12:09:49 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #schemata-discussion
12:09:53 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-irc
12:09:53 <tpac-breakout-bot> RRSAgent, do not leave
12:09:54 <tpac-breakout-bot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:09:57 <tpac-breakout-bot> Meeting: Schemata Discussion - Follow up from TPAC23
12:09:57 <tpac-breakout-bot> Chair: Ege Korkan
12:09:57 <tpac-breakout-bot> Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/breakouts-day-2024/issues/15
12:09:57 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #schemata-discussion
12:09:57 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, clear agenda
12:09:57 <Zakim> agenda cleared
12:09:57 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Pick a scribe
12:09:57 <tidoust> tidoust has joined #schemata-discussion
12:09:58 <Zakim> agendum 1 added
12:09:58 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Reminders: code of conduct, health policies, recorded session policy
12:09:59 <Zakim> agendum 2 added
12:09:59 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Goal of this session
12:09:59 <Zakim> agendum 3 added
12:09:59 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Discussion
12:10:00 <Zakim> agendum 4 added
12:10:00 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Next steps / where discussion continues
12:10:00 <Zakim> agendum 5 added
12:10:00 <tpac-breakout-bot> tpac-breakout-bot has left #schemata-discussion
12:13:55 <tidoust> tidoust has changed the topic to: Breakout: Schemata Discussion - Follow up from TPAC23 - Kora - 14:00-15:00 UTC
13:57:25 <kaz> kaz has joined #schemata-discussion
13:57:28 <McCool> McCool has joined #schemata-discussion
13:59:10 <JKRhb> JKRhb has joined #schemata-discussion
13:59:46 <ivan> ivan has joined #schemata-discussion
13:59:48 <kaz> scribenick: JKRhb
13:59:55 <ivan> present+
14:00:17 <Ege> Ege has joined #schemata-discussion
14:00:27 <kaz> meeting: Schemata Discussion - Follow up from TPAC23
14:01:33 <betehess> betehess has joined #schemata-discussion
14:01:37 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan, Marcel_Otto, Peter_Bruhn_Andersen, Alexandre_Bertails, Ivan_Herman, J-Y_Rossi, Jan_Romann, Klaus_Hartke, Michael_McCool, Octavian_Nadolu, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Christian_Glomb
14:01:54 <kaz> present+ Vladmir_Alexiev
14:02:08 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
14:02:10 <Tomo> Tomo has joined #schemata-discussion
14:02:12 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:02:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz
14:02:20 <JKRhb> topic: Intro
14:02:21 <JKRhb> ek: We can start
14:02:21 <Octavian_Nadolu> Octavian_Nadolu has joined #schemata-discussion
14:02:24 <JKRhb> ... welcome everyone
14:02:35 <ktoumura_> ktoumura_ has joined #schemata-discussion
14:02:35 <pebran> pebran has joined #schemata-discussion
14:02:38 <JKRhb> ... session is called Schemata Follow Up from TPAC2023
14:02:41 <Tomo> present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
14:02:50 <marcelotto> marcelotto has joined #schemata-discussion
14:02:53 <JKRhb> ... Jan is taking minutes
14:03:00 <JKRhb> ... will skip the introduction round
14:03:09 <McCool> present+
14:03:17 <VladimirAlexiev_> VladimirAlexiev_ has joined #schemata-discussion
14:03:20 <JKRhb> ... due to large turnout, please introduce yourself before speaking
14:03:23 <McCool> present+ Michael_McCool
14:03:28 <kaz> present+ Thomas_Wehr
14:03:45 <kaz> present+ Kunihiko_Toumura
14:03:47 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:03:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz
14:04:11 <JKRhb> ... meetings are under two polices: Antitrust and competition policy, encourage competition, furthermore we encourage a good work environment
14:04:30 <JKRhb> ... context is to share experience and find a place within W3C for discussion
14:04:47 <JKRhb> ... required background is some knowledge of SHACL and JSON-LD
14:04:51 <JKRhb> topic: Presentation
14:04:52 <VladimirAlexiev_> present+ Vladimir Alexiev
14:05:19 <JKRhb> ek: Maybe we have met before, we have hosted a session with Pierre-Antoine before at TPAC
