 [dlongley]
+1
16:03:02 [ivan]
+1
16:03:03 [azaroth]
+1
16:03:03 [ajs6f]
+1
16:03:05 [rubensworks]
+0
16:03:05 [gkellogg]
+1
16:03:12 [pchampin]
+1
16:03:19 [bigbluehat]
RESOLVED: minutes approved
16:03:33 [bigbluehat]
Topic: Announcements / Reminders
16:03:35 [ivan]
s/minutes/last week's minites/
16:03:41 [ivan]
s/minites/minutes/
16:03:45 [bigbluehat]
Subtopic: No call next week
16:04:06 [bigbluehat]
Subtopic: TPAC following week
16:04:10 [dlehn]
present+
16:04:33 [ajs6f]
bligbluehat: no call next week because of TPAC
16:04:42 [azaroth]
s/blig/big/
16:05:02 [bigbluehat]
https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/F2F/2019.09.Fuk
16:06:38 [bigbluehat]
Subtopic: Others?
16:06:47 [pchampin]
q+
16:06:50 [bigbluehat]
ack pchampin
16:06:54 [jeff_mixter]
jeff_mixter has joined #json-ld
16:06:58 [jeff_mixter]
present+
16:07:16 [ajs6f]
pchampin: we have a funded WoT project starting in February
16:07:24 [ajs6f]
... might be some JSON-LD interest
16:07:47 [ajs6f]
... I was wondering if we still want a note that mentions this
16:07:56 [ajs6f]
... might some people in this porject that might contriburte to that
16:08:07 [ajs6f]
s/contriburte/contribute
16:08:12 [ajs6f]
ivan: just a note, not a rec
16:08:30 [ajs6f]
... no problem publishing that if we can get it in before closing teh WG
16:08:35 [ajs6f]
s/teh/the
16:08:43 [ajs6f]
bigbluehat: still some time to do that
16:09:00 [ajs6f]
ivan: how much time we have to do this depends on how we manage time generally
16:09:15 [ajs6f]
... we have until June or July and a note can be published at the very end
16:09:24 [ajs6f]
... we're in pretty good shape re: testing and impl
16:09:33 [ajs6f]
... we may need less time to complete CR stagte
16:09:40 [ajs6f]
s/stagte/stage
16:09:49 [ajs6f]
... we could publish early and close the group early
16:10:24 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: thinking about the YAML note, we automated the transformations
16:10:30 [ajs6f]
... CBOR might or might not be
16:10:51 [ajs6f]
... as easy
16:10:58 [ajs6f]
ivan: not likely to be as easy
16:11:16 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: you can dump JSON into CBOR, altho it does many other things
16:11:32 [ajs6f]
... other than number representation I'm not sure there is much of a barrier
16:11:49 [ajs6f]
... more important is the transform CBOR -> JSON
16:12:02 [ajs6f]
... if there are people with experience at CBOR who want to help, we should keep that open
16:12:12 [ajs6f]
... unless/until we learn that we don't have enough time
16:12:22 [ajs6f]
bigbluehat: and of course we have the Best Practices doc
16:12:36 [ajs6f]
pchampin: okay, I'll ask those folks and see if anyone is into it
16:12:44 [ajs6f]
... before TPAC
16:12:53 [bigbluehat]
Topic: Horizontal Review Updates
16:13:30 [azaroth]
link: https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-wg/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Ahorizontal-review
16:13:47 [ajs6f]
azaroth: we're in good shape
16:13:59 [ajs6f]
... we have alerted Accessibility folks
16:14:05 [ajs6f]
... we've done their checklist
16:14:12 [ajs6f]
... ty bigbluehat
16:14:20 [ajs6f]
... I've told Privacy that we thikn we are in good shape
16:14:39 [ajs6f]
... they responded with thanks and no further issues
16:14:50 [ajs6f]
... ivan, what's the process from here?
