IRC log of rdf-star on 2024-02-16

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:11:51 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
01:00:46 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
01:11:25 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
01:12:16 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
02:26:19 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
02:52:54 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
03:13:59 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
03:32:07 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
04:02:11 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
04:29:46 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
04:48:44 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:02:05 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:11:27 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:24:17 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:42:16 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
09:03:15 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
09:27:33 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
09:45:54 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
10:05:11 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
10:24:18 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
10:43:47 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
11:01:59 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
11:35:09 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
11:55:11 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
12:13:57 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
12:33:51 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
12:51:57 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
13:15:50 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
13:35:28 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
13:54:37 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
14:30:29 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
14:52:24 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #rdf-star
14:59:19 [tl]
tl has joined #rdf-star
14:59:19 [enrico]
enrico has joined #rdf-star
14:59:22 [enrico]
present+
14:59:34 [tl]
present+
15:00:26 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:00:58 [ora]
ora has joined #rdf-star
15:01:15 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:07:32 [pchampin]
present+
15:08:06 [gkellogg]
zakim, who's here?
15:08:06 [Zakim]
Present: pfps, ktk, niklasl, tl, rubensworks, gtw, Tpt, eBremer, pchampin, ora, olaf, TallTed, AndyS, gkellogg, draggett, enrico, doerthe, AZ, fsasaki, Souri
15:08:10 [Zakim]
On IRC I see gkellogg, ora, enrico, tl, AndyS, gb, RRSAgent, Zakim, driib, gtw, Tpt, AnthonySpencer, VladimirAlexiev, SintayewGashaw, Timothe, smoothsalt, joraboi445, rhiaro,
15:08:10 [Zakim]
... csarven, ktk, pchampin, agendabot
15:08:12 [gkellogg]
present+
15:10:46 [ora]
present+
15:11:13 [niklasl]
niklasl has joined #rdf-star
15:11:22 [niklasl]
present+
15:12:04 [AndyS]
present+
15:12:56 [AndyS]
scribe+
15:13:22 [AndyS]
ora: To be named: triple term, triple occurrence, rdf:nameOf
15:13:51 [AndyS]
gregg: and description of "triple occurrence" vs "triple term"
15:14:19 [AndyS]
q+
15:14:40 [enrico]
q+
15:14:42 [ora]
ack AndyS
15:14:56 [niklasl]
q+
15:15:09 [ora]
ack enrico
15:15:09 [tl]
RDF spec uses "instance" and "token" to refer to reifications
15:15:32 [AndyS]
enrico: "triple term" is just a "triple"
15:15:38 [pchampin]
q+
15:15:42 [gkellogg]
q+
15:15:51 [ora]
ack niklasl
15:16:08 [AndyS]
AndyS: occurrence -> usage of a triple
15:16:19 [AndyS]
niklas: rdf:Triple
15:16:38 [AndyS]
... need to look at use case to see if it fits and is neutral enough
15:17:16 [pchampin]
"triple proxy"?
15:18:12 [AndyS]
... I am unclear about same bnode/uri as graph name and as a triple occurrence
15:18:18 [pchampin]
<< :e | :s1 :p1 :o1 >>. << :e | :s2 :p2 :o2 >>.
15:18:44 [AndyS]
s/as graph name/for two triples/
15:18:55 [ora]
ack pchampin
15:19:05 [olaf]
olaf has joined #rdf-star
15:19:08 [AndyS]
zakim, this is rdf-star
15:19:08 [Zakim]
got it, AndyS
15:19:24 [AndyS]
pchampin: I like "triple term"
15:19:44 [doerthe]
doerthe has joined #rdf-star
15:19:48 [olaf]
present+
15:19:54 [AndyS]
... they are different role to triple as elements of a graph
15:20:03 [olaf]
q?
15:20:05 [ora]
ack gkellogg
15:20:17 [AndyS]
... need a name that recognizes that role are differents
15:20:31 [olaf]
q+
15:20:44 [AndyS]
gregg: "triple" is a production in concrete syntaxes. Need a different name.
