15:56:28 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:56:32 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/07/18-rdf-star-irc
15:56:33 <ktk> meeting:  RDF-Star WG biweekly meeting
15:56:57 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/348e384e-2c0d-4c88-bb5c-5ddddf93ef4d/20240718T120000/
15:56:57 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:56:57 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/06/27-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:56:57 <agendabot> agenda+ Proposed resultion by Semantics TF -> 3 https://www.w3.org/2024/07/12-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:56:58 <agendabot> agenda+ Proposal for next week's discussion
15:56:59 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
15:57:02 <agendabot> agenda+ Issue Triage, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5
15:57:05 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
15:59:52 <pfps> scribe+
15:59:56 <pfps> present+
16:00:06 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
16:00:24 <Tpt> present+
16:00:25 <TallTed> present+
16:00:30 <niklasl> present+
16:00:32 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
16:00:36 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:00:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/18-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:00:41 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:00:51 <gtw> present+
16:00:53 <tl> present+
16:01:06 <AndyS> present+
16:01:06 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:01:09 <enrico> present+
16:01:46 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/07/12-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:01:46 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/07/19-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:02:19 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
16:03:06 <Dominik_T7> Dominik_T7 has joined #rdf-star
16:03:22 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:03:28 <ktk> ah ok
16:03:35 <doerthe> present+
16:03:55 <Dominik_T7> present+
16:04:02 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-star
16:04:03 <ora> present+
16:04:12 <AZ> present+
16:04:18 <ktk> regrets+ pchampin
16:04:24 <ktk> present+
16:04:36 <pfps> zakim, next agendum
16:04:36 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/06/27-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-rdf-star-minutes.html --
16:04:39 <Zakim> ... taken up [from agendabot]
16:05:29 <pfps> minutes look fine to me
16:05:39 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:05:45 <Souri> present+
16:06:05 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve minutes of 2024-06-27 and 2024-07-11
16:06:05 <pfps> +1
16:06:08 <tl> +1
16:06:08 <Dominik_T7> +1
16:06:09 <ora> +0 (I was not there)
16:06:15 <niklasl> +1
16:06:16 <AndyS> +1
16:06:16 <Souri> +1
16:06:16 <eBremer> eBremer has joined #rdf-star
16:06:17 <gtw> +1
16:06:20 <ktk> +1
16:06:21 <doerthe> +1
16:06:25 <ktk> regrets+ fsasaki
16:06:27 <eBremer> present+
16:06:30 <AZ> +0 (was not present last week)
16:06:56 <enrico> +1
16:06:56 <Tpt> +1
16:07:11 <TallTed> +0 (haven't reviewed)
16:07:19 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of 2024-06-27 and 2024-07-11
16:07:28 <pfps> zakim, next agendum
16:07:28 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Proposed resultion by Semantics TF -> 3 https://www.w3.org/2024/07/12-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:07:39 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
16:07:45 <pfps> the proposal is at https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22minimal-baseline%22
16:08:03 <pfps> ora: I was not at the meeting, can anyone give a summary
16:08:17 <gkellogg> present+
16:08:45 <pfps> nicklasl: the proposal adds triple triple terms and defines well-formed triple terms
16:09:09 <pfps> nicklasl: the triple terms are fully transparent
16:09:33 <pfps> nicklasl:  this was discussed last Thursday and there were no objections
16:10:07 <pfps> nicklasl: rdf:reifies with concept reifier
16:10:11 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
16:10:31 <niklasl> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-and-LPGs
16:10:42 <pfps> nicklasl: this is compatible with the use cases we've seen except for the one about recording deltas to RDF graphs
16:11:09 <gkellogg> rrsagent, generate minutes
16:11:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/18-rdf-star-minutes.html gkellogg
16:11:20 <pfps> nicklasl: this also caters to provenance of unasserted triples and other advanced usages
16:11:29 <ora> chair: ora
16:11:46 <pfps> nicklasl: this also permits many-to-many reifiers
16:12:02 <ora> q?
16:12:02 <ktk> q?
16:12:24 <AndyS> q+
16:12:51 <pfps> enrico: there was some discussion on syntax and whether triple terms have to be restricted to object position
16:13:24 <doerthe> mmm, but I doubt that we simply should not have the injectivity
16:13:31 <pfps> enrico: each unique triple term has a unique resource
16:13:34 <ora> ack AndyS
16:13:45 <pfps> enrico: doerte mentioned that this might be a problem in extensions
16:14:21 <gtw> q+ to ask about relying entirely on transparent triple terms
16:14:35 <Kurt> Kurt has joined #rdf-star
16:14:37 <pfps> andys: there are two levels of syntax - general syntax and well-formed syntax
16:14:43 <doerthe> @enrico you have a funny way of talking me into the well-formed fragment: You introduce a problem I don’t think we have and then create a solution.  ;)
16:14:43 <doerthe> I agree that the well-formed semantics solves the injectivity problem, I just doubt that we need to create the problem.
