14:46:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
14:46:27 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-irc
14:46:55 <TallTed> meeting: RDF-star WG biweekly long meeting
14:53:03 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:53:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
14:53:06 <TallTed> rrsagent, make logs public
14:53:37 <TallTed> scribe: TallTed
14:53:37 <TallTed> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/5ecc5c5f-5cd2-410c-b97c-6b13c6b843f1/20231026T110000/
14:53:37 <agendabot> clear agenda
14:53:37 <agendabot> agenda+ Discussion of Peters remarks  -> 1 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0042.html  & the proposal by the chairs  -> 2 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0071.html
14:53:54 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:54:08 <TallTed> present+
14:54:39 <TallTed> scribe: TallTed
14:54:45 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:54:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
14:57:57 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-star
14:58:07 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
14:58:26 <fsasaki> fsasaki has joined #rdf-star
14:58:53 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
14:59:19 <pfps> present+
14:59:42 <TallTed> present+ ora
14:59:45 <AZ> present+
14:59:46 <TallTed> present+ AZ
15:00:12 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
15:00:24 <TallTed> present+ tl
15:00:28 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
15:00:58 <fsasaki> present+
15:01:15 <tl> present+
15:02:54 <TallTed> present+ enrico
15:02:54 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:02:54 <Zakim> Present: TallTed, pfps, ora, AZ, tl, fsasaki, enrico
15:02:54 <Zakim> On IRC I see enrico, tl, ora, fsasaki, pfps, AZ, RRSAgent, Zakim, TallTed, AndyS, draggett, smoothsalt, Timothe, VladimirAlexiev, Tpt, driib, gb, ktk, gtw, csarven, agendabot,
15:02:54 <Zakim> ... pchampin, rhiaro
15:02:55 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:03:09 <TallTed> present+ draggett
15:03:12 <TallTed> present+ pchampin
15:03:31 <TallTed> present+ AndyS
15:03:44 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
15:03:49 <olaf> present+
15:03:59 <AndyS> present+
15:04:00 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
15:04:04 <niklasl> present+
15:04:06 <gkellogg> present+
15:04:09 <enrico> present+
15:04:15 <pchampin> Zakim, who is here?
15:04:15 <Zakim> Present: TallTed, pfps, ora, AZ, tl, fsasaki, enrico, draggett, pchampin, AndyS, olaf, niklasl, gkellogg
15:04:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see niklasl, olaf, gkellogg, enrico, tl, ora, fsasaki, pfps, AZ, RRSAgent, Zakim, TallTed, AndyS, draggett, smoothsalt, Timothe, VladimirAlexiev, Tpt, driib, gb, ktk, gtw,
15:04:17 <Zakim> ... csarven, agendabot, pchampin, rhiaro
15:04:26 <TallTed> chair: ora
15:05:03 <AZ> I am ready to assist as second scribe when/if Ted gets tired
15:05:49 <TallTed> Zakim, first agendum
15:05:49 <Zakim> I don't understand 'first agendum', TallTed
15:05:55 <TallTed> Zakim, open agendum 1
15:05:55 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Discussion of Peters remarks  -> 1 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0042.html  & the proposal by the chairs  -> 2
15:05:58 <Zakim> ... https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0071.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:06:14 <TallTed> subtopic: presentation by @pfps
15:07:15 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
15:07:25 <Souri> present+
15:07:29 <TallTed> pfps: "Stick to the Basics", i.e., do what we should be doing before going on tangents
15:08:17 <TallTed> ... syntax is less important than what is intended to be communicated through that syntax
15:09:08 <TallTed> ... quoted/named/blank graphs substantially complicate matters
15:10:19 <TallTed> ... proposes satisfying the charter, and declaring victory
15:10:41 <olaf> q+
15:10:45 <TallTed> ... THEN considering other stuff
15:11:38 <ora> ack olaf
15:12:11 <pfps> I'm rather astonished that Zoom worked well for me.  :-)
15:12:12 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
15:12:18 <Dominik_T> present+
15:12:34 <TallTed> subtopic: presentation by tl
15:12:45 <pchampin> pfps's slides: https://www.w3.org/mid/5c79099d-d2d6-957f-804e-d04d1cc2af4a@gmail.com
15:13:41 <pfps> My slides are on the mailing list at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0108.html
15:19:31 <TallTed> [ tl's screenshared doc will be posted to the list, and will appear within https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/ ]
15:24:24 <ora> q?
