15:58:04 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:58:08 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-irc
15:58:24 <TallTed> meeting: RDF-star WG biweekly meeting
15:58:32 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:58:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
15:58:36 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:58:59 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
15:59:03 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/08/23-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:59:03 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/08/30-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:59:15 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
15:59:24 <TallTed> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/348e384e-2c0d-4c88-bb5c-5ddddf93ef4d/20240829T120000/
15:59:24 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
15:59:24 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:59:24 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/15-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:59:24 <agendabot> agenda+ Proposed resultion by Semantics TF -> 3 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/23-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:59:25 <agendabot> agenda+ Proposal for next week's discussion
15:59:30 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
15:59:31 <agendabot> agenda+ Issue Triage, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5
15:59:34 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
15:59:34 <enrico> present+
15:59:45 <Dominik_T> present+
15:59:45 <TallTed> present+
15:59:50 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
16:00:02 <tl> present+
16:00:06 <eBremer> present+
16:00:23 <rubenswo_> present+
16:00:26 <niklasl> present+
16:00:44 <gtw> present+
16:00:46 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
16:00:55 <william_vw> william_vw has joined #rdf-star
16:01:19 <gkellogg> present+
16:01:22 <gkellogg> scribe+
16:01:36 <olaf> present+
16:01:41 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:01:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:01:53 <gkellogg> zakim, agenda?
16:01:53 <Zakim> I see 6 items remaining on the agenda:
16:01:54 <Zakim> 1. Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/15-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-rdf-star-minutes.html [from
16:01:54 <Zakim> ... agendabot]
16:01:54 <Zakim> 2. Proposed resultion by Semantics TF -> 3 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/23-rdf-star-minutes.html [from agendabot]
16:01:54 <Zakim> 3. Proposal for next week's discussion [from agendabot]
16:01:58 <Zakim> 4. Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 [from agendabot]
16:01:58 <Zakim> 5. Issue Triage, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5 [from agendabot]
16:01:58 <Zakim> 6. Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting [from agendabot]
16:02:23 <AndyS> present+
16:02:46 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
16:02:51 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:02:54 <gkellogg> zakim, next agendum
16:02:54 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/15-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-rdf-star-minutes.html --
16:02:57 <Zakim> ... taken up [from agendabot]
16:03:01 <pfps> present+
16:03:24 <ora> present+
16:03:34 <Adrian> Adrian has joined #rdf-star
16:03:42 <Adrian> Present+
16:03:45 <gkellogg> ora: Approval of minutes
16:04:04 <william_vw> present+
16:04:07 <ora> q?
16:04:23 <Adrian> Adrian has joined #rdf-star
16:04:35 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve last two weeks' minutes
16:04:39 <enrico> +1
16:04:39 <ora> +1
16:04:40 <niklasl> +1
16:04:41 <eBremer> +1
16:04:41 <AndyS> +1
16:04:42 <tl> +1
16:04:42 <william_vw> +1
16:04:42 <gkellogg> +1
16:04:43 <fsasaki> fsasaki has joined #rdf-star
16:04:43 <Adrian> +1
16:04:43 <gtw> +1
16:04:46 <TallTed> +1
16:04:47 <rubenswo_> +1
16:04:49 <olaf> +1
16:04:53 <Dominik_T> +1
16:04:55 <pfps> +1
16:04:58 <fsasaki> +1
16:05:03 <fsasaki> present+
16:05:11 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve last two weeks' minutes
16:05:15 <gkellogg> zakim, next item
16:05:15 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Proposed resultion by Semantics TF -> 3 https://www.w3.org/2024/08/23-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:05:24 <rubensworks> rubensworks has joined #rdf-star
16:05:27 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:05:33 <Souri> present+
16:05:36 <rubensworks> present+
16:06:13 <gkellogg> enrico: There was a proposal to simplify the well-formed fragment so that it is not needed.
