IRC log of rdf-star on 2023-06-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:56:28 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:56:32 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-irc
15:57:56 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:58:25 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:59:34 [pchampin]
zakim, start meeting
15:59:34 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:59:36 [Zakim]
please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin
15:59:47 [pchampin]
meeting: RDF-star WG weekly
15:59:58 [pchampin]
chair: ktk
16:00:02 [pchampin]
regrets+ ora
16:01:22 [ktk]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/931e4e54-81ad-4aa3-a39f-84efe4b788c7/20230622T120000/
16:01:22 [agendabot]
clear agenda
16:01:22 [agendabot]
agenda+ Scribe: TBD
16:01:22 [agendabot]
agenda+ Approval of last week's minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/06/15-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:01:22 [agendabot]
agenda+ Update on Use Cases
16:01:22 [agendabot]
agenda+ Update on Semantic TF 5 Text Direction -> 2 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Jun/0027.html
16:01:22 [agendabot]
agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
16:01:28 [agendabot]
agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
16:01:28 [agendabot]
agenda+ Discussion on named graphs -> 5 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/46
16:01:28 [agendabot]
agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
16:01:29 [gtw]
scribe+
16:01:29 [ktk]
present+
16:01:29 [gkellogg]
present+
16:01:48 [ktk]
regrets+ efranco
16:02:14 [ktk]
regrets- efranco
16:02:17 [pfps]
pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:02:17 [Tpt]
present+
16:02:21 [Tpt]
(might have to drop early
16:02:27 [pfps]
present+
16:02:32 [gtw]
present+
16:02:38 [AndyS]
present+
16:02:43 [enrico]
enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:02:46 [Dominik_T]
Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
16:02:46 [enrico]
present+
16:02:48 [pchampin]
present+
16:02:57 [Dominik_T]
present+
16:03:19 [doerthe]
doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:03:22 [AZ]
AZ has joined #rdf-star
16:03:26 [doerthe]
present+
16:03:29 [AZ]
present+
16:03:37 [ktk]
Zakim, next item
16:03:37 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- Scribe: TBD -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:03:44 [ktk]
Zakim, next item
16:03:44 [Zakim]
agendum 1 was just opened, ktk
16:03:47 [pchampin]
zakim, close item 1
16:03:47 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Scribe: TBD, closed
16:03:48 [Zakim]
I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:03:48 [Zakim]
2. Approval of last week's minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/06/15-rdf-star-minutes.html [from agendabot]
16:03:51 [pchampin]
zakim, next item
16:03:51 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- Approval of last week's minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/06/15-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:04:25 [gtw]
AZ: my acronym is used, but I was not present
16:04:40 [gtw]
Tpt: same case for me
16:05:10 [gtw]
pchampin: maybe we didn't kick out some agent
16:05:22 [gtw]
s/Tpt/dominik_T/
16:05:44 [gtw]
pchampin: can propose to approve pending fix of presence
16:05:57 [ktk]
PROPOSAL: Accept the minutes, pending the removal of presence for AZ & Dominik_T
16:06:05 [gkellogg]
+1
16:06:09 [ktk]
+1
16:06:10 [pfps]
+1 with the change
16:06:10 [AndyS]
+1
16:06:13 [gtw]
+1
16:06:16 [TallTed]
+1
16:06:16 [doerthe]
+1
16:06:18 [pchampin]
+1
16:06:19 [Dominik_T]
+1
16:06:27 [TallTed]
present+
16:06:36 [ktk]
RESOLUTION: Accept the minutes, pending the removal of presence for AZ & Dominik_T
16:06:37 [enrico]
+1
16:06:46 [ktk]
Zakim: close item 2
16:07:03 [ktk]
Zakim, next item
16:07:03 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- Update on Use Cases -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:07:27 [pfps]
q+
16:07:35 [gtw]
pfps: not much to report
16:07:44 [gtw]
... several use cases are progressing. one new one I haven't got to.
16:07:46 [AndyS]
q+
16:07:51 [gtw]
... if you have use cases, please add it.
16:08:09 [gtw]
... Ted said he couldn't edit wiki entries. That's because permissions are set differently. pchampin?
16:08:26 [ktk]
ack pfps
16:08:27 [gtw]
... you can put PR against the wiki as well.
16:08:43 [gtw]
AndyS: I tried to track the docs for that. Seemed to say you couldn't do that.
