16:58:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
16:58:25 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/12/01-rdf-star-irc
16:58:27 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:58:29 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin
16:58:34 <pchampin> meeting: RDF-star WG
16:59:04 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
16:59:24 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
16:59:39 <ora> present+
17:00:11 <Timothe> present+
17:00:21 <gkellogg> present+
17:00:49 <ktk> present+
17:01:09 <pchampin> present+
17:03:26 <gtw> present+
17:03:51 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
17:04:14 <pchampin> scribe: pchampin
17:04:16 <remiceres> remiceres has joined #rdf-star
17:04:17 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
17:05:16 <pchampin> topic: what is missing from the CG report
17:05:29 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #rdf-star
17:05:40 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
17:06:07 <csarven> present+
17:06:07 <pchampin> agenda+ "bureaucratic" things we have to settle
17:06:10 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
17:06:14 <Souri> present+
17:06:15 <olaf> present+
17:06:34 <pchampin> agenda+ discuss the recuriing time for the meeting
17:06:58 <gkellogg> q+
17:07:12 <Dominik_T> present+
17:07:32 <gkellogg> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/summary
17:08:20 <TallTed> present+
17:08:25 <pchampin> gkellogg: re. selection of editors, there are also mechanical bits to setup
17:08:35 <remiceres> present+
17:08:49 <pchampin> ... there are many specifications, present on Mercurial (link above)
17:08:55 <ora> q?
17:08:58 <gkellogg> q-
17:09:39 <pchampin> ora: what do we need to do to create some kind of editor's draft?
17:09:41 <pchampin> q+
17:09:55 <ora> ack pchampin
17:11:00 <gkellogg> q+ to suggest we really need to update the RDF specs that are out there.
17:11:13 <pchampin> pchampin: the charter says we are going to publisg several recommendations
17:11:17 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:11:17 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to suggest we really need to update the RDF specs that are out there.
17:11:17 <pchampin> ... but we can decide to change this.
17:11:46 <pchampin> ... They are mapped on the RDF 1.1 and SPARQL 1.1 specs, so it make sense.
17:11:52 <ora> q+
17:12:01 <gkellogg> ack me
17:12:02 <pchampin> ... Also the CG report is built as a "patch" of those existing specifications.
17:12:30 <pchampin> gkellogg: it makes sense to keep the recommentations -- if someone mentions the Turtle spec, it has to still be there
17:13:02 <pchampin> ora: how do we proceed to create a new version of each spec?
17:13:08 <csarven> q+
17:13:13 <ora> ack ora
17:13:17 <pchampin> ... do they all have to go through the heavy process of being updated?
17:13:20 <TallTed> q+
17:13:31 <ora> ack csarven
17:13:58 <pchampin> csarven: I don't think that al the specs will eventually need a next version.
17:14:21 <pchampin> ... Having 2 editors min per spec is a way to keep the work running, in my experience.
17:14:56 <pchampin> ... As for the release, any version that we have right now could be turned into an editor's draft.
17:15:09 <pchampin> ... The FIrst Public Working Draft is not expected to be already mature.
17:15:15 <pchampin> q+
17:15:37 <pchampin> ... This is just the version that we are starting with.
17:15:41 <ora> ack TallTed
17:16:02 <pchampin> TallTed: unfortunately, I think that all the documents need to be updated as a batch.
17:16:12 <ora> q+
17:16:23 <pchampin> ... SPARQL 1.1 is aligned with RDF 1.0, and there are similar disconnections in the stack of documents.
17:16:36 <pchampin> ... This is causing problems in the real world.
17:16:48 <pchampin> ... We have the power to fix this, we should.
17:17:20 <pchampin> ... It might need that we call them 2.0 rather than 1.2, as there will be breaking changes.
17:17:23 <ktk> q+
17:17:25 <pchampin> q-
17:17:25 <ora> ack pchampin
17:17:42 <ora> ack ora
17:17:43 <olaf> q+
17:17:45 <pchampin> pchampin: +1 to csarven and TallTed
17:18:03 <gkellogg> q+
17:18:20 <ora> ack ktk
17:18:22 <gtw> q+ to note that the charter says we'll roll editorial errata into the new specs.
17:18:26 <pchampin> ora: I'm not opposed to that, but my worry is that there will be demands to update other parts of these documents, that are not related to RDF-star.
17:18:48 <TallTed> I think that pandora's box is already open, and pretending that it's opened at the back (where we can't see) will do no-one any favors in the end.
17:18:55 <ora> q+
17:19:04 <ora> ack olaf
17:19:05 <pchampin> ktk: what would be the "RDF-star spec" once we update all the other ones?