15:25:05 <TallTed> subtopic: presentation by pchampin
15:25:39 <gtw> present+
15:25:44 <TallTed> pchampin: sympathizes with pfps concerns of the list of work to be done
15:26:27 <TallTed> ... work around N3 for graph terms, but need to not import all of N3
15:27:37 <TallTed> ... making large changes between early-adopter implementations of un-spec'ed RDF-star, and our output, could break implementer momentum, marking importance of use cases
15:29:05 <TallTed> ... there are issues with repurposing named graphs for quoted/annotated triples ... could work through resolving these issues instead of taking them as reason to invent something else for quoted/annotated triples
15:29:19 <fsasaki> Apologies that I have to leave early today. Just my +1 to pfps presentation about keeping the focus on rdf-star.
15:30:04 <ora> Thanks fsasaki
15:30:15 <TallTed> ... our overarching goal should be to produce the smallest spec to satisfy the largest community
15:30:39 <gkellogg> +1 to pchampin
15:30:41 <TallTed> q+
15:30:48 <ora> ack TallTed
15:30:55 <pchampin> scribe+
15:30:58 <niklasl> +1 from me too
15:31:14 <pchampin> TallTed: I'm concerned by the references to "concentrating on RDF-star". It does not exist until we say it does.
15:31:30 <Dominik_T> +1 to pchampin
15:31:30 <niklasl> +1 also to Ted: RDF-star is not yet a standard
15:31:43 <olaf> q+
15:31:43 <pchampin> ... The pre-existing implementation, the "early adopters", they don't implement a standard. They don't interoperate.
15:31:48 <ora> ack olaf
15:31:57 <pchampin> ... This is red hearring and discard a lot of what we have already done.
15:32:18 <tl> q+
15:32:23 <TallTed> s/they don't implement a standard. They don't interoperate/they didn't implement a standard. They don't interoperate/
15:32:23 <ora> ack tl
15:32:46 <niklasl> ... but GraphDB examples seem to make the seminal example mistake...
15:32:51 <pchampin> olaf: GraphDB implements exactly what we have in the CG report
15:32:58 <pchampin> scribe-
15:33:00 <TallTed> tl: could pchampin elaborate on convergence?
15:33:40 <TallTed> pchampin: doesn't have a clear idea right now, but mailing list content suggests some threads worth pursuing
15:33:58 <TallTed> s/convergence/convergence of named graphs and quoted triples/
15:34:06 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:34:21 <TallTed> subtopic: presentation by AndyS
15:35:41 <TallTed> [ slidedeck URL to be shared later ]
15:37:57 <TallTed> q+ to suggest thinking of "blank nodes" as "pronouns" can help with clarity, and by revealing hidden issues
15:39:08 <pchampin> scribe+
15:39:10 <ora> ack TallTed
15:39:10 <Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to suggest thinking of "blank nodes" as "pronouns" can help with clarity, and by revealing hidden issues
15:39:13 <tl> q+
15:39:20 <pchampin> TallTed: it can be helpful to think about blank nodes as pronouns
15:39:47 <pchampin> ... without an antecedent, a pronoun has no meaning, but with an antecedant it has a lot of meaning
15:39:55 <pchampin> ... the same for blank nodes: the context makes all the difference
15:40:09 <ora> ack tl
15:40:15 <pchampin> ... blank nodes can be challenging but are necessary
15:40:43 <pchampin> tl: did you say that we should standardize graphs?
15:40:57 <niklasl> I think Andy's point is important; and wonder if bnode skolemization is a "dead end" for accessing bnodes over the web, or a possibility?
15:41:07 <pchampin> AndyS: I didn't say anything strong one way or another. My point was to insist on "it's the web"
15:41:34 <pchampin> ... I happen to think that if we don't have groups of triples, I'm less confident about triples on their own.
15:41:44 <pchampin> ... But that's not an absolute MUST do.
15:41:54 <pchampin> ... My idea would be a modest way of going forward with quoted graphs.
15:42:24 <TallTed> subtopic: presentation by niklasl
15:42:27 <pchampin> scribe-
15:43:29 <TallTed> niklasl: [ slidedeck "Talking about Occurrences" ... link to deck, or copy of deck, to follow ]
15:56:14 <ora> q?