14:05:22 <betehess> new
14:05:26 <marcelotto> new
14:05:28 <VladimirAlexiev_> new
14:05:32 <pebran> new
14:05:33 <JKRhb> ... if you haven't been there, please write "new" into the IRC
14:05:42 <kaz> present+ Ben_Hutton, Dorthe_Arndt
14:05:43 <JKRhb> ... however, I also prepared a brief intro
14:05:53 <JKRhb> ... there a few new people here, I see
14:06:23 <JKRhb> ek: We have slides from previous sessions, which you can look at
14:06:39 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #schemata-discussion
14:06:57 <JKRhb> ek: As quick summary, you have different kinds of schema approaches, and if you have a specification that uses different concepts, it becomes hard to manage
14:07:17 <JKRhb> ... in WoT TD, for example, we have the spec document itself
14:07:20 <JKRhb> ... ontology documents
14:07:24 <JKRhb> ... SHACL shapes
14:07:28 <JKRhb> ... JSON Schema files
14:07:38 <JKRhb> ... type and class definitions in TypeScript
14:07:43 <JKRhb> ... tests and examples
14:07:54 <JKRhb> ... all need to be managed, updated and published
14:08:15 <JKRhb> ... we have some tooling, but we still have to do some manual work
14:08:37 <JKRhb> ... soon, we will also have a registry for Binding Documents, where authors will also face these issues
14:08:52 <JKRhb> ek: Previous presentations were given by Chris Mungell and @@@
14:08:59 <VladimirAlexiev_> see https://github.com/json-ld/yaml-ld/issues/19 for more "polyglot modeling" approaches/frameworks
14:09:14 <JKRhb> ek: The work so far included an analysis by the WoT WG
14:09:26 <JKRhb> ... concerning versioning, packaging, and serving resources
14:09:46 <JKRhb> ... we can discuss how to continue this in the last 10 minutes of this slot
14:10:06 <JKRhb> ek: Mahda did most of the work for this presentation actually, but she is currently not available
14:10:16 <JKRhb> ... all resources are available on GitHub
14:10:33 <kaz> present+ David
14:10:46 <JKRhb> ek: So far, we were creating a very complicated diagram summarizing the very complicated process that has to be done with every PR
14:10:51 <kaz> present+ Dominik_Tomaszuk, Elodie_Thieblin
14:11:02 <JKRhb> ... for example, the JSON Schema needs to be updated or rendering needs to be triggered
14:11:13 <JKRhb> ... we are not very proud of it, it is quite messy
14:11:28 <JKRhb> ek: We have then been looking into alternative tooling to make our lives easier
14:11:48 <JKRhb> ... and collected metrics and other aspects for comparison in a table
14:12:12 <JKRhb> ... for example, the handling of different value representations, inheritance, or unknown object keys
14:12:45 <JKRhb> ... at the moment, we are in favor of using LinkML in the future, but we have not decided yet and this is not is the topic of this session
14:12:59 <JKRhb> ... but we want to collect feedback from the tool authors themselves
14:13:12 <JKRhb> ... as Vladimir Alexiev has already done, thank you for that
14:13:32 <JKRhb> ... we want to update our requirements accordingly, to make sure that the process is transparent
14:13:43 <JKRhb> ... any questions so far regarding the analysis or the diagram?
14:13:48 <JKRhb> No questions so far
14:13:57 <dezell> dezell has joined #schemata-discussion
14:14:07 <JKRhb> ek: If you have any questions, then please join the IRC and write "q+"
14:14:20 <JKRhb> ek: So we have all of these resources, but there is still a missing point
14:14:22 <ethieblin> ethieblin has joined #schemata-discussion
14:14:33 <dezell> present+ David_Ezell
14:14:39 <JKRhb> ... so in the WoT WG, we have a repo with GitHub pages available
14:14:54 <JKRhb> ... after publishing, the W3C team contact adjusts the redirection
14:14:57 <ethieblin> present+ elodie.thieblin
14:15:12 <JKRhb> ... in general, you can consider this uploading software to a web server
14:15:22 <JKRhb> ... and there is no standardized way to handle this
14:15:26 <VladimirAlexiev_> I've seen many communities that face the same problem: electrical CIM, traceability in trade, GS1 EPCIS in logistics, ACORD in insurance, IFC in AECO etc etc
14:15:39 <JKRhb> ... and this process is too slow for our release cycle
14:15:44 <JKRhb> ek: Can we do better?