15:20:54 [ora]
ack olaf
15:20:57 [pchampin]
q+
15:21:15 [AndyS]
olaf: Support for "triple term" over "triple descriptor"
15:21:21 [tl]
q+
15:21:43 [AndyS]
... recognize the two roles/concepts
15:21:54 [ora]
ack pchampin
15:22:22 [AndyS]
pchampin: +1 to gregg about need a type for this. rdf:Triple - not "triple term"
15:22:37 [AndyS]
... (type as in rdf:Class)
15:22:38 [niklasl]
+1, the construct (the 3-tuple) is a triple term; I also agree that the type can be rdf:Triple
15:23:17 [AndyS]
... which is why "name" in "nameOf" is a weak choice for me
15:23:35 [AndyS]
gregg: "mention" used before
15:23:44 [enrico]
q+
15:23:56 [ora]
ack tl
15:23:56 [niklasl]
+100 to "the thing is not a name" (see also "Haddock's Eyes" in Through the Looking Glass :P )
15:24:04 [AndyS]
ora: "stands for" ? Appeal to intuition of user
15:24:29 [AndyS]
tl: have triple type terms and triple occurrence terms
15:24:44 [AndyS]
gregg: those are not RDF terms
15:24:57 [AndyS]
tl: We need consistent naming
15:25:25 [AndyS]
... :nameOf -> :instanceOf or possibly :occurrenceOf
15:25:31 [niklasl]
q+
15:25:33 [ora]
ack enrico
15:25:39 [gkellogg]
q+
15:26:10 [AndyS]
enrico: name of the triple occurence and the predicate could be the same (similar)
15:26:25 [AndyS]
s/occurence/occurrence/
15:26:40 [ora]
ack niklasl
15:26:40 [AndyS]
... can have several names
15:27:09 [Souri]
Souri has joined #rdf-star
15:27:13 [AndyS]
niklas: easier to look at use cases e.g. marriages have start, end relations
15:27:28 [Souri]
present+
15:27:33 [AndyS]
... naming the relation from (asserted) triple and the annotation
15:27:59 [AndyS]
... most neutral would be rdf:triple predicate
15:28:07 [AndyS]
... of rdf:useOf maybe
15:28:15 [pchampin]
rdf:triple rdfs:range rdf:Triple . make sense :)
15:28:18 [AndyS]
s/of rdf:/or rdf:/
15:29:30 [AndyS]
... some use case would be better with specific vocabulary e..g "description"
15:30:16 [AndyS]
... with semantic restrictions for the UC
15:30:40 [ora]
q+
15:31:04 [AndyS]
... several options
15:31:22 [ora]
ack gkellogg
15:31:51 [tl]
q+
15:32:06 [AndyS]
gkellog: advocate "mention" - describes the "mention" = use of the triple in the graph
15:32:21 [pchampin]
is the *2nd mariage* of Richard and Liz a "mention" of a triple?
15:32:37 [enrico]
q+
15:32:42 [AndyS]
... cardinality of one - entailment may affect this
15:32:49 [ora]
ack ora
15:32:55 [niklasl]
Its more of a qualification of. Or a reificiation... :P
15:33:29 [ora]
ack tl
15:33:29 [AndyS]
ora: should be be connected to name choice for triple occurrence choice
15:33:35 [AndyS]
tl: +1 to Ora
15:33:56 [pchampin]
q+
15:34:01 [AndyS]
... the property should be abstract ("general"/ed)
15:34:43 [ora]
ack enrico
15:35:13 [gkellogg]
q+
15:36:01 [AndyS]
enrico: reviewed philosophy books ... triple referent , triple occurrence are the truth maker.
15:36:20 [AndyS]
ora: "referent" has RDF history via PICS.
