Meeting minutes
<TallTed> agenda:
Pick scribe
antoine: having a rotation of scribes would be useful
+1 to antoine
ora: +1
<gtw> +1 to that. The last SPARQL WG had a scribe list on the wiki, and you just shifted your name down to the bottom when you scribed.
tallted: the scribe volunteer is able to interrupt at any time to ensure good recording
tallted: put everyone in the list in the scribe candidates, when someone scribes they are put at the back, pick from the front
<AZ> +1 to Ted
ora: I will make the initial list
ACTION: rdfguy: make the initial scribe list
<ghurlbot> Created action #25
Approve last week's minutes: https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html
pfps: I have an objection for the minutes. The biggest is that the semantic discussion is not an item in the minutes.
ora: there has been discussion on the mailing list on fixing minutes
ora: the working group needs to figure out how to do minutes better, with post-editing of source data (not HTML)
tallted: can the chairs please use the queue more?
tallted: typically the staff representative has the ability to edit the log or the HTML or both
tallted: having a WG member actually doing the editing to pass back to the rep is helpful
tallted: there is a link to the processed minutes at the end of the IRC log that WG members can use
<TallTed> this is today's raw log: https://
AndyS: WG members may not have access to the raw log
adrian: i'll make sure that more information is available
ora: can we provisionally accept the minutes
pfps: I would prefer waiting because there is a missing heading
<TallTed> `topic:` (and `subtopic:`) does set a heading in the minutes. I had thought that zakim "taking up" an agendum did the same; that appears to be so, as evidenced later in today's minutes....
<AZ> pfps: there are a number of issues in the minutes that need to be fixed
ora: we'll defer accepting until next week so that the problems can be fixed
ACTION: pfps: send message so that ora and adrian can have the minutes fixed up
<ghurlbot> Created action #26
Updates on WG-organization (raised last week)
adrian: I talked to pierre-antoine - the transcript is done for accessibility but the transcript cannot be permanently stored
pfps: I don't understand why the message didn't show up until about 12:20
tallted: can we all try to get along with the less-than-perfect technology
<ktk> The link I mentioned is here: https://
<ktk> 18:22 * RRSAgent records action 2
ora: what is your objection
<ktk> Sorry about that link was broken: https://
pfps: more or less that there is no chance of editing to remove problematic information
ora: if the only use is for better understanding then is that acceptable
pfps: OK. I'll withdraw my objection
adrian: at each meeting there will be a no recordings without consent announcement
tallted: edits can be made to the minutes by anyone to fix problems
Quick status update of ongoing activities
Use Cases Process
pfps: there have been several messages about use cases proposing a methodology
pfps: if the WG is fine with that we can start implementing it
ora: any comments?
pfps: I think I'll need help from pierre-antoine
adrian: there is a github template for use cases
<ktk> Github Use case template: Use case
ora: i've been writing up use cases - it is not trivial
pfps: one question is how to continue with an issue use case
ACTION: pfps: present a use case process to the working group
<ghurlbot> Created action #27
Report from conversations with I18N
ora: there just was a discussion with I18N group
ora: the group is offering to help us
ora: the earlier we can provide information to them the better
ora: one question is how to determine how much the working group will do in this space
ora: we could take the JSON-LD work and adapt it
ora: there are questions of backward compatibility
ora: from the process standpoint is this something that is out of charter
ora: my view is that this is a grey area and the working group needs to decide
adrian: if we don't do it in 1.2 then there will be pressure for 1.3
AndyS: it is quite early in the cycle
<ktk> For those like me who don't have a clear understanding of the problem, this was helpful for me https://
Continuation of the semantic predication discussion
<TallTed> `andys` is equivalent to `AndyS`
andys: things may have moved on from the discussion that was mentioned
<ktk> Adrian is ktk
ora: there is a lot to be discussed about semantic predication
enrico: i have a new proposal on semantic predication
new proposal on semantic predication
enrico: - presentation of slide that will be sent to mailing list later
enrico: semantic predication is fully transparent but does not require assertion
enrico: semantic predication is about events
enrico: syntactic predication is about triples - requires variable transparency
enrico: syntactic predication is not about events
<TallTed> `rdf:type :{event-type}` will have to be coined for every event type? or added to every ontology now in the wild?
enrico: modal/epistemic predication is a variation of syntactic predication (example is attribution, not belief)
ora: what would the abstract syntax (metamodel) look like?
ora: what is the difference between semantic predication and modal predication?
enrico: there is no abstract syntax for triples so a new notion is needed - embedded triples
enrico: it is possible to transform RDF-star graphs to RDF 1.1 graphs
enrico: care needs to be taken to preserve monotonicity
<ktk> I'm afraid we are at the end of our slot already
<ktk> could those with question write them down either here, list or on their own so we could start with them next time?
Doerthe: what about logically-equivalent statements?
<AZ> enrico's presentation requires discussion but we don't have time now
enrico: this would be done in a language that supports more powerful constructs, such as OWL
<TallTed> TallTed: I was going ask for more real-world examples, especially examples which cover some real-world existing data, perhaps digging into DBpedia or UniProt or Wikidata ... and about `rdf:type :{event-type}` will have to be coined for every event type? or added to every ontology now in the wild?
enrico: I will start an email thread on this
<TallTed> this is the thing that would be edited/cleaned: https://
<TallTed> which would then be reprocessed to produce the "pretty" minutes
<TallTed> any objections to letting zakim & rrsagent close things up?
<TallTed> seeing none...