17:19:40 <pchampin> olaf: back to what csarven said earlier: I don't think it is as easy to start with the existing specs,
17:19:55 <ora> q?
17:19:58 <pchampin> ... because they are not using ReSpec, and we probably want to start with ReSpec documents.
17:20:05 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:20:05 <csarven> I meant content-wise not formatting.
17:20:17 <pchampin> gkellogg: I believe they are in ReSpec, but a very old form of ReSpec.
17:20:32 <pchampin> ... We could automate the process.
17:20:56 <pchampin> ... Re 2.0 vs 1.2, I'm not aware of any breaking changes that the CG report introduces.
17:21:19 <pchampin> ... We will also need to include errata, one of them is important for the RCH WG (about canonical N-Quads).
17:21:48 <pchampin> ... Re the pressure to do new things: that would require us to update the charter.
17:22:08 <pchampin> ... We might accept to do that once the RDF-star part is ready, but not before.
17:22:18 <ora> ack gtw
17:22:18 <Zakim> gtw, you wanted to note that the charter says we'll roll editorial errata into the new specs.
17:23:26 <pchampin> gtw: agree with TallTed: once we are at updating the specs, we need to fix those inconsistencies
17:23:52 <ora> ack ora
17:23:52 <pchampin> ... It's important to find alignment in these specs as we are touching them.
17:24:14 <gtw> gtw: some of that alignment falls under the charter item regarding addressing errata
17:24:28 <pchampin> ora: I like how the SPARQL spec and others are organized: overview, then a list of different specs
17:24:39 <gkellogg> +1 to an overview document, and specs should probably refer to each other, as SPARQL does.
17:25:08 <pchampin> ... We should break up what lies ahed into parts;
17:25:12 <ora> q?
17:25:19 <csarven> +q pubrules
17:25:19 <pchampin> ... then we may find out along the way that some of those parts are actually revisions of an existing spec
17:25:33 <csarven> -q
17:25:53 <csarven> q+
17:25:57 <pchampin> ack pu
17:26:02 <ora> ack csarven
17:26:03 <pchampin> ack csarven
17:26:27 <pchampin> csarven: my point about editors drafts was about the content, not the formatting
17:26:43 <csarven> https://www.w3.org/pubrules/doc
17:26:44 <pchampin> ... I believe that the editors drafts can be anything, even markdown.
17:26:54 <pchampin> ... The FPWD must abide by pubrules (link avove)
17:27:40 <pchampin> ... If the old spec use an old version of ReSpec, if it passes the rules, then that would be OK.
17:28:23 <pchampin> ... We are not even forced to use ReSpec, what matters is passing the pubrules.
17:28:56 <gkellogg> q+
17:28:56 <pchampin> ora: are there objections about using ReSpec?
17:28:59 <pchampin> q+
17:29:12 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:29:28 <pchampin> gkellogg: I have a lot of experience with ReSpec
17:29:37 <csarven> q+ different approaches to formatting and editorial preference considerations
17:30:02 <csarven> q+ to mention formatting and editorial preference considerations
17:30:03 <pchampin> ... I can't see the files or mercurial, but my memory is that they are in the ReSpec format already.
17:30:28 <pchampin> ... It makes easy to validate the rules.
17:31:02 <pchampin> ... Also, a tool called PR-review is able to format a preview and a "diff" for every PR.
17:31:04 <ora> q+
17:31:13 <ora> ack pchampin
17:31:27 <olaf> Gregg, only for one doc per repo?
17:32:17 <ora> ack csarven
17:32:17 <Zakim> csarven, you wanted to mention formatting and editorial preference considerations
17:32:31 <gkellogg> Yes, one doc per repo. So, an rdf-concepts repo, for example.
17:32:55 <olaf> I see. Thx for the clarification.
17:33:33 <pchampin> csarven: in the Solid CG, the editors of each spec decide which tooling they want to use
17:34:03 <ora> q?
17:34:09 <pchampin> ... OTOH If you want different contributors to jump in easily, picking one tool for all the specs is helping.
17:34:10 <csarven> http://www.w3.org/ns/spec
17:34:47 <csarven> https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol
17:34:47 <csarven> https://solidproject.org/ED/protocol
17:35:30 <pchampin> ... those are examples of Solid specs annotated as RDFa with the 'spec' ontology
17:36:10 <pchampin> ... each normative requirement has its own IRI, and a machine readable description
17:36:28 <pchampin> ... This is relatively new, not used in ReSpec and Bikeshed right now.
17:36:50 <pchampin> ... These annotation do not interfere with pubrules.
17:36:57 <csarven> https://solid-contrib.github.io/specification-tests/coverage
17:37:12 <pchampin> ... They can be useful for describing test cases.