15:36:46 [ora]
ack pchampin
15:36:53 [AndyS]
enrico: "the wedding of L and R" -- statement : w1 is the referent of this statement
15:37:13 [AndyS]
pchampin: often used to distinguish syntax and semantics
15:37:34 [AndyS]
... between domain of language (symbols) and domain of discourse
15:37:40 [enrico]
q+
15:37:48 [AndyS]
... this might create wrong expections
15:38:07 [AndyS]
... like rdf:Triple giving rdf:hasTriple
15:38:36 [AndyS]
... too neutral is better
15:39:08 [AndyS]
... RHS is a triple
15:39:44 [AndyS]
... unclear whether should encourage multiple names but would work is rdf:hasTriple (not "the name")
15:40:00 [tl]
q?
15:40:02 [ora]
ack gkellogg
15:40:03 [niklasl]
+1 no domain (domain is just rdfs:Resource)
15:40:18 [AndyS]
... very general then name for domain makes less sense
15:40:43 [AndyS]
gkellogg: "occurrence" implies it is really in the graph
15:41:05 [AndyS]
... but we want use for a thing not in the graph e.g. to deny it.
15:41:05 [ora]
ack enrico
15:41:10 [Souri]
+1 to avoiding "occurrence"
15:41:27 [niklasl]
q+
15:41:33 [ora]
ack niklasl
15:41:49 [AndyS]
niklasl: examples ...
15:42:00 [niklasl]
_:x a :Claim ; :source <some-news-article> ; rdfx:theTripleRelation <<( <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> )>> .
15:42:22 [tl]
q+
15:42:40 [niklasl]
_:y a :Marriage ; rdfx:theTripleRelation <<( <elizabethtaylor> a :Wife )>> , <<( <richardburton> a :Husband )>> , <<( <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> )>> .
15:42:41 [AndyS]
... "has triple" work, "referent" works
15:43:24 [ora]
ack tl
15:43:43 [AndyS]
tl: asserted vs not asserted seems to make a difference
15:44:01 [AndyS]
... "claim of" OK, "fact of " not OK
15:44:26 [ora]
q+
15:44:37 [AndyS]
q+
15:44:42 [ora]
ack ora
15:44:42 [niklasl]
<thisgraph> { _:x a :Fact ; :assertedIn <thisgraph> {| :comment "obviously" |} ; rdfx:theTripleRelation <<( <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> )>> . }
15:45:00 [pchampin]
<< :e | :s :p :o >> a :Fact . # or :Claim
15:45:02 [AndyS]
ora: unasserted now may become asserted
15:45:35 [ora]
ack AndyS
15:45:36 [niklasl]
<thisgraph> { <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> . }
15:45:41 [enrico]
q+
15:45:46 [AndyS]
tl: maybe even be the author considers it asserted wven if not mentioned
15:45:47 [pchampin]
{ ?x a :Fact; ?x rdf:tripple ?t } => { ?x :factOf ?t }.
15:45:49 [pchampin]
q+
15:46:16 [ora]
ack enrico
15:46:36 [niklasl]
+1 to Andy, we're looking for one choice of name
15:46:42 [AndyS]
andys: annotation is used for asserted+rest
15:47:23 [AndyS]
enrico: (examples in zoom chat for formatting)
15:48:04 [AndyS]
... we "refer" to the specific statement, event, triple
15:48:09 [AndyS]
q?
15:48:18 [AndyS]
ora: makes sense
15:48:18 [ora]
ack pchampin
15:48:54 [AndyS]
pchampin: to TL: specific property : at x:45 in IRC
15:49:06 [AndyS]
... model in N3
15:49:10 [AndyS]
... OWL?
15:49:39 [AndyS]
... we can type them to give the subproperty they relate to
15:50:04 [AndyS]
... (discussion of subproperty)
15:50:53 [enrico]
q+
15:51:15 [AndyS]
... to enrico - nice example - predicate "refersTo" can be modelled as ":w2 rdf:type :Situation" then general property
15:51:21 [tl]
q+
15:51:30 [ora]
ack enrico
15:51:44 [AndyS]
enrico: less than "type"
15:52:23 [Souri]
rdf:tripleForm may be?