14:15:52 <JKRhb> ... we have a PR that tries to address this
14:16:12 <JKRhb> ... we need better tooling, could rely on package managers
14:16:30 <JKRhb> ... Klaus Hartke has done some work of using npm for this kind of thing
14:16:35 <VladimirAlexiev_> For the Traceability community, I asked them to consider LinkML: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/295
14:17:06 <JKRhb> ... in the JSON Schema world they are using custom registries (?)
14:17:18 <JKRhb> ek: So this finishes the summary for now
14:17:23 <VladimirAlexiev_> More importantly, I wrote up some draft Requirements for such tooling: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/296. This could complement the comparison table that WoT showed
14:17:26 <JKRhb> ... wanted to keep it brief
14:17:28 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:17:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz
14:17:47 <JKRhb> ... in the TPAC 2023 discussion, there was the question of where the discussion should continue
14:17:52 <kaz> q+
14:18:01 <JKRhb> ... not necessarily needed to standardize something like LinkML
14:18:26 <Ege> q?
14:18:42 <JKRhb> ... but there needs to be some process or best practices in my opinion, if anyone has other thoughts, please make a comment
14:18:50 <JKRhb> ... any questions?
14:18:54 <Ege> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/193OFcFaxD0GqrRuOggwZe5eorgL1C1Epe2cAYN3JEkk/edit?usp=sharing
14:19:11 <JKRhb> kaz: A comment regarding logistics: Please paste the link of the slides into the IRC
14:19:39 <JKRhb> ... another comment: please list the important questions in the slides
14:19:47 <JKRhb> ... like tooling, versioning, and so on
14:20:01 <JKRhb> ek: (Updates the slides)
14:20:10 <kaz> i|Maybe we have met|-> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/193OFcFaxD0GqrRuOggwZe5eorgL1C1Epe2cAYN3JEkk/edit?usp=sharing Slides|
14:20:13 <JKRhb> ... if there are any points, we can categorize them accordingly
14:20:14 <VladimirAlexiev_> .. communities: also AAS (industrial Digital Twins, i.e. Industry 4.0 / RAMI)
14:20:25 <JKRhb> ... in the IRC, there were some comments by Vladimir
14:20:36 <JKRhb> ... saying, that others have been suffering the same issues?
14:20:55 <JKRhb> va: I have been seeing the same issues in other communities as well
14:21:16 <JKRhb> ... many communities want to use both JSON Schema and JSON-LD, and they need to be in sync
14:21:32 <JKRhb> ... in some cases, they want to borrow schemas from other people and mix and match them
14:21:51 <JKRhb> ... in some cases, the results are mixed, in others they are very bad
14:22:00 <JKRhb> ... as many ontologies come with their own baggage
14:22:16 <JKRhb> ... also difficult if you are relying on a schema in XML
14:22:50 <JKRhb> va: In particular the Trade Transparency group has been working on related topics
14:23:09 <JKRhb> ... find this very interesting to see how semantic technologies spread into these communities
14:23:17 <JKRhb> ... on the other hand, these people need some help
14:23:30 <JKRhb> ... need guidance how to use RDF properly
14:24:00 <JKRhb> ... even simple things, how to model triples with literals (?)
14:24:37 <JKRhb> ... in RDF, we have infinite precision, in the case of conventional JSON numbers, we don't
14:24:39 <betehess> q+
14:24:46 <kaz> q-
14:24:51 <JKRhb> va: The importance of this discussion is very very high
14:25:00 <JKRhb> ... question how to get RDF into more communities
14:25:13 <JKRhb> ... that try to use it, but don't get it right yet
14:25:29 <JKRhb> ... question how W3C can help these communities
14:25:54 <JKRhb> ek: Thank you for your comments, tried to update the presentation with the links form the minutes
14:26:01 <Ege> q?