16:07:02 <gkellogg> ... Whenever there is a triple who's object is a triple term the semantics say that the predicate is of type rdf:ReificationProperty.
16:07:56 <gkellogg> ... This makes the system flexible, as in Turtle there is a short-cut to introduce a reifier with a triple term without mentioning the predicate, so there will be an rdf:reifies predicate coming from that expansion.
16:08:09 <enrico> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22alternative-baseline%22
16:08:15 <gkellogg> ... I fixed the semantics baseline to deal with thils.
16:08:19 <ora> q+
16:08:42 <ora> ack ora
16:08:44 <gkellogg> ... The new version of the baseline gets rid of the well-formed semantics.
16:08:45 <Adrian> Adrian has joined #rdf-star
16:08:56 <enrico> q+
16:09:02 <gkellogg> ora: What does this buy us. And, what are the downsides of this?
16:09:08 <ora> ack ora
16:09:10 <ora> ack enrico
16:09:24 <gkellogg> enrico: It means we don't need a well-formed syntax; you can write whatever you want.
16:09:39 <gkellogg> ... It also introduces the notion that triple terms only make sense in the object position.
16:10:07 <gkellogg> ... It maintains the "do whatever you want" philosophy of RDF, although it will have some meaning.
16:10:41 <gkellogg> ora: If I use something which is not a property, I get nonsense.
16:10:59 <gkellogg> enrico: You get a warning, as among the entailed triples you get something that does not sound correct.e
16:11:29 <gkellogg> ... This is typical with reasoning. You might derive something from your knowledge that is wrong, which means you need to go back and fix it.
16:11:56 <gkellogg> ... The entailment is interesting when you ask why something is an interest of rdf:ReificationProperty.
16:12:05 <ora> q+
16:12:13 <ora> ack ora
16:12:24 <gkellogg> ... The idea is that people will just use the short-cut, so it will always make sense.
16:12:39 <gkellogg> ora: Should we add something saying that implementations are free to warn the user.
16:12:51 <gkellogg> enrico: It's an entailment, so you assume that users mean what they say.
16:13:22 <gkellogg> ora: This is in line with our earlier thinking; if you do something that's not okay you get something out which is not okay.
16:13:38 <gkellogg> q?
16:14:06 <enrico> Any IRI used as the predicate of a triple whose object is a triple term denotes an instance of the denotation of rdf:ReificationProperty.
16:14:19 <gkellogg> enrico: This is what we voted on last Friday.
16:14:24 <william_vw> q+
16:14:43 <ora> ack william_vw
16:15:00 <gkellogg> william_vw: Is ReificationProperty a sub-property of rdf:Property?
16:15:16 <gkellogg> enrico: Yes. The modeling parts are discussed at the end.
16:15:47 <pfps> Remember that subclass and subproperty in RDF need to be stated - they never arise because of subset relationships
16:16:27 <gkellogg> william_vw: I was talking with Doerte and she made the point that you can always infer that any object of ReificationProperty, as it is a sub-property of rdf:Property, you can infer that a property :x is used in a triple with a triple term.
16:16:39 <pchampin> q+
16:16:57 <gkellogg> enrico: We may have something to fix.
16:17:04 <gkellogg> ... In principle, this should not happen.
16:17:29 <gkellogg> ora: Do you want to fix this before we vote on it?
16:17:35 <gkellogg> enrico: I'll let you know.
16:17:50 <ora> ack pchampin
16:18:10 <gkellogg> pchampin: I may be misunderstanding, but I don't think that issue ...
16:18:33 <gkellogg> ... My understand that ReificationPropery is a sub-class of rdf:Property. Not a sub-property of anything.
16:18:54 <enrico> q+
16:19:03 <gkellogg> ... There may be a question if every reification property is a sub-property of rdf:refies, but not necessarily.