16:08:46 [pchampin]
action: pchampin to ensure that anyone in the WG can edit the UC wiki / make PR
16:08:54 [ghurlbot]
Created -> action #67 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/67
16:08:54 [gtw]
pfps: let me try and find it.
16:09:21 [gtw]
pfps: at the bottom of this page...
16:09:41 [pfps]
Look at https://github.com/w3c/rdf-ucr/issues/12 for a pointer to editing wiki pages
16:10:00 [gtw]
pfps: some permissions have to be changed.
16:10:27 [gtw]
pchampin: I have an action to look at this. Probably only the editors could make changes to repos.
16:10:33 [gtw]
... for use cases, arguably that should be different.
16:10:39 [gtw]
pfps: UCR is locked down more strongly than others.
16:10:59 [gtw]
AndyS: I can't see anything saying you can do PRs. What am I missing?
16:11:18 [richard_lea]
richard_lea has joined #rdf-star
16:11:29 [gtw]
pfps: [quotes from linked page]
16:11:34 [gtw]
AndyS: that's not a PR.
16:11:43 [gtw]
pfps: you could create a new branch. should be able to do PRs.
16:12:06 [gtw]
AndyS: github adds another layer on top of the PR mechanism. Have found pages that say you can't do that. No machinery for wikis.
16:12:08 [pfps]
s/locked/probably locked/
16:12:10 [gtw]
pfps: I'll check it out.
16:12:17 [richard_lea]
present+
16:12:27 [pfps]
action: pfps to check out PRs against GitHub wiki pages
16:12:29 [ghurlbot]
Created -> action #68 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/68
16:12:35 [gtw]
AndyS: pfps, do we have reasonable coverage at the moment?
16:12:37 [gtw]
pfps: no.
16:13:01 [gtw]
... we have one which is very syntactic. several are semantic. don't really have a provenance use case.
16:13:10 [gtw]
AndyS: syntactic is add/delete triples?
16:13:11 [gtw]
pfps: yes.
16:13:29 [gtw]
AndyS: the other one that came up was danbri's triple occurences.
16:13:36 [ktk]
ack AndyS
16:13:37 [gtw]
pfps: we don't have a UC for it.
16:13:59 [gtw]
... all of the semantic ones really seem to be about occurences. anything with events requires triple occurences.
16:14:17 [gtw]
... when you take an event that has multiple arguments, project down to 3 args, you invariable end up with many-to-one mapping.
16:14:24 [gtw]
... you have to back off from the triple or things get conflated.
16:14:52 [gtw]
... depends what you mean by occurence.
16:15:01 [gtw]
ktk: do we need to ping people again to add provenance one?
16:15:11 [gtw]
pfps: on my list. trying not o add too many use cases so I can remain responsive.
16:15:25 [gtw]
... I'll try to ping more people. Tried to pick ones which were easy (but was wrong). Will try to pick prov-related ones.
16:15:35 [gtw]
ktk: If you need more support, let us know.
16:16:08 [gtw]
pfps: CIDOC-CRM is really complicated. I think I know what they wanted now.
16:16:15 [gtw]
... took a lot of back and forth.
16:16:35 [ktk]
Zakim, next item
16:16:35 [Zakim]
agendum 4 -- Update on Semantic TF 5 Text Direction -> 2 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Jun/0027.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:17:04 [gtw]
enrico: the plan was to have small schema that explains all possible variation of behaviors.
16:17:16 [gtw]
... of use cases. how many variations you can have.
16:17:25 [gtw]
... so far we're not concerned with formalizing semantics for each.
16:17:31 [gtw]
... just to have exhastive list of behaviors.
16:17:45 [gtw]
... for example, the case pfps mentioned would be captured by one of these variations.
16:18:24 [gtw]
... again by superficial look, what pfps is saying is correct. most UC fall into two major cases.
16:18:36 [pfps]
q+
16:18:57 [gtw]
pfps: there was an action on me to add to terminology. I have a PR in. there's been some comments that I have to figure out what to do. in-progress.
16:19:00 [ktk]
ack pfps
16:19:39 [pchampin]
Topic: Text Direction
16:19:40 [gtw]
[discussion about agenda management]
16:20:04 [pchampin]
s/on Semantic TF 5 Text Direction/on Semantic TF/
16:20:16 [gkellogg]
w3c/rdf-concepts#48
16:20:16 [ghurlbot]
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/48 -> Pull Request 48 Add text direction as a fourth element of literals. (gkellogg) i18n-tracker, needs discussion, spec:substantive
16:20:28 [gtw]
gkellogg: this was my proposal. PR to support initial text direction.
