16:02:01 RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star 16:02:05 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-irc 16:02:05 RRSAgent, make logs Public 16:02:06 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin 16:02:09 present+ 16:02:10 p+ 16:02:14 doerthe has joined #rdf-star 16:02:15 present+ 16:02:17 Zakim, who's here? 16:02:19 Present: pfps, ktk, gtw, ora, pchampin, doerthe, afs, TallTed, olaf, gkellogg, AZ 16:02:19 On IRC I see doerthe, RRSAgent, ktk, pfps, gkellogg, ora, AndyS, TallTed, csarven, rhiaro, driib, gtw, ghurlbot, Tpt, Zakim, VladimirAlexiev, Timothe, agendabot, pchampin 16:02:23 present+ 16:02:29 meeting: RDF-star WG weekly meeting 16:02:30 present+ 16:02:32 present+ 16:02:45 chair: ora 16:03:04 present+ 16:03:15 scribe: doerthe 16:03:17 scribe: doerthe 16:03:48 AZ has joined #rdf-star 16:04:12 RRSAgent, draft minutes 16:04:13 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed 16:04:21 present- enrico 16:04:21 RRSAgent, set logs public 16:04:42 regregrets+ enrico 16:04:49 regrets+ enrico 16:04:52 q+ 16:05:02 ack pfps 16:05:03 agenda? 16:05:11 zakim, open item 1 16:05:11 agendum 1 -- Scribe: Alexiev, Vladimir -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:05:27 agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/f2add3af-6743-4f52-8fcc-4f62c6cdd8af/20230323T120000#agenda 16:05:27 clear agenda 16:05:28 agenda+ Scribe: Arndt, Dörthe 16:05:28 agenda+ Approval of last week's minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/03/16-rdf-star-minutes.html 16:05:28 agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 16:05:28 agenda+ Formal creation of task forces: 16:05:31 agenda+ Use case proposal by Peter: -> 3 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0100.html 16:05:41 agenda+ Update on process concerns/proposal: -> 4 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0064.html 16:05:41 agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting Next week's scribe: Chaves-Fraga, David 16:05:41 zakim, open item 1 16:05:41 agendum 1 -- Scribe: Arndt, Dörthe -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:05:44 zakim, open item 2 16:05:44 agendum 2 -- Approval of last week's minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/03/16-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:06:06 s/agendum 1 -- Scribe: Alexiev, Vladimir -- taken up [from agendabot]// 16:06:51 pfps: there is a differerence between tag and label, that should be fixed 16:06:56 the minutes from last week mention GitHub tags where GitHub labels were meant 16:07:00 q+ 16:07:03 Souri has joined #rdf-star 16:07:06 ack TallTed 16:07:10 present+ 16:07:12 olaf has joined #rdf-star 16:07:37 pchampin: I will change that in the minutes 16:07:50 zakim, bye 16:07:50 leaving. As of this point the attendees have been pfps, ktk, gkellogg_, gtw, ora, pchampin, doerthe, afs, TallTed, olaf, gkellogg, enrico, AZ, AndyS, Souri 16:07:50 Zakim has left #rdf-star 16:07:50 Zakim has joined #rdf-star 16:07:56 present+ 16:07:58 not from me 16:07:59 present+ 16:08:03 Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star 16:08:04 present+ 16:08:13 action: pchampin to amend last week's minutes to avoid confusion between 'tag' and 'label' 16:08:26 Created -> action #39 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/39 16:08:26 present+ 16:08:26 ora: do we accept with this modification? 16:08:26 present+ 16:08:26 RRSAgent, draft minutes 16:08:27 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed 16:09:05 p+ 16:09:05 present+ 16:09:05 present+ 16:09:12 present+ 16:09:12 present+ 16:09:12 ... none, then we can accept. 16:09:21 resolution on the minutes? 