16:14:43 <Kurt> q+
16:14:49 <ora> ack gtw
16:14:49 <Zakim> gtw, you wanted to ask about relying entirely on transparent triple terms
16:15:34 <pfps> gtw: several months ago dorthe had some examples where entailment produced many-to-many results
16:16:07 <pfps> s/dorthe/doerhe/
16:16:21 <pfps> s/doerhe/doerthe/
16:16:55 <niklasl> I think Enciro's page https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-and-LPGs addresses this?
16:17:09 <enrico> To understand why the many-to-many is not prblematic for LPGs, see: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-and-LPGs
16:17:16 <pfps> gtw: there are some places where many-to-one is preferred
16:18:06 <pfps> enrico: see the link above showing that the minimal baseline works for LPGs
16:18:14 <AndyS> q+
16:18:28 <gkellogg> q+
16:19:06 <pfps> doerthe: my point was that a previous proposal had problems
16:19:09 <ora> ack Kurt
16:19:37 <pfps> Kurt: my proposal is relevant to this issue
16:20:04 <pfps> Kurt: LPG style semantics has local predicates
16:20:39 <ora> ack AndyS
16:21:25 <pfps> AndyS: part of the transparency issue is that IRIs are transparent in embedded triples
16:21:57 <pfps> AndyS: there are conventions on use of IRIs on the web
16:22:06 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:22:23 <TallTed> s/ah ok//
16:22:23 <TallTed> s/minutes look fine to me/pfps: minutes look fine to me/
16:22:23 <TallTed> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:22:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/18-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:23:03 <pfps> gkellogg: the many-to-many issue looks similar to the situation with lists
16:23:13 <AndyS> Previous discussion about use of URIs -- https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-rdf-star-minutes.html#t01
16:23:53 <TallTed> s/Enciro's/Enrico's/
16:24:34 <Kurt> https://githua.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/Proposal:-Named-Node-Expressions
16:24:45 <AndyS> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/Proposal:-Named-Node-Expressions
16:25:17 <pfps> Kurt: [presents information from the slide above]
16:25:20 <gkellogg> s|https://githua.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/Proposal:-Named-Node-Expressions||
16:26:52 <pfps> Kurt: a blank node is a local variable
16:27:45 <pfps> Kurt: sometimes a local identifier is provided, but sometimes it is not, e.g., in [] syntax
16:28:38 <enrico> q+
16:28:57 <pfps> Kurt: the blank node in a [] cannot be referenced elsewhere
16:29:09 <pfps> ora: how does this relate to the minimum baseline
16:29:22 <enrico> q-
16:30:15 <pfps> Kurt: if a local name could be added to a [] node then this would allow references to it elsewhere in the same document
16:30:26 <enrico> q+
16:30:56 <pfps> Kurt: expanding the [] syntax to triples necessarily adds a local name for the blank node
16:31:58 <pfps> ora: but if this name is an IRI there is a difference
16:32:19 <TallTed> Confusion may arise because `[]` are brackets, sometimes called square brackets. `{}` are braces, sometimes called curly brackets.
16:32:29 <pfps> +1 to TallTed
16:32:55 <pfps> I've tried not to use "brace" or "bracket" in scribing
16:34:06 <enrico> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2024May/0067.html
16:34:34 <pfps> enrico: I read the document and replied that this looks like singleton properties
16:35:28 <pfps> ora: how would I know that this is like a singleton property?
16:36:06 <pfps> I'm not geting the gist of this discussion so the scribing may not be accurate - see the document for more information
16:38:12 <Souri> I normally try to avoid brining the complexity of blank nodes in discussions to avoid missing out on the elephant in the room. :-)
16:38:34 <Souri> s/brining/bringing/
16:38:58 <enrico> This is where you can find the document by Kurt: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2024May/0064.html
16:40:17 <pfps> Kurt: in LPG there is an internal identifier for each edge, different from the label of the edge
16:40:27 <gkellogg> Sounds like for this to work as intended, the abstract syntax would need to allow blank node predicates.
16:40:40 <pfps> ora: singleton properties have not gone anywhere in RDF
16:41:34 <pfps> Kurt: my contention is that you do not have the concept of a singleton property then you cannot have the many-to-one case
16:41:59 <TallTed> q+
16:42:21 <ora> ack enrico
16:42:55 <pfps> enrico: there was a long discussion of singleton properties and it was turned down
16:43:16 <ora> ack TallTed
16:43:17 <niklasl> +1 to enrico
16:43:43 <tl> we will have to have the discussion what the rdf:reifies relation actually means. we will then have to re-visit instantiation, e.g. singleton prperties
16:44:10 <pfps> TallTed: as I'm reading this is appears to me that the author of the data needs to know that there are these two marries edges when the data is created and that is not viable
16:44:14 <niklasl> +t to TallTed
16:45:30 <ktk> q?