16:20:36 [gtw]
... agreed several meetings ago that we could work on this.
16:20:51 [gtw]
... there's a fair amount of discussion in PR about terminology.
16:21:02 [gtw]
... we determined that correct term is "base direction". unicode uses that also.
16:21:15 [gtw]
... question about how do we characterize literals including initial text direction.
16:21:33 [gtw]
... one being to add additional facet to rdf:langString where there's now a text direction element in addition to lang tag
16:21:49 [gtw]
... another option would be another type of literal dirLangString
16:22:21 [gtw]
... would semantically differentiate the two. ltr, rtl, none for langString; only two options for dirLangString.
16:22:31 [gtw]
... variety of references in there for why this is important.
16:22:35 [gtw]
... calls for this for some time.
16:22:37 [pfps]
q+
16:22:42 [pchampin]
q+
16:22:56 [gtw]
ktk: asking for reviews of PR?
16:23:11 [gtw]
gkellogg: questions about how we want to review literals. is adding another concept beyond lang-tagged strings a little conceptual overload?
16:23:18 [gtw]
... they are virtually the same thing.
16:23:27 [gtw]
... is it semantically clearer with different datatypes and terminology?
16:23:33 [ktk]
ack pfps
16:23:36 [gtw]
pfps: I'm still confused what requirement this is meeting.
16:24:03 [gtw]
gkellogg: if you look at documents on text direction in unicode, there's description on the problems with how to start off displaying text (ltr, rtl).
16:24:15 [TallTed]
q+
16:24:18 [gtw]
... cannot be determinied by unicode codepoints/characters.
16:24:30 [gtw]
... cases highlighted without providing metadata on how to start, it will get it wrong.
16:24:47 [gtw]
... this adds metadata. in html this is done with a dir attribute interpreted as how to start the presentation.
16:25:00 [gtw]
... as you noted, it's not completely adequate since direction can change within a string.
16:25:15 [gtw]
... at that point, we're beyond strings into structural elements. html would solve this with spans each with its own direction.
16:25:35 [gtw]
pfps: I get all that. I don't understand what good a partial solution is.
16:25:48 [gtw]
gkellogg: I think it is a complete solution for how to display strings. Where string is a sequence of codepoints.
16:26:00 [gtw]
... not trying to solve a markup problem where you can compose arbitrarily complex document.
16:26:08 [TallTed]
q+ to say relatively simply, this is movement toward better internationalization of RDF. still imperfect, but vastly better than today.
16:26:10 [gtw]
... I invite people to look at referenced documents.
16:26:30 [gtw]
... we had disussions with i18n team and community.
16:26:41 [gtw]
... several people including pchampin and ivanh spent a lot of time on this in json-ld phase.
16:27:05 [gtw]
pfps: this is something to keep i18n team happy?
16:27:06 [pfps]
I dispute that initial direction solves string display. There are strings that require in-line metadata.
16:27:31 [gtw]
gkellogg: not being able to support directional text is an i18n ... [?]
16:27:32 [ktk]
ack pchampin
16:27:40 [gtw]
pchampin: yes, you could put it like that. it's to make the i18n peopel happy.
16:28:10 [gtw]
... this is not a full fledged document format.
16:28:14 [AndyS]
s/peopel/people/
16:28:15 [pfps]
if this is something to satisfy the i18n requirements, then we should get their approval before this is merged
16:28:26 [gtw]
... given language strings are human-oriented and meant to be displayed, good practice is to make this metadata available for them as well.
16:28:47 [gtw]
... the first proposal is to have two distinct datatypes langString with optional direction, and dirLangString with mandatory direction?
16:29:05 [gtw]
gkellogg: not entirely. in first option, we'd use langString with base direction as element.
16:29:13 [gtw]
... it's one possible value for that would be "no direction".
16:29:28 [pfps]
What I don't understand is there are already two ways to provide full information about text direction - rdf:HTML and the i18n types from JSON-LD
16:29:30 [gtw]
pchampin: I'm not a big fan of multiplying datatypes.
16:29:42 [gtw]
... could imagine instead of no direction, the absence of direction could be...
16:30:00 [gtw]
gkellogg: I think it was absence. would expect it to inherit direction in html.