14:26:07 <VladimirAlexiev_> The import is: how can the sem web community help other data communities "graduate" into linked data?
14:26:15 <JKRhb> ... could you elaborate on the Trade Transparency group?
14:26:17 <JKRhb> va: Will do
14:26:28 <JKRhb> ab: Quick introduction:
14:26:36 <JKRhb> ... work at Netflix on an ontology service
14:26:54 <JKRhb> ... this group is exactly discussing what we are trying to solve
14:27:11 <JKRhb> ... try to combine schemas with ontologies (?)
14:27:21 <JKRhb> ... we tried using SHACL, has been working okay so far
14:27:42 <JKRhb> ... issue is that people need to learn RDF and SHACL, which is difficult
14:27:57 <VladimirAlexiev_> Another example: AAS is a very important spec in Industrial IoT. But they have fundamental issues that go against the Web Architecture, eg https://github.com/admin-shell-io/aas-specs/issues/383. See https://github.com/admin-shell-io/aas-specs/issues/384 for a list of issues
14:27:57 <JKRhb> ... we have a problem of discovery, how to discover ontologies?
14:28:15 <JKRhb> ... question how to combine schemas and ontologies
14:28:43 <JKRhb> ... very much interested in talking to people, standardization, wich we would like to see at some point
14:28:49 <JKRhb> s/wich/which/
14:29:18 <JKRhb> ek: Thank you, you've mentioned that you get a lot questions regarding SHACL, do you have problems with adaption?
14:29:32 <JKRhb> ab: Problem is that SHACL is way too powerful
14:29:42 <JKRhb> ... difficult to map to a schema
14:30:11 <JKRhb> ... tried to create a subset of SHACL that is powerful enough to write meaningful ontologies which you can then project onto GraphQL for example
14:30:17 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:30:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz
14:30:25 <JKRhb> ek: I think I can relate a bit with that
14:30:25 <VladimirAlexiev_> Another example: the Allotrope community (lab equipment measurements). It is very active and does things right. They use JSON-LD in nice ways
14:30:50 <JKRhb> ... I think a main problem is that @@@
14:31:00 <Ege> q?
14:31:05 <JKRhb> ... they have trouble seeing the benefit of switching
14:31:09 <betehess> q-
14:31:28 <JKRhb> ek: There has been some discussion on standardization or not
14:31:38 <JKRhb> ... in my point of view, there wasn't the need yet
14:31:47 <JKRhb> ... question: What should be standardized?
14:32:05 <JKRhb> ... some aspects from the table could be standardized, but the tools are already quite stable already
14:32:22 <JKRhb> ... not sure about the benefits, other that it would give more credibility
14:32:23 <betehess> q+
14:32:50 <JKRhb> ab: I consider the main issue with this slide related to standardization
14:33:07 <VladimirAlexiev_> q+
14:33:20 <JKRhb> ... how to we make sure that our projection to GraphQL, for example, is correct and can be injected into an ontology?
14:33:30 <ivan> q+
14:33:39 <ivan> ack betehess
14:33:50 <JKRhb> ek: From my point of view, it is mostly a tooling question, with LinkML you could go to the other representations
14:34:08 <JKRhb> ab: Yeah, for of people it would be about tooling, for us it would be about meaning
14:34:20 <JKRhb> ek: Guaranteeing that there is no information loss?
14:34:35 <Ege> q?
14:34:36 <JKRhb> ab: Yeah, and the information is represented correctly
14:35:06 <JKRhb> va: I feel very much all of the questions that have been raised as we are facing similar issues
14:35:41 <JKRhb> ... I tried to create a community for canonical mapping between SHACL and RDF(?)
14:35:58 <ivan> s/RDF(?)/Shex/
14:35:59 <JKRhb> ... SHACL is very useful to build UIs
14:37:37 <JKRhb> ... so the question is how to use most common subset of SHACL. How to use with GraphQL and translate to SPARQL and use certain more complex joins
14:38:03 <JKRhb> ... very important how to transform without losing meaning
14:38:11 <betehess> +1 on being lossless. That's our main concern here at Netflix.