15:56:15 <AndyS> q+
15:56:21 <ora> ack AndyS
15:56:48 <niklasl> My presentation: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/e/2PACX-1vT6luSkUUGrOgpl8vn_MZesCcE5c6TY2bNbLRGk_upB-yzTmM8BrnbYl8BMvqO2Qm2ZBNFcjwB9yuDZ/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000&slide=id.p
15:57:06 <TallTed> AndyS: general comment, not specifically on deck from niklasl -- can't quite square our replacing a chunk of RDF Concepts, with the idea that we have not changed the RDF data model
15:57:19 <gkellogg> q+
15:57:26 <ora> ack gkellogg
15:57:28 <TallTed> ora: Any other presentations waiting?
15:58:05 <TallTed> gkellogg: another comment... the only way we have to talk about things is through syntax, but we need to be careful about relying on syntax when discussing abstracts
16:00:37 <TallTed> ... nested graphs are graphs within graphs but they don't seem to be represented via triples
16:00:37 <TallTed> [ please clean and supplement that, as needed ... I've failed to track speech sufficiently to capture even a skim ]
16:01:54 <TallTed> ... in my mind, blank nodes have always had something of a wave/particle dual-nature
16:02:47 <TallTed> ... among other things, you can only refer to them indirectly, and this inevitably loses some pieces of the original through that indirect reference
16:03:37 <TallTed> scribe-
16:04:01 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:04:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:04:08 <AZ> ora: various opinions were presented
16:04:15 <AZ> ora: I'm leaning towwards what pfps proposed
16:04:48 <AZ> ora: I'm worried about finishing the work
16:05:11 <enrico> q+
16:05:12 <TallTed> s/... in my mind,/gkellogg: in my mind,
16:05:22 <ora> ack enrico
16:05:39 <AZ> enrico: I agree with you (ora & pfps)
16:05:46 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:05:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:06:24 <niklasl> q+
16:06:24 <AZ> ... we should provide well thought hooks for those who want to extend the work to graph terms
16:06:24 <pchampin> i|ora: various opinions were presented|topic: Discussion
16:06:24 <AZ> ... the work is already complex
16:06:43 <ora> q?
16:07:23 <TallTed> i/various opinions were presented/scribe: AZ/
16:07:28 <ora> ack niklasl
16:07:28 <AZ> ... we should have something in a final report about what we know is not going to extend well in the future
16:07:30 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:07:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:07:49 <ora> q?
16:07:56 <AZ> niklasl: I'd like to clarify something on what was proposed by pfps
16:08:36 <AZ> ... what I proposed as simple solution, having just syntactic sugar
16:08:59 <TallTed> s/antecedant/antecedent/
16:09:19 <AZ> ... I'm worried that [TOBE COMPLTED] would complicate things and may harm adoption
16:09:30 <enrico> q+
16:09:34 <pfps> q+
16:09:38 <ora> ack enrico
16:09:51 <AndyS> Slides -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0112.html
16:10:13 <AZ> enrico: reification is something we should not refer to at all when we talk about triple terms/etc
16:10:38 <AZ> ... if we use reification we lose the model theory
16:10:41 <niklasl> q+
16:11:00 <niklasl> on the contrary, the subject of a reification is the thing referred to
16:11:01 <AZ> ... a triple term denotes a resource in the real world and we can talk about
16:11:08 <tl> q+
16:11:24 <AZ> ... but the property rdf:subject, rdf:object are meaningless
16:11:26 <TallTed> s|Slides -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0112.html||
16:11:26 <TallTed> s|[ slidedeck URL to be shared later ]|Slides -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/0112.html|
16:11:30 <ora> ack pfps
16:11:41 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:11:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:12:20 <ora> ack niklasl
16:12:20 <AZ> pfps: I'd be happy to get behind something like quoted triple as syntactic sugar for reification
16:12:20 <AZ> ... I thought it was stil an option on the table
16:12:39 <AZ> niklasl: happy to hear that [what pfps said]
16:13:07 <AZ> enrico: if quoted triple are syntactic sugar for reiffication,
16:13:36 <AZ> ... you have in the model theory those spurious properties that are just here to encode a syntactic construct
16:13:41 <pchampin> q+
16:13:46 <gkellogg> q+
16:14:14 <AZ> ... these properties represent "tricks" to represent a triple
16:14:24 <ora> ack tl
16:14:26 <AZ> ... they are meaningless in the real world
16:15:08 <AZ> tl: nested graphs have a name, and you know what the name denotes
16:15:18 <AZ> ... and they can be nested
16:15:52 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:15:55 <AZ> ... graphs compared to triples, going for graphs is much easier than having only triples
16:15:59 <doerthe> present+
16:16:28 <ora> q?
