15:56:49 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:56:53 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/05/02-rdf-star-irc
15:56:54 <ktk> meeting:  RDF-Star WG biweekly meeting
15:57:03 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/0a6aa6e3-635c-42c2-baba-938c76b6ef01/20240502T120000/
15:57:03 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:57:03 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/04/18-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2024/04/25-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:57:03 <agendabot> agenda+ Meeting/no meeting on Ascension day
15:57:04 <agendabot> agenda+ TPAC: Deadline until May 20th
15:57:04 <agendabot> agenda+ Proposal for next week's discussion
15:57:07 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
15:57:10 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
15:57:13 <agendabot> agenda+ Issue Triage, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5
15:57:14 <eBremer> eBremer has joined #rdf-star
15:57:24 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
15:57:24 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:57:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/02-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
15:57:28 <ktk> RRSAgent, make log public
15:59:05 <ktk> present+
15:59:07 <fsasaki> fsasaki has joined #rdf-star
15:59:21 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
15:59:49 <eBremer> present+
15:59:58 <eBremer> Scribe: eBremer
16:00:20 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
16:00:29 <rubensworks> present+
16:00:37 <fsasaki> present+
16:00:53 <tl> present+
16:01:18 <ora> present+
16:01:22 <ktk> Chair: ora
16:01:44 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
16:01:45 <ktk> regerts+ enrico
16:01:54 <niklasl> present+
16:01:59 <AndyS> present+
16:02:14 <ktk> regrets+ enrico
16:02:22 <TallTed> s/regerts+ enrico//
16:02:26 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
16:02:32 <TallTed> present+
16:02:42 <TallTed> Zakim, next item
16:02:42 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/04/18-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2024/04/25-rdf-star-minutes.html --
16:02:43 <eBremer> Topic: Approval of the minutes
16:02:46 <Zakim> ... taken up [from agendabot]
16:03:19 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:03:31 <pfps> present+
16:03:31 <eBremer> ora: any cncerns?
16:03:34 <pfps> both minutes look fine by me
16:03:34 <olaf> present+
16:03:41 <eBremer> s/cncerns/concerns
16:03:41 <gtw> present+
16:03:54 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve minutes
16:03:58 <ora> +1
16:04:01 <AndyS> +1
16:04:04 <ktk> +1
16:04:04 <olaf> +1
16:04:05 <rubensworks> +1
16:04:10 <niklasl> +1
16:04:11 <TallTed> +1
16:04:11 <tl> +1
16:04:34 <pfps> +1
16:04:36 <gtw> +1
16:04:40 <fsasaki> +1
16:04:41 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:04:43 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve minutes
16:04:48 <doerthe> present+
16:04:48 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/04/26-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:04:48 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/05/03-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:04:52 <eBremer> Topic: Meeting/no meeting on Ascension day
16:04:58 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:04:58 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Meeting/no meeting on Ascension day -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:04:58 <pfps> My understanding of Catholic mythology is a bit lacking.  What date is "Asenscion day"?
16:05:07 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:05:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:05:14 <eBremer> ora: the idea is to cancel next weeks meetings
16:06:20 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
16:06:32 <ora> PROPOSAL: Cancel next week's meeting
16:06:46 <TallTed> a little firehose for the curious... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feast_of_the_Ascension
16:06:57 <ora> +1
16:07:02 <niklasl> +1
16:07:07 <olaf> +1
16:07:07 <ktk> +1
16:07:17 <tl> +0
16:07:18 <gtw> +0
16:07:19 <doerthe> +1
16:07:22 <fsasaki> +0
16:07:23 <TallTed> +0
16:07:52 <rubensworks> +1
16:07:52 <pfps> 0
16:07:56 <AndyS> 0
16:08:50 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:08:56 <pfps> not even new years?
16:08:58 <Souri> present+
16:09:11 <pfps> and boxing day?
16:09:15 <eBremer> Adrian: topic on calendar and if I dont hear anything by monday I would propose to cancel it then
16:09:28 <Dominik_T> present+
16:09:31 <ora> RESOLVED: Cancel next week's meeting provided nobody contact's Adrian by Monday
16:09:45 <ora> s/contact's/contacts
16:09:51 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:09:51 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- TPAC: Deadline until May 20th -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:09:54 <eBremer> Topic: TPAC: Deadline until May 20th
16:10:20 <eBremer> Adrian: deadline May 20th
16:10:36 <eBremer> ora: TPAC in California
16:10:45 <gtw> TPAC date?