14:38:26 <JKRhb> ek: Just one point
14:38:42 <JKRhb> ... you've mentioned that there are GraphQL implementation that use RDF?
14:38:52 <JKRhb> ... could you repeat that?
14:38:56 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:38:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz
14:39:04 <Ege> q?
14:39:04 <Ege> ack v
14:39:11 <VladimirAlexiev_> GraphQL implementations over RDF, and benchmarks (there's LinGBM and a couple smaller ones): https://www.zotero.org/groups/5393345/semantic_graphql
14:39:12 <JKRhb> va: I have Zotero library with resources regarding this topic, I will send you a link
14:39:25 <JKRhb> ih: I have seen similar problems before
14:39:29 <VladimirAlexiev_> q-
14:39:46 <JKRhb> ... I am currently participating in the @@@ WG, there have been similar issues
14:40:21 <JKRhb> ... Pierre-Antoine mentioned similar issues, there are slight differences between different languages, making it hard to convert
14:40:38 <JKRhb> ... one thing we've seen was that SHACL and shex cannot model dataset
14:40:43 <kaz> s/@@@ WG/Verifiable Credentials WG/
14:41:01 <VladimirAlexiev_> Holger Knublauch is convening a SHACL 1.2 CG that should address named-graphs
14:41:17 <JKRhb> ... typical problems, can't imagine what we will face with the introduction of RDF 1.2
14:41:49 <JKRhb> ih: What I am critical of is the problems JSON-LD introduces
14:42:13 <JKRhb> ... as it both sold as a serialization of RDF but also as plain JSON
14:42:26 <JKRhb> ... inherit problem of JSON-LD, not sure how to solve it
14:42:51 <JKRhb> ... one thing I've seen in communities was a misunderstanding of JSON-LD context files
14:43:01 <Ege> q?
14:43:11 <JKRhb> ... as context files can be seen as a glorified mapping file
14:43:14 <betehess> q+
14:43:16 <VladimirAlexiev_> "@context" is not an ontology, and it is not a schema: it's only a mapping from JSON to ontology terms
14:43:58 <JKRhb> ... we need to work on making these discrepancies disappear, but I am not really optimistic, as all of these schematas are not the same
14:44:18 <JKRhb> ... should not create yet another standard (in the XKCD sense)
14:44:41 <JKRhb> ... but we need to be aware of the discrepancies before we can go to the tools
14:45:08 <JKRhb> ek: Thank you, very good points, the double nature of JSON-LD is exactly why we are facing these kinds of problems
14:45:15 <Ege> q?
14:45:18 <JKRhb> ih: I have seen this in many communities before
14:45:24 <ivan> ack ivan
14:45:27 <ivan> ack betehess
14:45:31 <JKRhb> ab: I agree so much with what Ivan just said
14:45:42 <JKRhb> ... we are facing the same problems at Netflix
14:46:02 <JKRhb> ... JSON-LD was not a problem so far, everyone is using Turtle and that is working as expected
14:46:37 <JKRhb> ... the lack of definition of issues has been an issue, question how to import an asset (?)
14:47:18 <JKRhb> ... one aspect that we've noticed that we can always define a SHACL shape and achieve what you want to do, also with fundamental things
14:47:29 <Ege> q?
14:47:43 <JKRhb> ... want to publish something in that regard soon, SHACL is very good for this kind of thing in our experience
14:48:28 <McCool> sorry, ntd
14:48:41 <JKRhb> ek: In my experience, there is some tooling to help us if we want to go down the route of using SHACL
14:49:01 <JKRhb> topic: Check-out
14:49:03 <JKRhb> ek: Now we should fill out the check-out slides
14:49:24 <JKRhb> ... I think one consensus was that this is an annoying problem
14:49:48 <JKRhb> ... and is relevant for different communities (not only WoT)
14:49:55 <JKRhb> ... not sure about the next steps
14:50:05 <JKRhb> ... should we create a CG or mailing list?
14:50:11 <ivan> q+
14:50:15 <JKRhb> ... what can we do to work on this?