15:52:52 [gkellogg]
q+
15:52:56 [Souri]
q+
15:53:19 [ora]
ack tl
15:53:19 [AndyS]
pchampin: prefer rdf:triple for the property as neutral + name agreement => RHS is a rdf:Triple. Hard to restrict LHS.
15:53:47 [AndyS]
tl: we never what an URI refers to.
15:54:32 [ora]
ack gkellogg
15:54:34 [AndyS]
s/never what/never known what/
15:55:05 [ora]
ack Souri
15:55:06 [AndyS]
gkellogg: warn against against names differing only by case.
15:55:06 [pchampin]
good point
15:55:29 [AndyS]
souri: the connection should be neutral
15:55:29 [TallTed]
TallTed has joined #rdf-star
15:55:47 [AndyS]
... maybe "e has form s p o"
15:56:14 [niklasl]
q+
15:56:18 [AndyS]
... "e has triple form s p o"
15:56:19 [ora]
ack niklasl
15:56:27 [pchampin]
do mariages have the form of a triple?? :->
15:56:52 [AndyS]
niklasl: like "rdf:value" - not sure about that
15:57:19 [AndyS]
... support "hasTriple"
15:57:41 [AndyS]
... what about lists as terms in the future
15:58:08 [pchampin]
tl, about the referent of IRIs: https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#h3_referents covers it, IMO
15:58:44 [AndyS]
enrico: in the discussion we didn't consider reification => "reifies"
15:58:45 [ora]
STRAWPOLL: "hasTriple" or something else?
15:58:53 [ora]
hasTriple
15:58:59 [pchampin]
+1
15:59:02 [gkellogg]
+0.7
15:59:03 [niklasl]
+0.75
15:59:05 [enrico]
+ why not?
15:59:08 [tl]
something else
15:59:11 [pfps]
pfps has joined #rdf-star
15:59:12 [doerthe]
+0
15:59:14 [olaf]
+0
15:59:18 [AndyS]
+1 - several suggtions so far are OK
15:59:23 [pfps]
+0
15:59:28 [Souri]
+1 to rdf:hasTriple (or rdf:hasTripleForm)
15:59:34 [Souri]
q+
15:59:42 [ora]
ack Souri
15:59:52 [AndyS]
ora: working choice "rdf:hasTriple"
16:00:23 [AndyS]
souri: same e have s1 p1 o1 and also s2 p2 o2
16:00:36 [niklasl]
q+
16:00:37 [pchampin]
q+
16:00:56 [AndyS]
gkellogg: considering entailments this happens
16:01:05 [ora]
ack niklasl
16:01:57 [AndyS]
niklasl: need multiple "occurences" - RHS cardinality of one - functional properties => different names for the same thing.
16:02:02 [ora]
ack pchampin
16:02:26 [AndyS]
pchampin: function properties re in OWL
16:02:32 [TallTed]
present+
16:02:33 [tl]
q+
16:02:44 [AndyS]
... so baked into RDF, that sneaked in owl:sameAs
16:02:48 [AndyS]
q+
16:03:10 [AndyS]
s/sneaked/sneaks/
16:03:27 [enrico]
q+
16:03:35 [AndyS]
pchampin: not a strong syntax constraint because
16:03:48 [pchampin]
:e rdf:hasTriple <( :s :p "42"^^xsd:integer )>.
16:03:53 [pchampin]
:e rdf:hasTriple <( :s :p "042"^^xsd:integer )>.
16:04:13 [AndyS]
pchampin: ... syntactical different in RDF
16:04:29 [olaf]
scribe+
16:04:33 [niklasl]
+1 no there being many problems with cardinality constraints
16:04:46 [AndyS]
scribe-
16:04:56 [ora]
ack tl
16:05:15 [olaf]
tl: why would 'refersTo' not work?
16:05:22 [pchampin]
q+
16:05:25 [olaf]
... it is a pretty good description
16:05:29 [Souri]
So, just to confirm, we are planning to allow: :e rdf:hasTriple <( :s1 :p1 :o1 >), <( :s2 :p2 :o2 >) . Is that correct?