16:19:18 <AndyS> s/that issue/there is an issue/
16:19:19 <ora> ack enrico
16:19:28 <gkellogg> ... That doesn't man that the presense of a property used with a triple term would entail some other property.
16:19:55 <gkellogg> enrico: In RDF simple entailment, we use classes and instances of classes. This does not say anything about sub-properties.
16:19:59 <niklasl> +1 rdf:ReificationProperty rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Property .
16:20:26 <gkellogg> william_vw: But, it's not the case that everything needs to be a sub-property of rdf:Property?
16:20:52 <niklasl> q+
16:21:00 <gkellogg> enrico: :s :p <<(...))>>> does not imply :p a sub-property of rdf:refies.
16:21:10 <ora> ack niklasl
16:21:25 <gkellogg> william_vw: I thought that everything in the property position can be inferred to be a sub-class of rdf:Property.
16:21:26 <pchampin> I think that William confuses rdf:Propety with owl:topObjectProperty / owl:DataProperty
16:21:41 <gkellogg> niklasl: OWL has some other things, but RDF is simpler.
16:21:52 <Souri> Would this be allowed in a graph? ==> :x :firstName "John" . :y :firstName <<( :s :p :o )>> . (I hope not.)
16:21:53 <gtw> q+
16:22:13 <ora> ack gtw
16:22:16 <gkellogg> gtw: What is the value of having this ReificationProperty?
16:22:41 <gkellogg> ... The sematantics seem to say it is entailed, but what do we get from that?
16:22:47 <tl> https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf-schema-20140225/#ch_property
16:22:53 <gkellogg> enrico: You don't get anything, but it suggests that such a property is a ReificationProperty.
16:22:58 <gkellogg> gtw: Why do it then?
16:23:09 <gkellogg> ... If it doesn't mean anything.
16:23:29 <gkellogg> enrico: All of these entailments don't mean anything, but they help with understanding the model.
16:23:36 <gkellogg> ... It helps you to debug your graph.
16:23:45 <TallTed> Do we have an explicit draft proposal, of the thing that we might be voting on? That might help this discussion...
16:23:59 <gkellogg> enrico: rdf:Resource is also pointless.
16:24:14 <ora> s/rdf:Resource/rdfs:Resource
16:24:18 <gkellogg> gtw: We're not discussing changing those things, but I don't see the value of adding this if we think it's pointless.
16:24:27 <AndyS> rdf-semantics -- """rdfD2	xxx aaa yyy .	aaa rdf:type rdf:Property ."""
16:24:35 <tl> q+
16:24:38 <gkellogg> enrico: It does not enrich your graph semantically, but allows you to see the entailments.
16:24:58 <gkellogg> gtw: It's not saying that everything in the domain is a triple term.
16:25:29 <gkellogg> enrico: It's like entailment, if you compute some entailments, that are also pointless, as they are of necessity already true.
16:25:50 <gkellogg> ... This allows you to increase your trust in the graph. If you see something clearly false, you have something to fix.
16:26:17 <gkellogg> ... Entailment is pointless, because it is already true. But, when you see it you learn something about your data.
16:26:33 <ora> ack tl
16:26:37 <gkellogg> ora: This matches my experience. It's helpful when building tooling.
16:27:10 <william_vw> q+
16:27:11 <gkellogg> tl: I understood this as a guide. You can define properties with other capabilities, but this is really just documentation
16:27:17 <ora> ack william_vw
16:27:35 <gkellogg> william_vw: I think Souri had some reservations that I asked to be clarified.
16:27:45 <tl> s/with other capabilities/with more specific capabilities
16:27:45 <Souri> q+ to ask Would this be allowed in a graph? ==> :x :firstName "John" . :y :firstName <<( :s :p :o )>> . (I hope not.)
16:27:51 <ora> ack Souri
16:27:51 <Zakim> Souri, you wanted to ask Would this be allowed in a graph? ==> :x :firstName "John" . :y :firstName <<( :s :p :o )>> . (I hope not.)