16:10:53 <eBremer> ... we can have remote participation
16:11:09 <gtw> https://www.w3.org/events/tpac/2024/
16:11:48 <AndyS> TPAC -- 23-27 Sept
16:11:57 <eBremer> ora: end of september.... i think we should do it.  what do other people think?
16:12:10 <eBremer> ora: provided W3C gives charter extension
16:12:22 <TallTed> I'll be remote only, but in favor of the extended session
16:12:41 <niklasl> I'd strive to attend at least virtually (in spite of timezone diff)
16:12:42 <eBremer> Ora: I will try to be there in person
16:12:51 <Souri> +1 may be remote, not sure
16:12:55 <olaf> I wouldn't be able to attend. We have an EU project meeting at the same time.
16:13:06 <AndyS> Will attend - remote or local TBD
16:13:44 <ora> PROPOSAL: Register for TPAC
16:13:47 <tl> will probably attend, probably remote
16:13:48 <ora> +1
16:13:49 <gtw> +1
16:13:51 <ktk> +1
16:13:52 <tl> +1
16:13:58 <olaf> +0
16:13:59 <AndyS> +1
16:14:00 <Souri> +1
16:14:00 <fsasaki> +0
16:14:07 <doerthe> +0
16:14:07 <rubensworks> +0
16:14:27 <niklasl> +1
16:14:31 <eBremer> ora: Let's do it
16:14:32 <ora> RESOLVED: Register for TPAC
16:14:33 <TallTed> +1
16:14:39 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:14:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/02-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
16:14:55 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:14:55 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Proposal for next week's discussion -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:14:56 <eBremer> Topic: Proposal for next week's discussion
16:15:34 <eBremer> AndyS: 2 morning slows instead of full day...
16:16:01 <AndyS> s/slows/slots/
16:16:04 <eBremer> s/slows/slots
16:16:53 <eBremer> ora: we may not have meeting but if someone wants to lead that meeting....
16:18:21 <eBremer> ora: have focused meeting two weeks from now?
16:18:29 <tl> +1
16:18:29 <Souri> +1
16:18:30 <niklasl> We could keep the cycle if we have two consecutive focused meetings?
16:18:31 <ora> PROPOSAL: Shift meetings and have a focused meeting two weeks from now
16:18:34 <niklasl> +1
16:18:34 <ktk> +1
16:18:35 <TallTed> +1
16:18:38 <gtw> +1
16:18:38 <doerthe> +1
16:18:40 <olaf> +1
16:18:41 <fsasaki> +1
16:18:46 <rubensworks> +1
16:18:46 <AndyS> +1
16:18:54 <ora> RESOLVED: Shift meetings and have a focused meeting two weeks from now
16:19:07 <eBremer> ora: we should think of a topic
16:19:25 <eBremer> ... one possible discuss two profiles Enrico submitted
16:19:36 <eBremer> ... any other ideas?
16:20:00 <eBremer> TL:  discuss singleton properties
16:20:17 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-star
16:20:23 <AZ> present+
16:20:56 <eBremer> ora: we could throw that into the mix for sure
16:21:12 <eBremer> ... singleton properties have come up in the RDF community before
16:21:28 <eBremer> ... has not gone anywhere
16:21:38 <eBremer> TL: Okay
16:21:44 <eBremer> Ora: let's talk about it
16:22:02 <eBremer> ... the topic for the meeting in 2 weeks would be profiles
16:22:19 <eBremer> ... and possibly singleton properties
16:22:34 <ora> RESOLVED: Topic for next meeting: profiles + (potentially) singleton properties
16:22:39 <eBremer> Topic: Review of open actions
16:22:43 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:22:43 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:22:55 <tl> my proposal is to discuss a combination of RDF-star triple terms as the syntax and  singleton properties as the semantics. but let's wait how the discussion on the mailinglist evolves
16:23:31 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:23:31 <Zakim> agendum 5 was just opened, ktk
16:23:35 <ktk> Zakim, close item
16:23:35 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close item', ktk
16:23:42 <TallTed> Zakim, close item 5
16:23:42 <Zakim> agendum 5, Review of open actions, available at -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3, closed
16:23:44 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:23:44 <Zakim> 6. Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 [from agendabot]
16:23:48 <TallTed> Zakim, next item
16:23:48 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:23:55 <eBremer> Ora: and thomas, yes, what you put in chat is fine
16:24:21 <AndyS> q+
16:24:47 <AndyS> q-
16:26:56 <niklasl> +1
16:28:03 <eBremer> Ora: What are we gonna do about the json thing?
16:28:27 <eBremer> pfps: there are substantive problems in the proposal...