16:16:36 <AZ> ... what matters is I query graphs for information, comparing graphs is not important
16:16:55 <ora> ack pchampin
16:17:34 <AZ> ... maybe I'm missing something and I'd like to understand, but otherwise I'm for graphs
16:17:49 <TallTed> s|My presentation: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/e/2PACX-1vT6luSkUUGrOgpl8vn_MZesCcE5c6TY2bNbLRGk_upB-yzTmM8BrnbYl8BMvqO2Qm2ZBNFcjwB9yuDZ/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000&slide=id.p||
16:17:49 <TallTed> s|slidedeck "Talking about Occurrences" ... link to deck, or copy of deck, to follow|slidedeck "Talking about Occurrences": https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/e/2PACX-1vT6luSkUUGrOgpl8vn_MZesCcE5c6TY2bNbLRGk_upB-yzTmM8BrnbYl8BMvqO2Qm2ZBNFcjwB9yuDZ/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000&slide=id.p|
16:17:55 <AZ> pchampin: comparing graphs is important for some tasks
16:17:58 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:17:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:18:31 <AZ> ... I disagree with enrico about reification not really meaning anything
16:18:49 <AZ> ... I don't see much difference with triple terms
16:18:57 <niklasl> q+
16:19:28 <AZ> ... RDf-star provided an alternative way of expressing reification that people adopted
16:19:36 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:19:51 <TallTed> s|I am ready to assist as second scribe when/if Ted gets tired||
16:20:01 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:20:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:20:08 <AZ> ... I would support triple terms rather than graph terms for acceeptability by the community
16:20:44 <AZ> gkellogg: quoted triple (as it is defind now) has the same meaning wherever it appears (it's a type, not token)
16:20:58 <AZ> ... while reified triples are tokens
16:21:21 <tl> q+
16:21:21 <pchampin> +1 gkellogg, this would mean that
16:21:21 <pchampin> << s p o >> :a :b, :c.
16:21:21 <pchampin> and
16:21:21 <pchampin> << s p o >> :a :b.
16:21:22 <pchampin> << s p o >> :a c.
16:21:22 <pchampin> would parse to different graphs
16:21:26 <ora> ack niklasl
16:22:00 <AZ> ... [SOMETHING] made the problem more apparent
16:23:08 <pchampin> q++ to disagree with gkellogg, triple terms would then NOT appear in N-Triples
16:23:13 <AZ> ... with triples only we can only talk about one triple if we have an identifier for it
16:23:39 <pchampin> q-+
16:24:03 <AZ> niklasl: you can always use an identifier for a triple term or anything
16:24:31 <AZ> ... if quoted triple are syntactc sugar for reification,
16:24:56 <AZ> ... then it make it a token
16:25:19 <pchampin> q+
16:25:23 <AZ> ... you could still have a way to have types, for isntance with owl keys
16:26:06 <AZ> ... we don't really talk about the abstrac ttripples, we talk about occurrences
16:26:23 <AZ> ... named graphs are, imo, much more powerful
16:26:33 <olaf> s/isntance/instance
16:26:34 <AZ> ... they have grouping capability
16:26:52 <olaf> s/abstrac ttripples/abstract tripples
16:27:50 <olaf> s/abstrac ttripples/abstract triples
16:28:00 <AZ> ... is there something wrong iin the named graphs paper from 2005 wrt singleton edge
16:28:19 <ora> ack tl
16:28:43 <AZ> tl: the named graphs paper does too many things
16:28:58 <AZ> ... the semantics of the NG paper is opaque
16:29:03 <pchampin> the semantics of named graphs is not opaque; it is unspecified
16:29:12 <AZ> ... grouping triples is what people need in practice
16:29:25 <pchampin> i|the semantics of named graphs is not opaque; it is unspecified|
16:29:41 <pchampin> s|the semantics of named graphs is not opaque; it is unspecified|
16:30:06 <AZ> ... rdf-star CG discussed adding a proeprty "occurrenceOf"
16:30:34 <AZ> ... but I don't like that, named graphs solves the issue
16:30:45 <ora> ack pchampin
16:30:49 <AZ> s/named graphs/nested graphs/
16:31:05 <AZ> pchampin: reaction to gkellogg's comment
16:31:09 <pchampin> << s p o >> would be equivalent to
16:31:09 <pchampin> [ rdf:subject s; rdf:predicate p; rdf:object o ]
16:31:18 <AZ> ... I don't think there is a problem with N-triples
16:31:53 <ora> q+
16:32:01 <AZ> ... in N-triples, there would not be the syntax sugar appearing
16:32:16 <AZ> ... another issue I would raise is SPARQL
16:32:26 <AZ> ... in PSARQL if a varibale matches a quoted triple
16:32:38 <AZ> ... I retrieve the quoted triple with its sub, pred, obj
16:33:04 <AZ> ... if we go for syntactic sugar, we would retrieve a bnode, which is useless
16:33:07 <ora> ack ora
16:33:18 <AZ> ... which is another reason for not going towards syntactic sugar
16:33:22 <niklasl> But the case for lists today is even worse!
