– DRAFT –
RDF-star Editor's meeting

<TallTed> `/invite zakim` and `/invite rrsagent` help

<Zakim> ora, you wanted to suggest we use the queue

<Zakim> pfps, you wanted to talk about issues

<Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to say that W3C work is public and open; once it was done on publicly visible wikis; now it's largely done via publicly visible github. Also, we're expected to address all issues, substantive or not, raised by group members or otherwise, with substantive responses.

<Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to ask about the direction on errata

<Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to talk about PR cycle

<Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to suggest that working in public tends to keep things from happening "under the radar", and to note that editors are the only ones (who should be) empowered to merge PRs, which should reflect WG decisions (often, resolutions are taken up to approve such merging)

<pfps> it should be easy to get truly editorial changes in, but technical changes should require input from the WG

<TallTed> I refer you all to https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/ "Issue Tracking: Github (preferred), Public mailing list, Member-only mailing list" etc.

<Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to ask about the burden on the group of considering every PR and issue. Also, the GitHub requirements for merging a PR after a change has been requested.

<Zakim> pfps, you wanted to discuss hiding in plain sight and to

<pfps> oops no errata for rdf:JSON that I can find

<ora> I like the idea of a delay or grace period

<Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to note the above Process document...

<AndyS> BTW Pubrules https://www3.org/pubrules/ is off line. :-)

<ora> https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/15/health/oxford-comma-maine-court-case-trnd/index.html

<ora> Commas *do* matter. ;-)

<Zakim> VladimirAlexiev, you wanted to comment on being pragmatic and simplify approaches

<pfps> is LPG the main use case for RDF-star??

<ora> +1 to simplicity!

<Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to suggest using CODEOWNERS

<ora> Not the *main* use case as far as I know.

<Zakim> pfps, you wanted to comment on issues and to comment on technical errata

<gkellogg> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/Editor%27s-guide

<pfps> i'm fine with editorial PRs and even with merging them in

<pfps> my worry about boilerplate is not repeating it 22 times, but having 22 different versions of the boilerplate

<pfps> errata is already tagged as editorial and tecnical - my view is that technical errata need WG discussion

<TallTed> (demerits for all ... we failed to scribe)

<gkellogg> TallTed -- We had decided that we weren't going to scribe Editor's meetings, but may raise actions.

<TallTed> gkellogg -- ah, ok