IRC log of rdf-star on 2024-08-29
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 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 -- """rdfD2xxx 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