14:50:48 <JKRhb> ih: What I felt is to try to list, gather, categorize the problems that make these tools so difficult
14:51:12 <JKRhb> ... for example datasets, as Alexandre mentioned, or RDF 1.2 or literals
14:51:23 <JKRhb> ... we need to have a clear view of the problem space
14:52:00 <JKRhb> ... I have the impression that we should not jump into creating new tools, we should first understand the problem, step up
14:52:05 <JKRhb> s/up/back/
14:52:11 <JKRhb> ek: Agree with that
14:52:23 <JKRhb> ... what should the next step be then?
14:52:55 <JKRhb> va: I think we should begin with the UCR
14:53:05 <JKRhb> ... and then begin with SHACL vs Shex
14:53:19 <JKRhb> ... creating mapping, then see what is missing
14:53:46 <JKRhb> ... similar with GraphQL, if W3C wants to create a CG working on a mapping then this could happen
14:54:11 <JKRhb> ... not going to solve all problems, as there will always be differences
14:54:18 <kaz_> kaz_ has joined #schemata-discussion
14:54:30 <kaz_> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:54:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz_
14:54:54 <JKRhb> ... what do you do in case of a discrepancy? Maybe best practices are enough, not necessarily need to create a new specification
14:55:17 <JKRhb> ... the SHACL 1.2 CG is a good approach
14:55:42 <kaz_> q+
14:55:45 <JKRhb> ... @@@
14:55:57 <Ege> q?
14:56:13 <JKRhb> ... so first focus on UCR and then create focus groups to start working on the individual problems
14:56:35 <JKRhb> ek: Added creating the catalog to the slides
14:57:01 <JKRhb> kaz: I basically agree with Ivan and Vladimir
14:57:25 <JKRhb> ... we should clarify requirements, what the problem is, then see what solution would fit
14:57:46 <JKRhb> ek: I think there is a question whose requirements it is?
14:58:05 <JKRhb> kaz: A better word might be expections
14:58:28 <JKRhb> ek: There is a question of ownership, not only the WoT WG is involved
14:58:31 <VladimirAlexiev_> yes: 1. Catalog the problems/features/questions/issues (UCR), 2. focus CGs to work out specific issues: a) SHEX-SHACL mapping, b) RDF-GraphQL best practices, c) maybe YAML/YAML-LD syntax for mixing schemata approaches (JSON Schema and JSONLD Context are first candidates)
14:58:58 <JKRhb> kaz: As I mentioned, this is related to Ivan's comments, we should clarify and categorize problems
14:59:17 <JKRhb> ... and then see how they relate to requirements
14:59:39 <JKRhb> ... WoT WG should clarify its own requirements, then we can contact the others again
14:59:46 <VladimirAlexiev_> 4. Dissemination/proliferation into various communities. Because these are problems that affect widely different communities, it will not be easy to reach/evangelize to them
15:00:59 <JKRhb> ek: Question is how the individual groups will form, as I am not part of the groups mentioned in the discussion
15:01:06 <kaz_> s/As I mentioned, this is related to/As I mentioned at the beginning of this session, and similar to/
15:01:09 <kaz_> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:01:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz_
15:01:26 <JKRhb> ... if there is not going to be a new CG, then each group will first have to work on its own
15:01:55 <VladimirAlexiev_> 0. Catalog of tools/practices. I'd be ecstatic if a single tool (eg LinkML) can solve the problems, but I'm doubtful. So we can borrow from the "KGC" CG (who work on RDB/JSON/XML mapping tools, extending R2RML and RML): features from one tool are borrowed as requirements for another
15:02:01 <JKRhb> ... (adds an action item to the slides that each person notes the problems and should do dissemination)
15:02:16 <JKRhb> ... that concludes our session
15:02:34 <kaz_> [adjourned]
15:02:35 <kaz_> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:02:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/12-schemata-discussion-minutes.html kaz_
17:26:47 <tidoust> tidoust has joined #schemata-discussion
20:23:47 <tidoust> RRSAgent, bye
20:23:47 <RRSAgent> I see no action items