17:37:13 <gkellogg> There are also respec tags for identifying tests associated with some normative statement.
17:37:32 <ora> ack ora
17:38:11 <pchampin> ora: trying to understand the spectrum of possiblity: we can use ReSpec together with those annotations?
17:38:18 <pchampin> csarven: yes
17:39:01 <pchampin> ora: I like the idea of these new tools, but I would suggest that we use one tool for all specs, and pick ReSpec.
17:39:09 <gkellogg> +1 to picking one tool, and if docs are already in ReSpec, we should use that.
17:39:14 <pchampin> q+
17:39:15 <gkellogg> q+
17:39:24 <ora> ack pchampin
17:39:29 <ktk> q+
17:41:57 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:42:00 <pchampin> pchampin: I can create a first "spec" repo
17:42:52 <pchampin> gkellogg: the naming convention is usually to use the short-name of the spec as the name of the repo
17:43:04 <ora> ack ktk
17:43:05 <Dominik_T> q+
17:43:08 <pchampin> ... I can be part of  the effort to migrate the existing specs
17:43:14 <Souri> I think two specs are definitely going to be needed. So, IMHO, we may want to consider starting with two specs: RDF-star and SPARQL-star.
17:43:15 <pchampin> ... but that will need more people
17:43:39 <pchampin> ACTION: pchampin to create a firsr "spec" repo
17:43:40 <ghurlbot> Created https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/52 -> action 52 create a firsr "spec" repo (on ) due  8 Dec 2022
17:43:56 <Dominik_T> q-
17:44:05 <pchampin> ACTION: everybody to reflect on what they think is missing in the CG report
17:44:06 <ghurlbot> Created https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/53 -> action 53 reflect on what they think is missing in the CG report (on ) due  8 Dec 2022
17:44:08 <gkellogg> maybe create an issue for this that people can chime in on.
17:44:12 <pchampin> Topic: scheduling
17:44:28 <pchampin> ora: I realized that once a month, I will have a conflict with this timeslot
17:44:48 <TallTed> q+
17:45:00 <pchampin> ... this is not the end of the world, but if other people may want to change?
17:45:06 <gkellogg> q+
17:45:44 <ora> ack TallTed
17:45:49 <pchampin> TallTed: this timeslot is fine for me in general.
17:46:17 <pchampin> ... if we are going to look for something else, I suggest we use a Doodle poll of some kind.
17:46:21 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:46:25 <pchampin> ... Email discussions on this kind of questions go on forever.
17:46:42 <pchampin> q+
17:46:51 <pchampin> gkellogg: I think we had a doodle pool, and this was the slot that came up.
17:47:11 <pchampin> ... Personally I could make do 1 or 2h later, but that's ok.
17:47:23 <ora> ack pchampin
17:47:53 <Souri> The current schedule works perfectly for me (lunch time in US EST), but I can adjust if needed.
17:48:04 <TallTed> I'll have frequent though inconsistent conflicts if we move 1 or 2 hours earlier on Thursdays
17:48:42 <pchampin> pchampin: the doodle that we had was for the kick-off. Maybe it was convenient for some people that day, but not on a regular basis
17:48:47 <csarven> q+
17:49:06 <ora> ack csarven
17:49:19 <pchampin> ACTION: ktk to set up the doodle for the recurring time
17:49:20 <ghurlbot> Created https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/54 -> action 54 set up the doodle for the recurring time (on ) due  8 Dec 2022
17:49:59 <ora> q?
17:50:10 <pchampin> csarven: being based in Europe, this slot is ok for me because it does not conflict with my other meetings
17:50:39 <pchampin> ora: let's keep this time slot until the doodle pool gives its result
17:51:00 <pchampin> ... ideally, we can send it during the week, and discuss it next Thursday
17:51:40 <pchampin> ... I anticipate that as the group progresses, we might divide in task forces,
17:52:04 <pchampin> ... and the whole group will not need to meet every week.
17:53:01 <olaf> olaf has left #rdf-star
17:54:17 <pchampin> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2022/11/17-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:54:36 <Souri> exit
17:54:40 <pchampin> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2022/12/08-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:54:46 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:54:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/01-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:57:53 <pchampin> s/what is missing from the CG report/organization of the WG/
17:58:31 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:58:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/01-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
18:24:18 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:30:48 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
18:41:24 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:50:24 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
18:54:54 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:55:55 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
19:00:16 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:01:18 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
19:02:45 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:05:24 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
19:21:53 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:46:02 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:58:52 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:03:21 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:07:09 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
20:08:12 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:24:56 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:40:00 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:58:23 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:03:11 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:05:52 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
21:07:04 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:15:09 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:24:54 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:28:38 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
21:33:25 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star