16:45:51 <pfps> Kurt: without named node expressions you cannot create a singleton property
16:46:12 <gkellogg> q+
16:46:27 <TallTed> q+
16:46:40 <pfps> Kurt: Neo4J has an internal hidden identifier for the statement that acts as a singleton property
16:47:04 <niklasl> I do get that if someone wants exactly the design that LPGs have, that's singleton properties (as I wrote a while back). But that does not handle lots of what we're enabling with rdf:reifies and references to triples. If there is opposition to enabling that, please speak up now.
16:47:18 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:47:22 <pfps> ora: let's go back to the queue
16:47:31 <TallTed> q+ to note that masked identifiers are implementation details; they are not part of the abstract data model; they do not really exist. seeAlso Oracle's invisible ROWID.
16:47:52 <pfps> gkellogg:  what this boils down to in the abstract syntax is to allow blank node predicates
16:48:09 <ora> ack TallTed
16:48:09 <Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to note that masked identifiers are implementation details; they are not part of the abstract data model; they do not really exist. seeAlso Oracle's invisible
16:48:12 <Zakim> ... ROWID.
16:48:14 <tl> @niklasl i'm opposed to that
16:48:49 <pfps> TallTed: invisible ids are not part of RDF and thus not portable
16:49:20 <pfps> Kurt: the idea is to promote these to IRIs
16:49:54 <pfps> ora: back to the agenda
16:49:57 <TallTed> nonymizing anonymous nodes makes them no longer anonymous ... in which case they should just be nonymized
16:49:59 <tl> q+
16:50:07 <ora> ack tl
16:50:42 <pfps> tl: I think that the minimal baseline is a good basis but leaves some things open
16:51:01 <pfps> tl: what does the reifies thing mean, for example
16:51:20 <pfps> tl: and unasserted assertions
16:51:23 <ktk> q+
16:51:28 <ora> ack ktk
16:51:45 <pfps> tl: so I'm in favour of adopting the minimal baseline
16:52:01 <doerthe> q+
16:52:06 <ora> ack doerthe
16:52:07 <pfps> ktk: adopting is just creating something to compare against
16:52:42 <pfps> doerthe: so proposals from now on are made against the baseline
16:52:53 <pfps> ora: what is the proposal to vote on?
16:53:11 <ktk> https://www.w3.org/2024/07/12-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:53:35 <gkellogg> q+
16:53:40 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:53:55 <gkellogg> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/96
16:53:55 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/96 -> Pull Request 96 Change the section on Quoted Triples to Triple Terms. (by gkellogg) [spec:substantive]
16:53:58 <pfps> ora: the Semantics group only resolved to bring forward the minimal baseline
16:54:45 <pfps> gkellog: i created a draft PR for the purpose but all we need is a resolution to adopt the minimal baseline
16:54:53 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22minimal-baseline%22
16:55:11 <ora> PROPOSAL: Adopt minimal baseline https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22minimal-baseline%22
16:55:14 <gkellogg> +1
16:55:16 <pfps> +1
16:55:17 <niklasl> +1
16:55:17 <ktk> +1
16:55:17 <enrico> +1
16:55:18 <doerthe> +1
16:55:22 <ora> +1
16:55:42 <gtw> -0 ; I remain doubtful that this addresses LPG use-cases
16:55:43 <TallTed> +1
16:55:45 <AZ> +0
16:55:45 <AndyS> +1
16:55:49 <eBremer> +1
16:55:54 <tl> +1
16:55:54 <Souri> +1
16:56:02 <Dominik_T> +1
16:56:09 <enrico> q+
16:56:13 <niklasl> (Noting that I favor well-formed, or at least restriction on triple-terms as objects only.)
16:56:36 <Souri> +1 to niklas regarding well-formed
16:56:43 <ora> RESOLVED: Adopt minimal baseline https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22minimal-baseline%22
16:56:50 <pfps> enrico: doubters should start an email discussion
16:57:20 <AndyS> The baseline abstract syntax has triple terms only in the object position.
16:57:21 <pfps> ktk: discuss use cases next week
16:57:51 <pfps> got to go now
16:58:13 <niklasl> ... or perhaps categorize some of what we have as "anti"-use-cases.
16:58:24 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:58:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/18-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:58:43 <pfps> pfps has left #rdf-star
17:04:44 <TallTed> Zakim, end meeting
17:04:44 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been pfps, Tpt, TallTed, niklasl, gtw, tl, AndyS, enrico, doerthe, Dominik_T, ora, AZ, ktk, Souri, eBremer, gkellogg
17:04:47 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:04:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/18-rdf-star-minutes.html Zakim
17:04:54 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, TallTed; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:04:54 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdf-star
17:04:57 <TallTed> RRSAgent, bye
17:04:57 <RRSAgent> I see no action items