15:56:04 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:56:08 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-irc
15:56:18 <ktk> meeting:  RDF-star WG biweekly focused meeting
15:56:34 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/5ecc5c5f-5cd2-410c-b97c-6b13c6b843f1/20240606T120000/
15:56:35 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:56:35 <agendabot> agenda+ Feedback KG Forum
15:56:35 <agendabot> agenda+ 1: Map the steps to get to 2: vote on a working baseline and 3: map further work testing the use cases and verifing well-formness -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-rdf-star-minutes.html#t05
15:58:36 <ktk> present+
15:59:00 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:59:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
15:59:05 <ktk> RRSAgent, make log public
15:59:15 <TallTed> present+
15:59:17 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:59:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
15:59:25 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:59:46 <gtw> present+
16:00:00 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
16:00:02 <gkellogg> present+
16:00:11 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
16:00:19 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/05/24-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:00:21 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/06/07-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
16:00:25 <AZ> scribe+
16:00:26 <ktk> Scribe: AZ
16:00:28 <niklasl> present+
16:00:33 <AZ> present+
16:00:47 <ktk> Chair: ktk
16:00:49 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:00:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:00:56 <pchampin> present+
16:01:07 <tl> present+
16:01:34 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:01:34 <TallTed> s/html ktk/html
16:01:40 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:01:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:01:48 <pfps> present+
16:02:01 <eBremer> eBremer has joined #rdf-star
16:02:12 <TallTed> agenda?
16:03:09 <eBremer> present+
16:03:19 <ktk> Zakim, open issue 1
16:03:19 <Zakim> I don't understand 'open issue 1', ktk
16:03:29 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:03:34 <TallTed> Zakim, open item 1
16:03:34 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Feedback KG Forum -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:03:35 <enrico> present+
16:03:39 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:03:48 <Souri> present+
16:03:55 <AndyS> present+
16:04:02 <AZ> ktk: we had the KG forum last week
16:04:14 <AZ> ... a few people from the group were there
16:04:19 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:04:38 <doerthe> present+
16:04:45 <AZ> enrico: I was the only academic, it was a great experience,
16:05:36 <AZ> ktk: there was interest in the work we do here
16:06:01 <AZ> enrico: I was at CAiSE
16:06:22 <AZ> ... 90% of papers were related to LLMs
16:07:04 <AZ> ktk: Olaf presented a proposal for lists at ESWC
16:07:20 <AndyS> https://awslabs.github.io/SPARQL-CDTs/spec/latest.html
16:07:25 <AZ> ktk: it's a datatype for lists
16:07:35 <pchampin> https://2024.eswc-conferences.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/77770226.pdf
16:07:38 <pchampin> q+
16:07:39 <ktk> q?
16:07:42 <tl> q+
16:08:09 <tl> q-
16:08:20 <pchampin> https://www.w3.org/community/dataspaces/
16:08:40 <AZ> pchampin: there was a workshop organised by Stefan Decker related to a community group on dataspaces
16:08:56 <AZ> ... they want to propose best practices on publishing dataspaces
16:09:18 <AZ> ... dataspaces are a big thing in Europe
16:09:36 <ktk> q?
