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