16:09:21 agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/f2add3af-6743-4f52-8fcc-4f62c6cdd8af/20230323T120000#agenda 16:09:22 clear agenda 16:09:22 agenda+ Scribe: Arndt, Dörthe 16:09:22 agenda+ Approval of last week's minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/03/16-rdf-star-minutes.html 16:09:22 agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 16:09:23 agenda+ Formal creation of task forces: 16:09:26 agenda+ Use case proposal by Peter: -> 3 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0100.html 16:09:29 agenda+ Update on process concerns/proposal: -> 4 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0064.html 16:09:32 agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting Next week's scribe: Chaves-Fraga, David 16:09:51 RESOLUTION: accept the minutes https://www.w3.org/2023/03/16-rdf-star-minutes.html 16:10:31 zakim, open next item 16:10:31 agendum 1 -- Scribe: Arndt, Dörthe -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:10:31 zakim, open item 3 16:10:31 agendum 3 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:10:31 q+ 16:10:45 s/regregrets/regrets/ 16:10:54 q+ 16:10:57 ack pchampin 16:11:00 s/p+/present+/ 16:11:07 pchampin: change of github settings changed, all can now add and change labels 16:11:29 ack gkellogg 16:11:45 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-Terminology 16:11:53 ghurlbot, close #34 16:11:54 Closed -> action #34 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/34 16:12:00 gkellogg: rdf terminology wiki created 16:12:22 q+ 16:12:29 ack TallTed 16:12:36 q+ to explain about the dashboard 16:12:57 ... there was some discussion whether it should be in our github, I want to keep all together 16:13:35 TallTed: I dislike that the wiki does not give notifications, therefore I dislike it 16:13:41 q+ 16:13:49 ack pfps 16:13:50 q- 16:14:11 q+ 16:14:26 ack gkellogg 16:14:41 pfps: should we go somewhere else? comparison is there, but not good. 16:15:14 +1 to use markdown pages in the docs/ directory 16:15:38 gkellogg: more feature cause extra work, do we need that given that is more for the current discussion and not for long-lasting access 16:15:58 The wiki is a git repo: `gh repo clone https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg.wiki.git` 16:16:15 ora: I prefer to have everything in github, but understand concerns 16:16:45 You can see the versions, e.g., https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/Editor's-guide/_history 16:17:03 and there, you can compare arbitrary pairs of revisions 16:17:03 q+ 16:17:12 TallTed: for me arbitrary version comparisons are important, notifications are as well, I do not see how to get these 16:17:20 ack ktk 16:17:29 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/Editor's-guide/_compare/d248a753731bcddac4d725bfc5843463f609052c...15f37ab93dda76743b40df1044e89bdb44032582 16:18:03 There is indeed an atom feed: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki 16:18:20 I can see changes to wiki pages https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/_compare/1c556ed9dba2c01ec0d73f21a4f04b50dfc0d7cb 16:18:23 sorry: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki.atom 16:18:36 ktk: I will test what is possible 16:18:43 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/tree/main/docs 16:19:21 scribe+ 16:19:35 gkellogg: gkellogg to move existing wiki entries to the /docs directory 16:19:47 scribe- 16:19:54 q+ 16:20:05 ack pchampin 16:20:05 pchampin, you wanted to explain about the dashboard 16:20:23 q+ 16:20:37 ack pfps 16:20:48 pfps: dashbord should contain all actions with filter accordingly 16:21:01 ack gkellogg 16:21:02 all my completed actions should be closed 16:21:14 q+ 16:21:21 pfps: the actions mentioned should be clased 16:21:37 q+ 16:21:44 ack ktk 16:22:10 q- 16:22:13 q+ 16:22:16 ktk: what is the apporach for closing actions in genral? 