16:09:39 <ktk> ack pchampin
16:09:44 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:09:44 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- 1: Map the steps to get to 2: vote on a working baseline and 3: map further work testing the use cases and verifing well-formness -> 1
16:09:46 <Zakim> ... https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-rdf-star-minutes.html#t05 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:10:07 <AZ> ktk: we must figure out how to get more concrete in the WG
16:10:42 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
16:10:43 <AZ> ... we already made some steps on point 1. mapping
16:10:44 <enrico> q+
16:10:49 <Dominik_T> present+
16:11:36 <AZ> niklasl: the concerns mentioned by tl and pfps I share
16:11:38 <AZ> enrico
16:11:48 <ktk> ack enrico
16:12:02 <AZ> enrico: I tried to summarise what I've heard
16:12:39 <AZ> ... we now have 1 profile and there is a baseline
16:13:23 <AZ> ... there is a basic graph definition were triples are unrestricted
16:13:33 <AZ> ... this would still be simple re. pattern matching
16:13:50 <AZ> ... we introduce the well-formedness constraint
16:14:23 <AZ> ... then in RDF entailment is only defined in the well-formed fragment
16:15:04 <AZ> ... there is a vocabulary that can only be used in certain way for RDF entailment
16:15:26 <AZ> ... we restricted the annotations to be functional
16:15:49 <AZ> ... annotations can only have opaque triple in object terms
16:16:30 <AZ> ... Some criticise this saying we don't want to have everything in one syntax
16:16:57 <AZ> ... some want to have opaque triples, other transparent, or semi opaque
16:17:47 <pchampin> q+
16:17:47 <AZ> ... We could have 2 layers; one with simple entailment and when we have RDF entailment, we introduce restrictiosn
16:17:55 <pfps> q+
16:18:13 <ktk> ack pchampin
16:18:17 <AZ> pchampin: one question to enrico
16:18:21 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
16:18:21 <Zakim> Present: ktk, TallTed, gtw, gkellogg, niklasl, AZ, pchampin, tl, pfps, eBremer, enrico, Souri, AndyS, doerthe, Dominik_T
16:18:23 <Zakim> On IRC I see Dominik_T, doerthe, Souri, enrico, eBremer, pfps, tl, niklasl, RRSAgent, Zakim, TallTed, gkellogg, AZ, AndyS, driib5, agendabot, csarven, ktk, rhiaro, Tpt, gb,
16:18:23 <Zakim> ... pchampin, gtw
16:18:28 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:18:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:18:36 <AZ> ... there is a  discrepency between what you describe and what I read
16:18:57 <AZ> ... I don't think you define "simple semantics" in your document
16:19:09 <AZ> enrico: it is defined there
16:19:16 <ktk> ack pfps
16:19:31 <AZ> pfps: my main concern is that it is a ??? not a baseline
16:19:39 <AndyS> q+
16:19:44 <TallTed> present+ pfps, eBremer, enrico, Souri, AndyS, doerthe, Dominik_T
16:19:47 <AZ> ... we get too much with this proposal
16:19:50 <tl> s/???/kitchen sink
16:20:12 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:20:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:20:37 <AZ> enrico: this is a proposal where you have everything and then we can compare to others with less
16:21:15 <gkellogg> q+
16:21:21 <ktk> ack AndyS
16:21:23 <AZ> enrico: my understanding of "baseline" is that if you want X, you can find it in the baseline
16:21:38 <pchampin> It seems that perfection is attained not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to remove (Antoine de Saint Exupéry) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Antoine_de_Saint_Exup%C3%A9ry
16:21:42 <AZ> AndyS: this is a "baseline document", not a baseline in the sense of minimal
16:22:27 <AZ> ... by having a starting point, we can say "this is better because...", "this is this because..."
16:22:40 <niklasl> q+
16:22:44 <tl> +1 to AndyS
16:23:34 <AZ> AndyS: what I like in enrico's proposal and niklasl is that the ...
16:24:17 <AZ> ... split of the data model syntax
16:24:36 <AZ> ... and there's abstract syntax for different flavours
16:24:52 <gtw> s/split of the data model syntax/split of the data model syntax is kept minimal/
16:25:38 <AZ> gkellogg: I'm suprise to see that we have in the well formed RDf tripple term appear in subject or object
16:25:56 <enrico> q+
16:26:12 <ktk> ack gkellogg
16:26:19 <AZ> ... I don't recall that we had a discussion whether we can have a triple term in subject position
16:26:42 <AZ> enrico: only in well-formed you have certain restrictions
16:27:37 <pchampin> q+
16:27:37 <niklasl> +1 to gkellogg on simplifying things with triples only as objects
16:27:49 <AZ> gkellogg: for people who implement, they want to have base implementation that make simplification and having tripel term insubjecft can have real worl implications
16:27:52 <ktk> ack niklasl
16:27:58 <AZ> s/worl/world/
16:28:29 <TallTed> q+ to check whether "triple term" is now being a special literal, or some other kind of entity
16:28:35 <AZ> niklasl: we can address gkellogg's concerns
16:28:37 <pchampin> q-
16:28:47 <TallTed> s/tripel term insubjecft/triple term in subject/
16:29:09 <AZ> ... it's good we can put everything on the table and compare
16:29:31 <AZ> ... how do you decide whether a triple term is opaque or transparent?
16:29:41 <AZ> ... is it the predicate or something else?