16:15:07 [ajs6f]
ivan: tag it as done and when we write a request to go to CR we can point to it
16:15:20 [ajs6f]
azaroth: DONE
16:16:05 [ajs6f]
azaroth: we did the Security questionairre in June
16:16:15 [ajs6f]
... I pinged them a few times with no response
16:16:38 [ajs6f]
... and latterly I told them we consider it done, but if they have any concerns to raise them with us at TPAC
16:16:42 [ajs6f]
... I heard nothing back
16:16:50 [ajs6f]
... I say we call this done
16:17:02 [ajs6f]
ivan: that works, and the same goes for Internationalization
16:17:17 [ajs6f]
azaroth: we are good, even if we only got one official signoff
16:17:25 [ajs6f]
ivan: what about Accessibility
16:17:40 [ajs6f]
bigbluehat: I've heard no problems from them
16:17:54 [ajs6f]
... I bet someone will catch us in the hallway at TPAC and tell us that we are fine
16:18:03 [ajs6f]
ivan: we're probably low on thei priorities
16:18:33 [ajs6f]
azaroth: if avnish (sp?) can work with it that seems like as good an Acceissiblity review as we get
16:18:49 [ajs6f]
ivan: no he looks only at the accessibility of the docs themselves
16:18:55 [ajs6f]
... different question
16:19:05 [dlongley]
s/avnish/Avneesh/
16:19:11 [ajs6f]
... that's not the same as true review of the rec itself and problems that might arise from its use
16:19:39 [ajs6f]
azaroth: finally we have the short names issue
16:19:46 [azaroth]
https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-wg/issues/103
16:19:50 [ajs6f]
ivan: it turns out we can do what we wanted
16:20:14 [ajs6f]
... when we publish the rec from that point on JSON-LD with no qualifier will point at the latest rec
16:20:43 [ajs6f]
... you can also do JSON-LD/latest and there are some other combinations, look at the issue for details
16:20:55 [ajs6f]
... but our most important point is that LSON-LD itself will point at the latest
16:21:17 [ajs6f]
azaroth: I put together some nice stats for Karly (sp?)
16:21:24 [ajs6f]
... she said they were great
16:21:34 [dlongley]
s/Karly/Coralie/
16:21:37 [ajs6f]
... and added them to the Members' update for September
16:22:20 [ajs6f]
ivan: I also spoke with her and she was happy for the info and put it various Members' comms
16:22:32 [ajs6f]
... I think she might put together a slide for Jeff
16:22:56 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: too many TPACs have gone by that would make you think that the only thing W3C does is HTML
16:23:11 [ajs6f]
azaroth: at the last one the Wed was disheartening
16:23:16 [ajs6f]
... we can turn that around
16:23:22 [azaroth]
q?
16:23:41 [azaroth]
TOPIC: Issues
16:23:58 [azaroth]
SUBTOPIC: Framing blank nodes
16:24:24 [ajs6f]
azaroth: last discussion we agreed that we couldn't solve it on a call
16:24:33 [ajs6f]
... so gkellog and dlongley went off to look at it
16:25:04 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: we found a problem in a framing test where @container : @graph got mangled in re-expansion
16:25:12 [ajs6f]
... a bug in the compaction algo
16:25:46 [ajs6f]
... if the value is an array, it puts them in an @include block
16:26:21 [dlongley]
s/@include/`@include`/
16:26:21 [ajs6f]
... i tried [s solution] but it turned out not to be defined well enough
16:26:35 [dlongley]
s/`@include`/`@included`/
16:26:48 [azaroth]
q?
16:26:57 [ajs6f]
azaroth: all of that is solved and merged?
16:27:00 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: yep
16:27:21 [azaroth]
q?