16:27:51 <gkellogg> ... It would be more difficult to implement, and would lead to users messing up their data.
16:28:28 <gkellogg> Souri: The original idea was to be minimal; we get a triple term who's only value is to define a reifier to talk about the triple term.
16:28:54 <gkellogg> ... When you see rdf:reifies, expect a triple term. That worked well from a minimalist point of view.
16:29:46 <gkellogg> ... when we introduce ReificationProperty, we shouldn't allow things that aren't aligned with the intention of ReificationProperty.
16:30:06 <gkellogg> ... Are we going to allow this, or not?
16:30:31 <gkellogg> ... I don't want to allow mixed use of Triple Terms.
16:31:02 <gkellogg> ... I see :firstName :John, and later <<(...)>>, it introduces a problem.
16:31:32 <gkellogg> ... If we allow any property to used, then by virtue of RDF Entailment, this causes a conflict.
16:31:48 <pchampin> q?
16:31:49 <enrico> q+
16:32:00 <gkellogg> ... I'm not sure we need to bring in the ReificationProperty, we only need rdf:reifies.
16:32:15 <ora> ack enrico
16:32:18 <gkellogg> ... I'm not sure what we're getting out of it other than to find inconsistencies.
16:32:44 <tl> q+
16:32:49 <gkellogg> enrico: It would be more complex to impose such a restriction.
16:32:55 <pchampin> q+
16:32:55 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:33:09 <gkellogg> ... Triple Terms can't appear elsewhere, so you need to defined a well-formed syntax.
16:33:39 <Souri> q+
16:33:42 <gkellogg> ... It's not obvious that having an enforced syntax is simpler than using the entailments to flag misuse.
16:33:51 <ora> ack tl
16:34:19 <fsasaki> q+
16:34:27 <gtw> q+ to mention that RDF 1.0-style reification will make any restriction on rdf:reificationProperty difficult due to rdf:object
16:34:35 <gkellogg> tl: I think it's necessary to define an extension point for triple terms and rdf:reifies. If the group doesn't support asserts/states, then I would be in favor of the ReificationProperty.
16:35:03 <gkellogg> ... I am for prohibiting triple terms in the subject position, but not for other hard restrictions.
16:35:05 <ora> ack pchampin
16:35:36 <gkellogg> pchampin: Souri's concerns reminds me of another discrepancy: that with literals.
16:36:05 <gkellogg> ... Some implementations recognize xsd:integer and will reject literals that are invalid.
16:36:18 <gkellogg> ... But, the abstract data model allows them to be stated.
16:36:38 <gkellogg> ... The same can occur with ReificationProperty.
16:37:06 <gkellogg> ... We already use this type of flexibility unconsciously; the reasoning holds here too.
16:37:28 <gkellogg> ... By not insisting on well-formedness this allows some implementations to be more strict.
16:37:43 <ora> ack Souri
16:37:46 <gkellogg> ora: Not quite ready to vote on now.
16:38:06 <gkellogg> Souri: My phylosophy is that if you give people too much freedom, they will mess up.
16:38:23 <gkellogg> ... People will try to do things that don't make sense.
16:38:45 <gkellogg> ... Unless there is a substantial benefit, it may be better to not allow it to be stated.
16:39:04 <gkellogg> ... If we have rdf:reifies, we can do anything with the reifier, including to give it a type.
16:39:21 <gkellogg> ... The rdf:reifies hook gives us the ability ...
16:39:31 <ora> ack fsasaki
16:39:41 <ora> ack gtw
16:39:41 <Zakim> gtw, you wanted to mention that RDF 1.0-style reification will make any restriction on rdf:reificationProperty difficult due to rdf:object
16:39:43 <gkellogg> fsasaki: I agree with Souri
16:40:06 <gkellogg> gtw: In RDF 1.0 reification, it would be hard to do these sorts of restrictions.