16:05:51 [ora]
ack AndyS
16:05:55 [Souri]
s/>)/)>/
16:05:56 [olaf]
even if "refers to" doesn't sound very familar to me, I like it
16:06:14 [TallTed]
s/>)/)>/
16:06:20 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:06:21 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:06:28 [olaf]
AndyS: regarding the cardinality, we can add it as an advice
16:06:38 [olaf]
... rather than baking it into RDF
16:06:47 [ora]
ack enrico
16:06:47 [pchampin]
"if you use the same name for different [occurrences], *all bets are off*"
16:07:04 [olaf]
enrico: the point is not the card.constraint
16:07:26 [olaf]
... we want a many-to-many relationship
16:07:49 [TallTed]
s/even if/... even if/
16:07:53 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:07:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:08:38 [olaf]
... no equality in RDF apart from the equality regarding literals (their values)
16:09:00 [olaf]
... if triple terms are syntactical equal, they need to denote the same resource
16:09:25 [pchampin]
for me, what enrico describes is referential transparency
16:09:33 [olaf]
... triples that have the same denotation for the elements should ...
16:09:44 [olaf]
... the same for the datatype system
16:10:39 [olaf]
... if triple terms occur somewhere else, they become a mess because they produce equivalence all over the place
16:10:57 [olaf]
... long discussion we need to have
16:11:17 [olaf]
... option 3 should be discarded by Andy's original proposal
16:11:41 [olaf]
... which is equally expressive but avoids the equivalence-related issues
16:12:09 [olaf]
... The problem of unicity, cardinality etc is much more complex
16:13:18 [AndyS]
q+
16:13:37 [olaf]
... In RDF plain, the equaliyt of literals does not show up, it shows up only in SPARQL
16:13:51 [ora]
ack pchampin
16:13:52 [olaf]
... with triple terms, it shows up already in RDF
16:14:22 [olaf]
pchampin: enrico can you write down an example where the issue of equality occurs?
16:14:40 [olaf]
... maybe take this offline
16:15:11 [ora]
ack AndyS
16:15:24 [AndyS]
<< :e | :s :p :o >> :source <foo> . :e :seen "date" .
16:15:30 [olaf]
AndyS: problem we identified with putting named occurrence in the data model
16:15:38 [AndyS]
<< :e | :s :p :o >> :source <foo> . <<: e | :s :p :o >> :seen "date" .
16:16:03 [Souri]
s/: e/:e/
16:16:20 [olaf]
... There may be two different (occurrence) terms referring to the same
16:16:58 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:16:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:17:35 [pchampin]
or: :e :source <foo> . << :e | :s :p :o >> :seen "date" .
16:17:35 [olaf]
... Because there would be two different ways to refer to the named occurrence
16:17:35 [olaf]
... one by simply using :e
16:17:35 [olaf]
... the other one by using the occurrence term
16:17:51 [olaf]
... << :e | :s :p :o >>
16:17:59 [ora]
q?
16:18:23 [olaf]
... enrico, which original proposal do you mean?
16:18:30 [olaf]
enrico: the one in December
16:18:50 [olaf]
AndyS: Ah, that is an expansion which doesn't have this problem
16:19:01 [olaf]
... and in fact that is Option 3 in the table
16:19:20 [pchampin]
q+
16:19:21 [olaf]
ora: anything else to discuss?
16:19:29 [ora]
ack pchampin
16:19:42 [olaf]
pchampin: regarding hasTriple, which doesn't have a lot of support
16:19:44 [enrico]
<( :s :p "42"^^xsd:integer )> :p :o . entails <( :s :p "o42"^^xsd:integer )> :p :o .
16:20:18 [tl]
i prefer "refersTo" to "hasTriple"
16:20:24 [olaf]
... my advice is to consider whether the term that we choose for this predicate is to consider it for a marriage example
16:20:38 [niklasl]
What's the common relationship between a Fact/Mention/Quote/Event/Marriage/Relationship and "its" triple(s)?