16:28:50 [gkellogg]
https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/pull/146
16:29:02 [gkellogg]
https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/pull/145
16:29:15 [azaroth]
PROPOSAL: Close framing #27 as not being the issue, and the real issues being addressed is api #143, solved by api # 145 and #146
16:29:24 [azaroth]
+1
16:29:25 [bigbluehat]
+1
16:29:28 [dlongley]
+1
16:29:30 [gkellogg]
+1
16:29:32 [ivan]
+1
16:29:37 [ajs6f]
+1
16:29:40 [azaroth]
RESOLVE: Close framing #27 as not being the issue, and the real issues being addressed is api #143, solved by api # 145 and #146
16:29:45 [pchampin]
+1
16:29:54 [rubensworks]
+1
16:30:07 [azaroth]
PROPOSAL: Close api #143 as resolved by api #145 and #146
16:30:11 [azaroth]
+1
16:30:12 [ivan]
+1
16:30:13 [rubensworks]
+1
16:30:14 [gkellogg]
+1
16:30:14 [ajs6f]
+1
16:30:14 [pchampin]
+1
16:30:16 [bigbluehat]
+1
16:30:21 [dlongley]
+1
16:30:28 [azaroth]
RESOLVED: Close api #143 as resolved by api #145 and #146
16:31:04 [azaroth]
https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues
16:31:07 [ajs6f]
azaroth: now lookig at syntax issues
16:31:20 [ajs6f]
... we have two that are really styling
16:31:30 [ajs6f]
... and two that we have already deferred
16:31:36 [azaroth]
https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues
16:31:38 [ajs6f]
.... no open non-defferred issues for syntax
16:31:48 [ajs6f]
... for API we have two open non-deferred issues
16:32:05 [azaroth]
https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-framing/issues
16:32:23 [ajs6f]
... for framing we have issue 7 and two that we deferred to future versions
16:32:36 [azaroth]
https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-wg/issues
16:32:38 [ajs6f]
... in the WG metalist of issues
16:32:50 [ajs6f]
.. just some editorial updates on bigbluehat and myself
16:33:06 [ajs6f]
... there are the horizontal reviews and short names issue that we talked thorugh earlier
16:33:51 [ajs6f]
ivan: what guiding principles document?
16:34:00 [ajs6f]
azaroth: the one from the very beginning
16:34:18 [ajs6f]
... we never adding things like horizontal review to those guiding principles, but it's a bit late
16:34:43 [ajs6f]
ivan: I see something "updating json-ld.org" on bigbluehat
16:34:45 [pchampin]
q+
16:34:58 [azaroth]
ack pchampin
16:34:59 [ajs6f]
bigbluehat: I will work on that before TR-- it's in the CG
16:35:22 [gkellogg]
q+
16:35:35 [ajs6f]
pchampin: there is no recorded issue about the fact that the specs for 1.1 refer to 1.0 docs via the short name JSON-LD, without qualifier
16:35:37 [azaroth]
ack gkellogg
16:35:39 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: I think I fixed that
16:35:52 [ajs6f]
pchampin: perhaps I wasn't seeing the latest versions
16:36:00 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: yes, I used the timestmaped URI
16:36:14 [ajs6f]
... what Respec does for JSON-LD uses the unversioned URI
16:36:28 [ajs6f]
... which would have had that problem when we updated
16:36:47 [ajs6f]
... and our internal links already use precise URIs
16:36:52 [ajs6f]
pchampin: okay, all good!
16:37:25 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: Respec does keep breaking and marcus said he would fix these things
16:37:35 [ajs6f]
... once those are done we can publiush another heartbeat draft
16:37:38 [azaroth]
q?
16:37:39 [ajs6f]
... that might it for us
16:38:13 [ajs6f]
ivan: it might be good to look for a "preview CR" request, to see what we need for that
16:38:19 [azaroth]
ACTION: ivan to send to -chairs example CR request
16:38:41 [ajs6f]
azaroth: after which we can look at the example and work with it
16:38:44 [ajs6f]
... other issues?