16:30:04 <AZ> enrico: you need a way in the syntax to represent the different things
16:30:38 <AZ> ... how to decide the nature of the term is based on the position
16:30:38 <ktk> ack enrico
16:30:42 <tl> q+
16:31:58 <AZ> ... we should have a label to refer to syntactic sugar we have
16:32:25 <ktk> ack TallTed
16:32:25 <Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to check whether "triple term" is now being a special literal, or some other kind of entity
16:32:44 <AZ> TallTed: currently, triple term is a special kind of literal
16:33:03 <enrico> q+
16:33:15 <AZ> ... this is a problem for tools that restrict literals to object position
16:33:18 <tl> q-
16:33:35 <AZ> ... this change can have important performance issues
16:33:58 <niklasl> +1 to TallTed, that would be (IMHO too) radical (though it is a theoretical necessity for some entailments)
16:34:10 <AZ> enrico: syntactically, these are not literals; they are just interpreted as literals
16:34:19 <niklasl> q+
16:34:24 <ktk> ack enrico
16:34:39 <ktk> ack niklasl
16:34:51 <pchampin> q+
16:35:22 <AZ> niklasl: triple terms are not literals but "literal-like"
16:36:02 <AZ> ... I'm not completely sure how the baseline really works
16:36:20 <AZ> ... how it works wrt entailments
16:36:24 <enrico> Denotation of opaque triple terms:  [I+A](r) = IL(SRE(r))   if r is a opaqueTripleTerm
16:36:42 <enrico> SRE maps an opaque triple term to a literal
16:37:07 <AndyS> q+
16:37:24 <AZ> ... is a token of a triple entailing the resource ???
16:37:47 <pfps> q+
16:38:00 <gkellogg> q+
16:38:06 <ktk> ack pchampin
16:38:28 <AZ> pchampin: focusing on AndyS's meta proposal
16:38:41 <niklasl> Can a token of a triple also entail that it "references" the subject, predicate and object *resources*?
16:38:42 <AZ> ... I've concerns about this being too big but can live with it
16:38:52 <pfps> q+ to mention that just because a syntactic type is used in several places that does not imply that it has the same meaning in those places
16:39:15 <AZ> ... let's keep in mind that this is not whether it is perfect or not but is this something we can live with
16:39:36 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:39:46 <Souri> present+
16:39:46 <pfps> q-
16:39:51 <AndyS> q-
16:40:04 <pfps> Note that just because a syntactic type is used in several places that does not imply that it has the same meaning in those places.
16:40:11 <AZ> gkellogg: how can we interpret triple terms containing bnodes
16:40:33 <enrico> q+
16:40:45 <ktk> ack gkellogg
16:40:52 <AZ> ... the mapping from bnode in syntax to bnode is made by parser but how does it work here
16:40:54 <TallTed> I can live better with smaller "baseline" to which we add, than with larger "kitchen-sink (baseline?)" from which we subtract, because when we run out of time, it's easy to not add any more, but it's hard to then subtract what remains as problematic
16:40:59 <tl2> tl2 has joined #rdf-star
16:41:22 <tl2> present+
16:41:24 <AZ> enrico: the name of a bnode is always irrelevant
16:41:51 <AZ> ... what's relevant is whether a mentioned bnode is the same as another occurence of a mentioned bnode
16:42:42 <AZ> ... in the abstract syntax, one can have a function from bnode to something which is well defined
16:42:55 <AZ> gkellogg: there are corner cases that need by discussed
16:42:57 <ktk> q?
16:43:00 <ktk> ack enrico
16:43:04 <niklasl> q+
16:43:06 <AZ> s/by/be/
16:43:10 <ktk> ack niklasl
16:43:11 <gkellogg> s/by/to be/
16:43:15 <TallTed> q+
16:43:33 <ktk> ack TallTed
16:43:41 <AZ> niklasl: I'd like to address the "hasAnnotation" etc.
16:44:01 <enrico> q+
16:44:06 <pfps> +1 to TallTed
16:44:07 <ktk> ack enrico
16:44:08 <pchampin> good point
16:44:25 <AZ> TallTed: we may be in more trouble to start with this "baseline" rather than something from which we can add
16:44:42 <tl2> q+
16:44:49 <AZ> enrico: peopel understand "annotate" differently
16:44:55 <TallTed> s/something from which/something to which/
16:45:20 <TallTed> s/this "baseline" rather/this "baseline" and make subtractions, rather/
16:45:22 <AZ> ... we can change/restrict the proposal if needed
16:45:30 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:45:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:45:48 <AZ> ... and start the document from well-formed fragment
16:45:54 <ktk> ack tl
16:46:13 <Souri> +1 to TallTed
16:46:20 <AZ> tl2: if I +1 this proposal, it does not mean I endorse, it's that I think it's useful
16:46:36 <niklasl> Yes, baseline, not "will go to REC as is" ;)
16:46:36 <pchampin> q+
16:46:46 <TallTed> is there a draft proposal?