16:22:28 q+ 16:22:39 q+ 16:22:45 q- 16:23:06 ora: I trust people if they say that actions are not contraversial 16:23:27 TallTed: I would prefer that the closing is announced here 16:25:05 ack TallTed 16:25:53 My actions in the main working group repository, #28, #27, #26, and #17, are all complete 16:25:54 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/27 -> Action 27 [closed] present a use case process to the working group (on pfps) due 9 Mar 2023 16:25:54 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/28 -> Action 28 write a proposal document for a WG process (on pfps) due 16 Mar 2023 16:25:54 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/17 -> Action 17 set up tf to get use cases set up (on pfps) due 16 Feb 2023 16:25:55 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/26 -> Action 26 send message so that ora and adrian can have the minutes fixed up (on pfps) due 9 Mar 2023 16:25:57 ack gkellogg 16:26:42 close #28 16:26:43 Closed -> action #28 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/28 16:26:49 gkellogg: I am concerned that if we announce all closed issues we will waist working group time 16:26:52 close #27 16:26:53 Closed -> action #27 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/27 16:26:56 close #26 16:26:57 Closed -> action #26 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/26 16:27:08 close #17 16:27:09 Closed -> action #17 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/17 16:27:18 s/waist/waste/ 16:27:31 q? 16:27:32 q+ 16:27:38 ack pfps 16:27:46 Issue #31 is done as well, close #31 16:27:46 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/31 -> Action 31 chairs to contact I18N group to start discussion (on ktk, rdfguy) 16:27:47 ora: if things are not controversial, we do not need to loose time on that 16:27:57 close #31 16:27:59 Closed -> action #31 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/31 16:29:30 pfps: there should be a place where we can all look up which issues are closed, this information should at least be visible till a next meeting 16:29:47 RRSAgent, make minutes 16:29:48 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin 16:30:04 TallTed: I really just want small announcements, such that we can see them in the minutes 16:30:33 q- 16:30:39 pfps: we can also add them all in the agenda if we completed them, then they show up 16:31:25 agenda? 16:31:32 zakim, open item 4 16:31:32 agendum 4 -- Formal creation of task forces: -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:32:45 pchampin: We can create task forces, but these need to be created officially, we have 3 task forces: editors, use cases and semantics 16:32:52 sounds good to me 16:33:05 +1 16:33:24 RESOLUTION: formally establish task forces for Editors, Use Cases, and Semantics 16:33:29 + 16:33:32 +1 16:33:33 +1 16:33:33 +1 16:33:37 +1 16:33:39 +1 16:33:57 ora: what does it mean in practice? 16:34:19 pchampin: I will create task forces 16:34:20 action: pchampin, create the task forces: Editors, Use Cases, Semantics 16:35:21 gkellogg's proposed agenda item: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0108.html 16:35:52 s/loose time/lose time/ 16:36:28 gkellogg: last week we discussed to tag open issues, it happened, but we are now waiting, can we discuss that now? 16:36:29 q+ 16:36:32 w3c/rdf-concepts#16 16:36:33 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/16 -> Pull Request 16 Security considerations (gkellogg) spec:enhancement 16:36:48 ora: what is open? 16:37:43 gkellogg: instructions for editors to what they can proceed on and what requires discussion 16:39:01 q+ 16:39:09 ack pfps 16:39:34 ack pchampin 16:39:49 pfps: I agree that we need some sort of process, to know what needs to be done 16:40:51 q+ 16:41:03 ack ora 16:41:08 I have 4 editorial PRs: https://github.com/w3c/sparql-query/pulls/afs 16:41:10 pchampin: proposal: mark actions as ready to be closed, close in meeting, we can do similar for pull requests, these should be visible before the meeting, if necessary, we discuss them in the meeting 16:41:31 q+ 16:41:31 ora: does that mean that normative changes become agenda items? 