16:33:31 <gkellogg> q+
16:33:39 <AZ> ora: you mean it would introduce a bnode identifier
16:33:54 <niklasl> q+
16:34:15 <gkellogg> q= to say that yes, they are syntactic sugar in concrete syntaxes such as Turtle
16:34:16 <AZ> pchampin: if the double angle bracket was syntactic sugar, it could be replaced with square brackets
16:34:25 <gkellogg> q-
16:34:40 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:34:49 <ora> ack niklasl
16:35:07 <AZ> niklasl: I was typing the example that I mentioned
16:35:18 <niklasl> Here are all our use cases using quotation dashes (and variant annotation): https://gist.github.com/niklasl/2d02902b81e215b1795981df31927e9b  (barring 26)
16:35:42 <pchampin> q+
16:35:52 <AZ> ... beware it's using the notations to differentiate different things
16:36:25 <ora> ack pchampin
16:36:37 <AZ> pchampin: I wanted to respond to tl
16:37:07 <AZ> ... the angle bracket notation is fairly recent
16:37:22 <AZ> ... and I think it was a mistake
16:37:51 <AZ> ... with the current abstract syntax, there can be other ways of writing it
16:38:31 <AZ> tl: I think it would be better if the notation could expend to something with an identifier
16:38:56 <AZ> ... RDF-star is way too focused on type and that's inpractical
16:38:59 <pchampin> q+
16:39:12 <ora> ack pchampin
16:39:16 <AZ> ... it's easier to define but it's much harder to use
16:39:23 <niklasl> Here are my motivations for -- and {[...] [...]} or {<...>}: https://gist.github.com/niklasl/4f52c32ef2d888c172c8584e36c24610#proposal-rdf-star-annotation-occurrences
16:39:42 <AZ> pchampin: the situation with the seminal example
16:39:54 <AZ> ... it was not future proof
16:40:31 <AZ> ... quoted triples were always types from the very first definitions
16:41:16 <AZ> ... the seminal example was maybe bad modelling but it did not change what quoted triples are
16:41:30 <AndyS> q+
16:41:36 <ora> ack AndyS
16:41:45 <AZ> tl: it took years to realise that this was a problem
16:41:55 <AZ> AndyS: eventually, we need to have types
16:42:10 <niklasl> q+
16:42:16 <ora> ack niklasl
16:42:19 <tl> q+
16:42:28 <AZ> ... if you have occurrences of the same thing, you at some point want to know what they refer to, which is the trype
16:42:32 <AZ> s/trype/type/
16:42:47 <ora> q+
16:43:08 <ora> ack tl
16:43:40 <ktk> present+
16:43:57 <AZ> tl: we could use literals to refer to types
16:44:03 <AndyS> q+
16:44:17 <niklasl> Pat wrote: all we are ever needing to identify are graph tokens, not abstract graphs. You name a graph by identifying a token of it.
16:44:42 <ora> ack AndyS
16:44:57 <AZ> AndyS: a literal is self denoting
16:45:10 <niklasl> +1 to Andy, they are all self-denoting
16:45:13 <ora> ack ora
16:45:39 <niklasl> "the meaning of meaning is its meaning"
16:45:44 <AZ> ora: I'd like to know the way forward, considering these discussions
16:45:51 <AZ> ... we need to look at use cases
16:46:08 <AZ> ... are there UCs that require one of these proposals
16:46:26 <AZ> ... also what these proposals would look like in terms of abstract syntax
16:46:58 <AZ> ... how much things should be changed/extended
16:47:00 <pfps> One problem with using use cases to push everytthing is that several views of quoted triples are equally expressive.