16:38:53 [gkellogg]
https://raw.githack.com/w3c/json-ld-api/reports/reports/index.html#JSON-LD-HTML-tests
16:39:14 [ajs6f]
azaroth: I mean any new technical issues
16:39:34 [ajs6f]
... if not, we're done with technical issues and we'll spend TPAC carousing wildly
16:39:43 [ajs6f]
... we'll request CR after TPAC
16:39:55 [ajs6f]
... we need to get people to get onto implementation
16:40:04 [ajs6f]
... and submitting reports thereof
16:40:19 [ajs6f]
... that al conform to some part of the work
16:40:33 [ajs6f]
... and for all features there are at least 2 impls that do that
16:40:46 [ajs6f]
... which is not to say that any given impl must do all features-- that's not true
16:40:55 [azaroth]
TOPIC: Implementation Report
16:40:57 [azaroth]
https://raw.githack.com/w3c/json-ld-api/reports/reports/index.html
16:41:25 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: I have software to collate the reports that get sent in and generate this file
16:41:39 [ajs6f]
... this includes all the tests that were included
16:41:58 [ajs6f]
... at the beginning there is a discussion of requirements for subimssions
16:42:24 [ajs6f]
... submissions are found in a directory which is processed by the software
16:42:44 [ajs6f]
... producing an HTML output with a column for each impl and each test the result obtained
16:43:12 [ajs6f]
... there are details like test options that we don't find here
16:43:15 [ivan]
q+
16:43:19 [ajs6f]
... it is many pages
16:43:24 [azaroth]
ack ivan
16:43:37 [azaroth]
q+ re test definitions
16:43:41 [ajs6f]
ivan: I have seen this type of product from gkellogg before and I thikn it's perfect
16:43:44 [dlehn]
add a browser stress test and add syntax highlighting for all the tests input/output
16:44:29 [ajs6f]
... i understand that the tests in this report cover all of JSON-LD< including 1.0 stuff
16:44:40 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: we have 1.0 stuff, 1.1 stuff, and both
16:44:59 [ajs6f]
... we don't include 1.0 stuff, just stuff that is relavent for both
16:45:45 [ajs6f]
... we test the entire behavior
16:46:01 [ajs6f]
ivan: is it worth indicating what's new? the stuff that is new in 1.1?
16:46:13 [ajs6f]
azaroth: seems valuable
16:46:17 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: the data is there
16:46:27 [ajs6f]
... we could annotate the tests as appropriate
16:46:40 [azaroth]
ack azaroth
16:46:40 [Zakim]
azaroth, you wanted to discuss test definitions
16:46:48 [ajs6f]
ivan: in the column for test you could add a symbol to indicate something new for 1.1
16:47:06 [ajs6f]
azaroth: for test defns, which are quite long, could we make it a separate HTML file?
16:47:13 [ajs6f]
... rather than including it in-line
16:47:29 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: or we could create HTML test manifests and link to them
16:47:58 [ajs6f]
... in json-ld.org we had some PHP that listed out the tests
16:48:23 [ajs6f]
... we could do something template-driven to the same purpose
16:48:31 [dlehn]
q+
16:48:39 [azaroth]
ack dlehn
16:48:41 [ajs6f]
... then we update the report so that the test links point at the right places int eh test manifestos
16:49:00 [ajs6f]
dlehn: shold we not put the version numbers of the various libraries on their?
16:49:06 [ajs6f]
... support changes with time.
16:49:53 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: if you look in "What to Submit" we could put a slot for version and then use that in the "Descrption of test subject"
16:50:15 [ajs6f]
dlehn: did the URI format change much?
16:50:20 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: nope, same thing
16:50:25 [azaroth]
ACTION: gkellogg to add software version DOAP property to report template
16:50:31 [ajs6f]
dlehn: what does it do if you skip tests?