16:40:29 <gkellogg> ... I don't see the value in ReificationProperty.
16:41:04 <gkellogg> ... It would be unfortunate if we got to the point where we said it was okay to violate such restrictions.
16:41:09 <TallTed> Please, please, can the agenda (and mailing list) include explicit text of proposal(s) on which we aim to vote? A link to a complete page of meeting minutes doesn't help advance prep much if at all.
16:41:32 <gkellogg> ora: People should think about this.
16:41:35 <gkellogg> zakim, next item
16:41:35 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Proposal for next week's discussion -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:41:56 <tl> q+
16:41:58 <AndyS> q+
16:42:01 <ora> ack tl
16:42:01 <gkellogg> ora: Anything else to discuss next week?
16:42:11 <gkellogg> tl: I'd like to discuss rdf:stated/asserted.
16:42:16 <ora> ack AndyS
16:42:29 <enrico> q+
16:42:41 <AndyS> Is there anything we need to do for TPAC?
16:43:08 <ora> ack enrico
16:43:14 <gkellogg> ora: Another good discussion for next week; what do we want to accomplish at TPAC?
16:43:36 <tl> s/rdf:stated/rdf:states
16:43:43 <gkellogg> enrico: Another thing related to ReificationProperty is the unrestricted nature of RDF, and if triple terms should be restricted from being used in the subject position.
16:43:55 <tl> s/rdf:asserted/rdf:asserts
16:44:35 <gkellogg> ora: We can continue with today's discussion and get into some of these other issues.
16:45:08 <niklasl> q+
16:45:12 <ora> ack niklasl
16:45:13 <gkellogg> ... I don't think we need to vote on these, as they are clear discussion topics.
16:45:36 <gkellogg> niklasl: I think the detail about naming the range of rdf:reifies is baked into the discussion.
16:45:46 <gkellogg> zakim, next ite
16:45:46 <Zakim> I don't understand 'next ite', gkellogg
16:45:50 <gkellogg> zakim, next item
16:45:50 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Review of pull requests, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:46:23 <gkellogg> ora: There are several editorial things.
16:46:26 <AndyS> q+
16:46:32 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
16:46:35 <gkellogg> ... It would be nice if we could see how long things have been open.
16:46:39 <rubensworks> q+
16:47:01 <ora> ack AndyS
16:47:08 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:47:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:47:35 <ora> ack rubensworks
16:47:48 <gkellogg> gkellogg: plan to merge w3c/rdf-turtle#62 after the meeting.
16:47:49 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/pull/62 -> Pull Request 62 Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors. Change reifiedTriple to reifingTriple. (by gkellogg) [spec:editorial]
16:48:03 <gkellogg> rubensworks: It's 4, 5, and 6 are all the same and has good agreement.
16:48:28 <gkellogg> ... There are several about migrating from quoted triples to triple terms/reifiers which have good reviews.
16:48:37 <gkellogg> ... I think they can all be merged.
16:48:46 <gkellogg> ... Including Andy's update to the SPARQL grammar.
16:49:29 <gkellogg> ora: No objections heard. General agreement that all open PRs can be merged.
16:49:39 <pchampin> s|4|https://github.com/w3c/sparql-protocol/pull/28
16:49:51 <pchampin> s|5|https://github.com/w3c/sparql-update/pull/40
16:49:52 <gkellogg> AndyS: I think it's important to get the grammar in.
16:50:22 <gkellogg> gkellogg: I think w3c/rdf-tests#135 needs to be merged.
16:50:22 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-tests/pull/135 -> Pull Request 135 Updates Turtle tests to use triple term syntax and reifications (by gkellogg) [enhancement] [Turtle]
16:50:31 <pchampin> s|and 6|and https://github.com/w3c/sparql-service-description/pull/27
16:50:43 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:50:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:50:50 <gkellogg> AndyS: It's a bit more complex. It depends on what the expectations are.