16:47:06 <AZ> ... especially for nested grapsh
16:47:14 <AZ> s/grapsh/graphs/
16:47:29 <AZ> ... I propose as homework:
16:47:47 <niklasl> My slides at 32 and 33 address "what do we do now" (and the use cases we've collected are covered). But there are questions in those two slides.
16:47:47 <AZ> ... find what use cases are supported by each proposal
16:48:25 <niklasl> +100 for what are people currently doing with RDF
16:49:09 <niklasl> q+
16:49:21 <ora> ack niklasl
16:49:39 <AZ> ... and to understand the abstract syntax better to know what it implies for the work to be done
16:50:18 <AZ> niklasl: with my proposal, the case of occurrences come for free
16:50:32 <AZ> ... I'm not sure it implies changes to the abstract syntax
16:50:40 <ora> q+
16:51:14 <ora> q-
16:51:16 <tl> q+
16:51:17 <olaf> q+
16:52:00 <ora> ack tl
16:52:05 <AZ> ... I would need to know the implementation [not sure I got the point]
16:52:47 <ora> ack olaf
16:52:53 <AZ> tl: we may not need any change [to semantics] if nested graphs are just surface syntax
16:53:09 <AndyS> q+
16:53:12 <AZ> olaf: about what ora mentioned and gkellogg
16:53:21 <niklasl> q+
16:53:42 <AZ> ... anything we propose can be defined in terms of the existing concepts or concepts that we build on top
16:53:48 <tl> correctio tl: we may not need any change [to abstract syntax] if nested graphs are just surface syntax
16:54:04 <AZ> ... I disagree with tl about the nested graphs proposal requiring no change
16:54:18 <AZ> ... but that's my interpretation from the examples
16:54:38 <pchampin> that's also my interpretation
16:54:54 <AZ> ... on the ML tl's proposal seemed to change the definition of an RDF graph
16:55:12 <AZ> ... to include nested graphs as terms
16:55:42 <ora> ack AndyS
16:56:02 <AZ> tl: at line 215 of my example file, there is something releveant
16:56:27 <ora> ack niklasl
16:56:35 <AZ> AndyS: I don't find the large examples particularly useful
16:56:55 <AZ> niklasl: the syntax I propose reduces to Nquads
16:57:16 <AZ> ... I don't think my proposal requires additions to the syntax but maybe to the semantics
16:57:56 <AZ> ... I'm not strictly focused on blank graphs
16:58:46 <AZ> ora: now we need to understand better the merrits of each of these proposals
16:59:47 <AZ> ... I'm giving a talk tomorrow about OneGraph
17:00:11 <AZ> enrico: the agenda of the semantics TF is to attend ora's talk!
17:01:07 <niklasl> Yes, thanks all!
17:01:20 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:01:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:03:12 <pchampin> s|pfps's slides: https://www.w3.org/mid/5c79099d-d2d6-957f-804e-d04d1cc2af4a@gmail.com|
17:03:14 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:03:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:04:52 <pchampin> s|[ tl's screenshared doc will be posted to the list, and will appear within https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Oct/ ]|tl's slides: https://www.w3.org/mid/696F5022-62FD-4A07-A070-1F77C62C4AB3@rat.io
17:04:55 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:04:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:06:09 <pchampin> s|topic: Discussion|subtopic: Discussion
17:06:10 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:06:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:08:08 <pchampin> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/10/19-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:08:23 <pchampin> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/11/02-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:08:25 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:08:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:08:37 <pchampin> zakim, end meeting
17:08:37 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been TallTed, pfps, ora, AZ, tl, fsasaki, enrico, draggett, pchampin, AndyS, olaf, niklasl, gkellogg, Souri, Dominik_T, gtw, doerthe, ktk
17:08:40 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:08:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/26-rdf-star-minutes.html Zakim
17:08:46 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, pchampin; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:08:46 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdf-star
17:08:57 <pchampin> zakim, bye
17:08:59 <pchampin> RRSAgent, bye
17:08:59 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
<pchampin> s/[TOBE COMPLTED]/???