16:30:08 [ktk]
ack TallTed
16:30:08 [Zakim]
TallTed, you wanted to say relatively simply, this is movement toward better internationalization of RDF. still imperfect, but vastly better than today.
16:30:24 [gtw]
TallTed: answering pfps' question, it improves our i18n which is a generic reuqirement of all rdf documents.
16:30:42 [gtw]
... we need to do what we can to make those things better.
16:30:53 [gtw]
... as there are scripts that go both directions, this is needed.
16:31:05 [gtw]
... also vertical scripts, but don't think they are manditorially so.
16:31:10 [gtw]
... might be another question for i18n group.
16:31:24 [gtw]
... we have reasonable solution right now for rtl and ltr.
16:31:47 [ktk]
Zakim, next item
16:31:47 [Zakim]
agendum 5 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:32:01 [TallTed]
s/all rdf documents/all w3c documents/
16:32:28 [pchampin]
q+
16:33:00 [gtw]
pchampin: I reached out to some people in w3c. Took opportunity to have a closer look at the issue.
16:33:04 [gtw]
[what issue?]
16:33:13 [gtw]
... go incrementally with this. Tweak one parameter at a time.
16:33:29 [gtw]
... discussion is all over the place because PR makes a lot of subtle changes.
16:33:32 [ktk]
ack pchampin
16:33:46 [gtw]
... think we should aim to tidy the HTML itself. We are inheriting rather old HTML.
16:34:02 [gtw]
... align more with respec stylesheets might solve problems. Once we have clean html, we can optimize css.
16:34:17 [gtw]
... I'm assuming that's what w3c colleague will tell use.
16:34:25 [ktk]
it's this issue https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/pull/30
16:35:13 [gtw]
ktk: issue on strong compliance. needs discussion.
16:35:20 [TallTed]
i|reached out|subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/pull/30|
16:35:28 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:35:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:35:45 [pchampin]
scribe+
16:36:19 [pchampin]
AZ: have not had the time to read the last comments on the 'compliane' issue #19
16:36:19 [ghurlbot]
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/19 -> Action 19 work with antoine and others to come up with a proposal for weak and strong compliance (on Antoine-Zimmermann, rdfguy) due 16 Feb 2023
16:36:46 [gtw]
ktk: any other actions? issue 13 is complete. close it?
16:37:00 [AZ]
s/compiane/compliance/
16:37:02 [gtw]
pchampin: we can resolve it. I reported on that last week.
16:37:04 [pchampin]
ghurlbot, close #13
16:37:05 [ghurlbot]
Closed -> action #13 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/13
16:37:10 [pchampin]
q+
16:37:18 [AZ]
s/compliane/compliance/
16:37:32 [gtw]
pchampin: reporting on the ?? stuff. few documents that are not published yet.
16:37:48 [gtw]
... everything except for trig.
16:37:55 [ktk]
s/?? stuff/#55 issue/
16:37:55 [ghurlbot]
https://github.com/stuff//issues/55 -> #55
16:37:56 [TallTed]
i|have not had the time|subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/19|
16:37:59 [gtw]
... every merged PR leads to new publication of new draft.
16:38:16 [gtw]
ktk: issue 55 in rdf-star-wg
16:38:17 [ktk]
ack pchampin
16:38:19 [TallTed]
s/compliane/compliance/
16:38:30 [ktk]
Zakim, next item
16:38:30 [Zakim]
agendum 6 -- Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:38:31 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:38:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:39:09 [gkellogg]
q+
16:39:22 [gtw]
gkellogg: the PR on trig for quoted triples.
16:39:26 [gtw]
... I think we can merge that.
16:39:30 [ktk]
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-trig/pull/24
16:39:32 [gtw]
... will test out echidna publication.
16:39:45 [ktk]
ack gkellogg
16:40:03 [gtw]
ktk: no comments. think this is "go".
16:40:04 [TallTed]
s|s/compliane/compliance/||
16:40:25 [TallTed]
s|s/compiane/compliance/||
16:40:43 [ktk]
zakim, next item
16:40:43 [Zakim]
agendum 7 -- Discussion on named graphs -> 5 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/46 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:40:43 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:40:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:41:00 [gtw]
ktk: continuation of what we started last week.
16:41:27 [gtw]
... not named graphs as I learned. "context".
16:41:38 [gtw]
AndyS: no, not "context". That is not an accurate description of how it came about.