16:20:42 [olaf]
... Then, refersTo, mentions, don't work
16:21:02 [olaf]
s/mentions, don/mentions, etc. don
16:21:34 [olaf]
pchampin: hasTriple has the advantage of being neutral
16:21:42 [olaf]
tl: no really not
16:21:50 [Souri]
rdf:refersTo conveys a sense of a uniqueness -- does not "allow" multiplicity
16:22:00 [olaf]
... because it has a very strong conotation to refer to the triple
16:22:41 [pchampin]
tl, the thing on the RHS *is* a triple, isn't it?
16:22:44 [olaf]
AndyS: what should we bring back to the wider WG?
16:22:47 [tl]
"refersTo" IMO works very well for all kinds of reference: the triple itself and what the triple is about
16:23:02 [olaf]
ora: We have identified things that need to be defined, and things that need to be renamed
16:23:12 [olaf]
... and we have some suggestions.
16:23:43 [Souri]
I prefer rdf:has... than rdf:refersTo based on the fact that we are not constraining to cardinality of 1
16:23:44 [olaf]
... Naming is difficult. tl has a valid point.
16:24:00 [olaf]
... and we concluded that rdf:nameOf is not on the list
16:24:05 [tl]
s/because it has a very strong conotation to refer to the triple/because it has a very strong conotation to refer to the triple as a syntactic construct (vs what the triple is about)
16:24:17 [olaf]
AndyS: I can write a very short summary for the mailing list
16:24:20 [pchampin]
+1
16:24:22 [niklasl]
+1
16:24:30 [pchampin]
q+
16:24:37 [Souri]
s/conotation/connotation/
16:24:39 [ora]
ack pchampin
16:25:18 [olaf]
pchampin: We also need a name for the syntactic construct that enrico calls the "macro".
16:25:50 [olaf]
... i.e., the Turtle expression of the form << :s :p :o >>
16:26:20 [olaf]
... or of the form << :e | :s :p :o >>
16:27:11 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:27:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:27:38 [TallTed]
previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/02/15-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:27:49 [TallTed]
next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:28:09 [TallTed]
meeting: RDF-star Semantics TF
16:28:18 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:28:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:28:56 [olaf]
olaf has left #rdf-star
16:29:47 [pchampin]
s/niklas:/niklasl:/
16:29:49 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:29:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:30:17 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, pointer?
16:30:17 [RRSAgent]
See https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-irc#T16-30-17
16:30:52 [pchampin]
s/niklas:/niklasl:/g
16:31:56 [pchampin]
s/gregg:/gkellogg:/g
16:32:43 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:32:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:33:35 [pchampin]
s/gkellog:/gkellogg:/g
16:34:02 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, make minutes
16:34:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:38:06 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
16:42:34 [TallTed]
Zakim, who's here?
16:42:34 [Zakim]
Present: pfps, ktk, niklasl, tl, rubensworks, gtw, Tpt, eBremer, pchampin, ora, olaf, TallTed, AndyS, gkellogg, draggett, enrico, doerthe, AZ, fsasaki, Souri
16:42:37 [Zakim]
On IRC I see gkellogg, pfps, TallTed, doerthe, ora, tl, AndyS, gb, RRSAgent, Zakim, driib, gtw, Tpt, AnthonySpencer, VladimirAlexiev, SintayewGashaw, Timothe, smoothsalt,
16:42:37 [Zakim]
... joraboi445, rhiaro, csarven, ktk, pchampin, agendabot
16:42:46 [pchampin]
right, I forgot to dismiss Zakim yesterday :-(
16:43:40 [pchampin]
I'll fix the list of participants in the IRC log
16:43:59 [pchampin]
zakim, bye
16:43:59 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees have been pfps, ktk, niklasl, tl, rubensworks, gtw, Tpt, eBremer, pchampin, ora, olaf, TallTed, AndyS, gkellogg, draggett, enrico, doerthe,
16:43:59 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rdf-star
16:44:02 [pchampin]
RRSAgent, bye
16:44:02 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items
16:44:03 [Zakim]
... AZ, fsasaki, Souri