Meeting minutes
Scribe: Haudebourg, Timothée (alternate: Arndt, Dörthe)
Approval of last week's minutes: 1
<pfps> minutes look good
gkellogg: outstanding item should be discussed, apart from that fine
<ora> proposal: Accept last week's minutes
<gkellogg> +1
ora: we add that if there is time
<rubensworks> +1
<pfps> +1
<niklasl> +1
<doerthe> +1
<ora> 0
<AndyS> +1
<olaf> 0
<Souri> +1
RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes
Brainstorming: “What still needs to be done” (Ora)
ora: I would like to make a list what needs to be done, just to keep the overview and organise the work
<rubensworks> w3c/
<rubensworks> w3c/
rubenworks: incorporation of the RDF-star community report to the sparql-update and sparql-query (w3c/
gkellogg: the dashboard also contains open issues
gkellogg: transparency vs. opacity is open, also concrete/abstract syntax
niklas1: I am having a hard time teaching RDF-star for example relationships to named graphs
niklas1: maybe we should add at least a note to clarify
niklas1: transparency is a big part of the confusion
ora: that would indeed be good to clarify
ora: how do we maintain the list we create here? only git? something more?
AndyS: one problem for SPARQL is that changes might arise from changes to the semantics (e.g.; simple entailment), That should be resolved.
AndyS: we need more than just a list of issues, we also need tracking. Maybe the github project part is a good solution here, but this would need supervision, maybe by the chairs?
ora: Adrian and I are happy to do the gate keeping here and that would be a good idea to have
ora: this will be picked up in the chairs meeting
enrico: The use cases are related to the semantics discussion, the absence of use cases blocks the process here
<niklasl> +1 for concrete use cases informing the choice of semantics
ora: welcome to Dave Raggett
Review of open actions, available at 2
Review of pull requests, available at 3
ora: my action is open, as pchampin is absent, we cannot ask him, so issues remain open
ora: proposal to merge editorial things
<gkellogg> gkellogg: hold off on w3c/rdf-concepts#57 until next week.
<gb> Pull Request 57 Adds a definition for "IRI reference". (by gkellogg) [spec:editorial]
gkellogg: hold off on w3c/rdf-concepts#57 until next week since it is new
ora: we now have a dependency of a living spec, is that a problem, do we have experience there?
ora: what do we do concretely? Do we have to state that the dependencies were good at some point in time?
TallTed: normally there is a dated version and this is used
gkellogg: I do not find time stamps
<gkellogg> Snapshot https://
TallTed: I think it is there but can't check at the moment
AndyS: Are there guarantees about what stays valid?
ora: either we need guidance or we need to come up with our own principles how to handle it
DaveRaggett: If you make a concrete question, I can look up how this can be don/is done by others
gkellogg: Maybe we need an infrastructure to get a closest snap shot to our publication?
Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
ora: so far we only have one dependency to a living spec, to dom
<gkellogg> https://
gkellogg: we should go over issues which need discussions (as discussed in last meeting)
gkellogg: problem that language tags have different representation (https://
AndyS: we should ask the community
ora: options are 1. ask community and wait, then put it in the spec, 2. we make a proposal, 3. give it to RDF canonicalization spec
AndyS: It is not really a canonicalization problem
gkellogg: I also added issues. Forcing implementations to use lower case language tags will break a lot of implementations
gkellogg: RDF canonicalization is bound to RDF 1.1, so we can only make people aware of the problem
ora: could we make a use case for the problem?
gkellogg: how to best do it? wiki?
ora: actual real use case as all other use cases?
gkellogg: I will formulate such a use case
ACTION: gkellogg to formulate use case on language tag canonicalization
<gb> Created action #82
<gkellogg> Semantics TF calendar: https://
Tpt: add to what needs to be done: a few erratas on the SPARQL query spec
<gb> Created action #83