16:41:48 [gtw]
... that was one of the inputs to the WG.
16:42:08 [gtw]
AndyS: another confusion is whether they are really talking about graph literals vs. named graphs.
16:42:16 [gtw]
... a term in the RDF graph could be another graph (n3-style)
16:42:46 [gtw]
... don't think treating singletons in graphs is the same as talking about triples.
16:42:54 [gtw]
... not convinced there is a complete answer that excludes quoted triples.
16:43:20 [pchampin]
q+
16:43:44 [gtw]
pchampin: I'm still unsure what we should do. +1 to what AndyS said. Difference between named graphs and graph literals.
16:44:11 [gtw]
... I'm wondering if we should make some statements from WG, what form that should take (blog posts?).
16:44:15 [gtw]
... enough documents to work on.
16:44:26 [gtw]
... still people are nagging us about this.
16:44:52 [gtw]
... there's some consensus in the group. we seem to go in the same direction.
16:45:02 [ktk]
ack pchampin
16:45:08 [AndyS]
q+
16:45:13 [gtw]
... what would be the best way to capitalize on this group knowledge? make it available to the rest of the world.
16:45:26 [gtw]
AndyS: we do have RDF-new.
16:45:48 [gtw]
... I'm not sure it's that beneficial to go that way. It's got to explain what's new. If it becomes a defense of it, doc doesn't actually help new people.
16:45:58 [ktk]
ack AndyS
16:46:04 [pchampin]
q+ to propose that we could spin in a non-defensive way
16:46:20 [gtw]
... We can make a statement. I don't think that will change the situation a great deal.
16:46:36 [gtw]
... It's easy to pick weaknesses about any approach that tries to be a simple step forward.
16:47:56 [gtw]
... technologies have potential to make things to work, don't know what it would look like in reality, whether it gains acceptance.
16:48:22 [ktk]
ack pchampin
16:48:22 [Zakim]
pchampin, you wanted to propose that we could spin in a non-defensive way
16:48:25 [gtw]
pchampin: rdf-new cold be a place where we could write something.
16:48:36 [gtw]
... could spin it as not defensive.
16:48:58 [gtw]
... we should be careful not to be too defensive on proposals.
16:49:08 [AndyS]
s/cold/could/
16:49:25 [gtw]
ktk: easiest way to say something is the mailing list.
16:49:38 [gtw]
... regarding living spec, a blog is a bit more formal.
16:49:41 [gtw]
... rdf-new would be even more formal.
16:49:58 [ktk]
Zakim, next item
16:49:58 [Zakim]
agendum 8 -- Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:50:27 [gtw]
ktk: ora remarked in two weeks is the week of july 4th. holiday in the states. proposed we might cancel.
16:50:49 [gtw]
gtw: I will be here.
16:51:04 [pfps]
The holiday is Tuesday, so people would have to take a whole week off for the meeting to impacted.
16:51:14 [gtw]
gkellogg: I will be scuba diving.
16:51:22 [gtw]
pfps: I'm in Canada.
16:52:32 [gtw]
pchampin: there are enough people not impacted that we justify keeping the meeting.
16:53:07 [gtw]
gkellogg: trig did updated, btw.
16:53:29 [TallTed]
fwiw, I'm fine to meet on the 6th
16:53:41 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:53:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:54:17 [ktk]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:54:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
16:54:37 [ktk]
ah sorry didn't see you did it too pchampin
16:55:24 [pchampin]
previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/06/15-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:55:33 [pchampin]
next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/06/29-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:56:00 [pchampin]
s/ah sorry didn't see you did it too pchampin//
16:56:04 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:56:05 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:56:11 [ktk]
looks good tnx
16:57:17 [pchampin]
present+ richard_lea
16:57:18 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:57:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:05:02 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
17:10:00 [gkellogg_]
gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
17:23:05 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
17:25:51 [gkellogg_]
gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
17:27:39 [gkellog__]
gkellog__ has joined #rdf-star
17:37:15 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
17:53:05 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:09:24 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:27:20 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:39:09 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:45:38 [gkellogg_]
gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
18:46:50 [pfps]
pfps has left #rdf-star
18:48:56 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:54:51 [gkellogg_]
gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
19:01:30 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:16:56 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:19:27 [gkellogg_]
gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
19:22:38 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:22:58 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:38:48 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:02:23 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:04:10 [gkellogg_]
gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
22:15:15 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:21:38 [gkellogg_]
gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star