16:50:40 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: I think it says something like "Untested"
16:50:48 [azaroth]
ACTION: gkellogg to look at taking out test definitions and replacing with links to test manifests
16:50:57 [ajs6f]
... there is Pass, Fail and some other statuses
16:51:14 [azaroth]
q+ re dogfood of JSON-LD and Turtle
16:51:28 [ajs6f]
.... doesn't matter than much what the current level of conformance but we could grease the wheel
16:51:35 [azaroth]
ack azaroth
16:51:35 [Zakim]
azaroth, you wanted to discuss dogfood of JSON-LD and Turtle
16:51:39 [ajs6f]
dlehn: python code hasn't yet been updated
16:52:03 [ajs6f]
azaroth: it currently asks people to submit Turtle-- could we make that JSON-LD
16:52:10 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: sure, we could
16:52:32 [ajs6f]
... but devs seem happy with Turtle
16:52:43 [ajs6f]
... but I would work with JSON-LD if someone gives it to me
16:52:43 [azaroth]
q?
16:54:19 [azaroth]
TOPIC: TPAC face to face arrangements
16:54:53 [bigbluehat]
q+
16:54:56 [azaroth]
ack bigbluehat
16:55:44 [ajs6f]
[shared discussion of travel arrangements]
16:58:08 [ajs6f]
azaroth: has anyone asked for Observer status?
16:58:16 [ajs6f]
ivan: not that I saw, and you would have been notified
16:58:52 [ajs6f]
gkellogg: shoudl we arrange a Wed update for people?
16:59:03 [ajs6f]
azaroth: given where we are at, that seems reasonable
16:59:08 [azaroth]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2019/SessionIdeas
16:59:19 [ajs6f]
ivan: wait I was wrong!
16:59:21 [ivan]
https://www.w3.org/register/tpac2019/registrants#meeting-85
16:59:21 [azaroth]
ACTION: gkellogg to add session idea for https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2019/SessionIdeas
16:59:30 [ajs6f]
... there are quite a nnumber of requestors
16:59:30 [dlongley]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2019/SessionIdeas#Linked_Data_Security <-- may be of interest to people here
16:59:44 [dlongley]
q+
17:00:18 [azaroth]
ack dlongley
17:00:25 [ajs6f]
ivan: experience shows that people do sin up but rarely stay around
17:00:44 [ajs6f]
dlongely: manu is trying to put together a LD security topic on Wed
17:01:00 [ajs6f]
ivan: and the DID WG has been announced
17:01:17 [ajs6f]
ivan: dlongley, you will be on it?
17:01:20 [ajs6f]
dlongely: yep
17:01:32 [ajs6f]
azaroth: I will try to participate
17:01:42 [ajs6f]
ivan:bigbluehat is signed up
17:02:04 [ajs6f]
... and two guys coming, registered as group participants, who have never been on any of our calls
17:02:17 [ajs6f]
.... someone frmo Siemens and somone from [Didn't catch the name]
17:02:29 [ajs6f]
pchampin: I don't know them well but met one
17:02:50 [ajs6f]
azaroth: and it's the top of the hour. See (some of) you in japan
17:02:59 [ajs6f]
ivan: we will have a call the week after TPAC
17:03:14 [azaroth]
TOPIC: Adjourn
17:03:25 [ivan]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/09/06-json-ld-minutes.html ivan
17:03:25 [ivan]
zakim, bye
17:03:25 [ivan]
rrsagent, bye
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
I see 4 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2019/09/06-json-ld-actions.rdf :
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: ivan to send to -chairs example CR request [1]
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/09/06-json-ld-irc#T16-38-19
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: gkellogg to add software version DOAP property to report template [2]
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/09/06-json-ld-irc#T16-50-25
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: gkellogg to look at taking out test definitions and replacing with links to test manifests [3]
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/09/06-json-ld-irc#T16-50-48
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: gkellogg to add session idea for https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2019/SessionIdeas [4]
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/09/06-json-ld-irc#T16-59-21-1
17:03:25 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees have been azaroth, ivan, dlongley, rubensworks, bigbluehat, gkellogg, ajs6f, pchampin, dlehn, jeff_mixter
17:03:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #json-ld