16:28:35 <eBremer> ... and they have not been addressed...
16:28:47 <eBremer> ... they're unresolved questions....
16:29:07 <eBremer> ... i would say get rid of RDF:json
16:29:19 <gtw> q+
16:29:20 <eBremer> Ora: interesting idea of course
16:29:23 <doerthe9> doerthe9 has joined #rdf-star
16:29:39 <pfps> q+
16:29:42 <eBremer> ... JSONLD folks took a very practical approach....
16:29:53 <AndyS> q+
16:30:09 <ora> ack gtw
16:30:25 <eBremer> gtw: they were the ones who defines it
16:30:33 <ora> ack pfps
16:30:41 <eBremer> ... thats seems like makes for moving it a non-starter
16:30:52 <eBremer> pfps: we have no obligation to talk about it...
16:31:09 <ora> ack AndyS
16:31:13 <eBremer> ... there are firm definitions of what it takes to be a RDF data type...
16:31:38 <eBremer> AndyS: it's already been published into the RDF name space, so I think we'll have to keep it
16:31:51 <TallTed> q+ to wonder whether it would be sufficient to enumerate the issues we see as unresolvable writ large, and therefore are to be handled thus-and-so
16:31:56 <eBremer> Ora: does anyone know if this has cause problems?
16:32:01 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:32:02 <AndyS> https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/#the-rdf-json-datatype
16:32:09 <eBremer> pfps: not the right question to ask
16:32:15 <doerthe> present+
16:32:26 <pfps> q+
16:32:33 <ora> ack TallTed
16:32:33 <Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to wonder whether it would be sufficient to enumerate the issues we see as unresolvable writ large, and therefore are to be handled thus-and-so
16:32:40 <eBremer> ... can there ever be any problems that would cause security things to break
16:32:56 <ora> ack pfps
16:33:00 <eBremer> TallTed: that becomes something to put into security considerations...
16:34:20 <pfps> q+
16:34:25 <ora> ack pfps
16:35:10 <eBremer> pfps: there are a bunch of unspecified things
16:35:42 <eBremer> TallTed: log issues with those other specs on particulars.  this is a large issue as its written for us
16:35:45 <pfps> q+
16:36:08 <ora> ack pfps
16:36:13 <eBremer> ... I dont think we should be expected to find all the problems in the other specs...
16:36:44 <eBremer> pfps: The question is whether jcs has an internal error
16:38:00 <eBremer> TallTed: they have a strong errata handling mechanism in ITF
16:38:12 <pfps> s/ITF/IETF/
16:38:42 <eBremer> pfps: I can try poking them informally...
16:39:20 <eBremer> Ora:  I have friend who was in IETF if yours doesnt work
16:40:30 <eBremer> Ora: if we cant get anyone to fix their documents, what is the best way for us to resolve this?
16:41:03 <eBremer> ... we just put some nasty language in our spec
16:41:11 <eBremer> TallTed: It doesn't have to be nasty...
16:42:37 <eBremer> ora: prudent course of action is to try to influence the others without killing ourselves
16:42:44 <AndyS> q+
16:42:50 <ora> ack AndyS
16:43:12 <eBremer> AndyS: ...security issue.  The obligation is to report it
16:43:34 <eBremer> Ora: we absolutely should report...
16:43:47 <TallTed> q+
16:43:52 <ora> ack TallTed
16:44:14 <eBremer> AndyS: making a external claim on someone elses matarial that there is a security issue is a very serious step to take
16:44:46 <eBremer> TallTed: If we're restating things.  then we have a stronger obligation to figure out why a should is a should and not a must
16:45:09 <eBremer> .... because there are legitimate reasons to do that
16:45:46 <eBremer> ... we can make a judgment cakk as to whether we want to make it a requirement a must in our spec for doing this thing
16:46:06 <eBremer> ora: lets see what happens when Peter pokes the IETF people
16:46:08 <TallTed> s/cakk/call/
16:49:50 <eBremer> TallTed: it is also legit to make that an open issue on what we're doing and put it out for wider community input
16:54:58 <doerthe> I will read
16:55:28 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
16:55:34 <ora> present+
16:56:54 <AZ> once PR 48 of rdf-semantics is merged, we can close issue 46
16:57:01 <eBremer> ora: out of time
16:57:06 <eBremer> ... not time for the issues
16:57:12 <eBremer> s/not no/
16:57:29 <eBremer> s/not/no/
16:57:35 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:57:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/02-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
17:07:52 <pfps> pfps has left #rdf-star
18:38:24 <MacTed> MacTed has joined #rdf-star