16:46:52 <AZ> pchampin: I sympathise with TallTed's point
16:47:12 <TallTed> q+
16:47:18 <ktk> ack pchampin
16:47:22 <AZ>  ... but if time is the argument, I hope we will be time efficient
16:47:53 <AZ> ... by finding what needs to be removed from the "baseline" proposal
16:48:19 <ktk> ack TallTed
16:48:29 <AZ> ... we may lose time going one way or the other
16:49:02 <AZ> TallTed: we failed to become more efficient in the past years
16:49:03 <pfps> +1 to TallTed
16:49:22 <AndyS> q+
16:49:32 <tl2> q+
16:49:40 <AZ> ... the baseline should be the minimum we can do, instead of the "kitchen sink"
16:49:47 <enrico> q+
16:49:51 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
16:49:54 <ktk> ack AndyS
16:49:57 <niklasl> present+
16:50:07 <AZ> AndyS: everybody has a different idea of what is "simple"
16:50:10 <ktk> ack tl
16:50:55 <Souri> q+
16:50:58 <pfps> At several times in the past I thought we were very close to accepting something like https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-profile-%22transparent%22
16:50:58 <AZ> tl2: I think it's better to have the big picture and when someone proposes something, we have this "baseline" to compare to
16:50:59 <ktk> ack enrico
16:51:24 <ktk> ack Souri
16:51:37 <AZ> Souri: I prefer starting at a minimum baseline
16:51:56 <AZ> ... but we could approach things from both sides
16:52:12 <AZ> ... and hoepfully we meet in the middle
16:52:13 <doerthe> I am a little bit afraid of voting on a document which changes every minute (but I trust you Enrico :) )
16:52:30 <ktk> q?
16:52:31 <niklasl> q+
16:52:39 <ktk> ack niklasl
16:52:52 <pfps> q+
16:52:54 <tl2> minimum: annotating ref. transparent asserted triple terms. maximun: + unasserted triple terms, + referential opacity, + graphs
16:53:08 <AZ> niklasl: we can agree that this [enrico's baseline"] is the maximum baseline
16:53:23 <Souri> q+
16:53:23 <ktk> ack pfps
16:53:25 <AZ> pfps: there has been proposals that have been more maximum than this
16:53:32 <niklasl> I mean maximum that we've converged upon.
16:53:49 <niklasl> Not "semantics for multiple, modal datasets"... :P
16:53:59 <ktk> ack Souri
16:54:40 <pfps> At one point there was a proposal that allowed direct specification of which components of a triple term were opaque and which were transparent.  This is decidedly bigger than the "baseline".
16:54:58 <niklasl> Fair point.
16:55:00 <TallTed> Please, what *is* the draft proposal? What (URI, please) *is* the "document" now being discussed?
16:55:11 <niklasl> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22baseline%22
16:55:34 <tl2> @pfps thanks for remembering :)
16:56:10 <AZ> Souri: having unrestricted fragment is not minimum
16:57:02 <AZ> ktk: is enrico's proposal the maximum among the things that we considered seriously?
16:57:11 <pchampin> q+
16:57:33 <AZ> pchampin: let's have a strawpoll
16:57:45 <AZ> ... we don't need to do it synchronously
16:57:59 <AZ> ... we can do it by email
16:58:01 <TallTed> straw polls are useful, and are noncommittal
16:58:18 <Dominik_T> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:58:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html Dominik_T
16:58:29 <AZ> ... I can write the proposal or sync with the chairs
16:58:37 <TallTed> please use the web polling tools, pchampin!
16:58:46 <TallTed> voting via email thread is beyond troublesome
16:58:56 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:58:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:59:18 <gkellogg> +1 to TallTed; use a polling tool rather than count email responses.
17:01:39 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:01:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/06/06-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:25:00 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
17:28:19 <driib5> driib5 has joined #rdf-star
17:43:29 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:04:00 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:20:27 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:42:55 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:03:38 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:25:45 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:51:16 <MacTed> MacTed has joined #rdf-star
21:39:17 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:03:57 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:22:54 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:41:16 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:50:26 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:15:21 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:33:37 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:52:53 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star