16:41:35 pchampin: yes 16:41:40 ack pfps 16:42:35 q+ 16:42:42 ack AndyS 16:42:46 pfps: maybe that is too much of an bottom up process, people should ask the working group and not just create requests 16:43:24 AndyS: I think that is the work of the editors to look over the changes 16:43:56 ora: are you afraid that things are changed without being noticed 16:44:20 pfps: yes, I am afraid that some things get in without consideration 16:44:37 q+ 16:44:54 q- 16:44:54 ack AndyS 16:44:54 ... example: RDF-JSON, that has not been discussed in the working group 16:45:19 ... also grammar, what if it is wrong? 16:45:24 s/RDF-JSON/rdf:JSON/ 16:45:56 ... working group should decide how much we look into the grammar and its details 16:46:26 q+ 16:46:37 ack TallTed 16:46:48 pchampin: rdf:JSON is just an issue marker, it is an open issue, it is not dangerous 16:47:35 q+ 16:47:39 TallTed: issue markers are just to get awareness of discussions, but they do by themselves not change documents 16:47:41 ack AndyS 16:47:54 TallTed: what can the editors do? 16:48:23 ... I have some pull requests and am waiting. 16:48:34 s/TallTed/AndyS/ 16:48:58 q+ 16:49:21 ora: I am also concerned that the process of official approval can hold us back 16:49:38 ack TallTed 16:50:26 I agree that editorial changes can be made just by the editors. 16:51:55 q+ 16:52:04 TallTed: editor's jobs are to put group decisions into group documents, since we have multiple editors, editorial changes can be approved and looked over by the different editors 16:52:23 ack gkellogg 16:52:43 ora: I think that is a good process 16:52:58 q+ 16:53:18 My view, however, is that editorial changes should be considered narrowly, i.e., that adding a new section on rdf:JSON is not an editorial change. 16:53:38 gkellogg: I think we should have a process in which changes stay open at least a week, that enables everyone to see what is happening and maybe raise concerns 16:53:58 ... issue makers can then be used 16:54:15 q+ 16:54:19 ... not all discussions need to be done in meetings 16:54:23 ack AndyS 16:54:36 ora: I think we already have a good process in place 16:55:21 AndyS: what are group decisions? just things discussed in our meeting? 16:55:45 ack pfps 16:55:55 TallTed: group decisions are also general agreements how we proceed 16:56:41 q? 16:57:02 pfps: there was no process, some things stayed open, we need a way to ask for discussions 16:57:25 TallTed: use e-mail, git, ... and name them 16:57:41 q+ 16:57:52 ack pchampin 16:57:57 ora: chairs should look into pr's 16:58:07 ... till next meeting 16:58:29 Souri: can you scribe next week? it's David Chavez in the list but he can't 16:59:04 pchampin: can we agree that things marked as editorial for some time and have so far not lead to discussions can be merged? 16:59:08 close #25 16:59:09 Closed -> action #25 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/25 16:59:22 ack pchampin 16:59:23 I'm fine with allowing editorial PRs with no needs discussion labels to be merged 16:59:33 +1 16:59:40 ... discussions should happen outside the meeting if possible 17:00:10 RRSAgent, make minutes 17:00:12 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin 17:00:54 hurrah for `/i/`! 17:01:28 s|/i/|i/| 17:01:46 olaf has left #rdf-star 17:06:01 s|agendum 1 -- Scribe: Arndt, Dörthe -- taken up [from agendabot]|| 17:07:37 i/gkellogg: last week/Topic: Handling pending PRs 17:07:39 RRSAgent, make minutes 17:07:41 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin 17:09:51 i/TallTed: I dislike/Subtopic: Github Wiki// 17:10:07 previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/03/16-rdf-star-minutes.html 17:10:15 next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/03/30-rdf-star-minutes.html 17:12:33 i|pfps: dashbord should|Subtopic: -> Action dashboard https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3/ 17:12:36 RRSAgent, make minutes 17:12:37 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin 17:46:31 pfps has left #rdf-star 17:53:07 gkellogg has joined #rdf-star 17:53:15 RRSAgent, make minutes 17:53:16 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/23-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin present- gkellogg_ present- enrico