16:51:37 <gkellogg> gkellogg: I'd rather merge sooner rather than later.
16:51:52 <Adrian> Chair: ora
16:51:58 <gkellogg> AndyS: I wanted to point out that people may not have implementations ready to do good validation.
16:52:05 <ora> q?
16:52:06 <gkellogg> ora: I agree, lets merge.
16:52:25 <gkellogg> zakim, next item
16:52:25 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Issue Triage, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:52:56 <gkellogg> ora: we're almost out of time, but I urge people to examine open issues to see what they may want to work on.
16:53:02 <Adrian> Q+
16:53:22 <gkellogg> ... We can pick up some of these items in due course, maybe at TPAC.
16:53:29 <ora> ack Adrian
16:53:48 <gkellogg> ktk: I think we want to spend some time together to go through the lists.
16:54:08 <gkellogg> zakim, next item
16:54:08 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:54:25 <gkellogg> ktk: we have a couple of new members, although they're not on the call.
16:54:47 <pchampin> q+
16:54:58 <ora> ack pchampin
16:55:27 <gkellogg> pchampin: University of Oxford joined with Ian Horricks.
16:55:52 <gkellogg> ora: Oxford Semantics was just acquired by Samsung.
16:56:18 <tl> s/Horricks/Horrocks
16:56:25 <Adrian> Adrian has joined #rdf-star
16:56:58 <gkellogg> Julian: [introductory comments]
16:57:02 <gkellogg> ora: Welcome!
16:57:28 <TallTed> yes, Samsung is W3C member -- https://www.w3.org/membership/list/?initial=s&ecosystem=network-communications
16:57:44 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:57:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:58:05 <gkellogg> TallTed: It would be helpful if we could have explicit proposals for what we're voting on, not pointers to discussions.
16:58:25 <gkellogg> zakim, end meeting.
16:58:25 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been enrico, Dominik_T, TallTed, tl, eBremer, rubenswo_, niklasl, gtw, gkellogg, olaf, AndyS, pfps, ora, Adrian, william_vw, fsasaki, Souri,
16:58:25 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:58:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:58:32 <Zakim> ... rubensworks
16:58:32 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:58:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html Zakim
16:58:38 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, gkellogg; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
16:58:38 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdf-star
17:01:42 <pchampin> s|https://github.com/w3c/sparql-protocol/pull/28,|https://github.com/w3c/sparql-protocol/pull/28 ,
17:01:53 <pchampin> s|https://github.com/w3c/sparql-update/pull/40,|https://github.com/w3c/sparql-update/pull/40 ,
17:01:55 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:01:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:04:43 <pchampin> s|rubensworks: It's|rubensworks:
17:04:45 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:04:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:06:08 <pchampin> s|[introductory comments]|I'm a PhD student at Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. I have already worked with RDF-star.
17:06:09 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:06:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:19:01 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
18:23:18 <william_vw> william_vw has joined #rdf-star
19:40:57 <gkellogg_> s/why something is an interest/why something is an inferrence/
19:42:07 <gkellogg_> s/ ReificationProperty/ rdf: ReificationProperty/g
19:42:43 <gkellogg_> rrsagent, generate minutes
19:42:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html gkellogg_
19:43:19 <gkellogg_> s/ReificationPropery/rdf:ReificationProperty/g
19:45:58 <gkellogg_> s/rdf: ReificationProperty/rdf:ReificationProperty/g
19:47:05 <gkellogg_> s| rdf:states/asserted| rdf:states/rdf:asserts|
19:48:19 <gkellogg_> rrsagent, generate minutes
19:48:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html gkellogg_
19:49:13 <gkellogg_> s|<tl> s/rdf:asserted/rdf:asserts||
19:49:16 <gkellogg_> rrsagent, generate minutes
19:49:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html gkellogg_
19:49:36 <gkellogg_> rrsagent, bye
19:49:36 <RRSAgent> I see no action items