RDF Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 13 March 2013

Seen
Andy Seaborne, Antoine Zimmermann, Charles Greer, Gavin Carothers, Gregg Kellogg, Guus Schreiber, Markus Lanthaler, Patrick Hayes, Peter Patel-Schneider, Pierre-Antoine Champin, Richard Cyganiak, Souripriya Das, Thomas Baker, Zhe Wu
Chair
Guus Schreiber
Scribe
Gavin Carothers, Charles Greer
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. to accept the minutes of the 06 March telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-03-06 link
  2. Publish Semantics as FPWD marking the section on blank node scope as an ISSUE link
  3. reopen and close ISSUE-97 to make RDF interpretations interpret all IRIs as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0041.html link
  4. take TriG, n-triples and n-quads to FPWD according to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0091.html link
Topics
14:59:46 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/03/13-rdf-wg-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/03/13-rdf-wg-irc

14:59:48 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

14:59:50 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 73394

14:59:50 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute

14:59:51 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:59:51 <trackbot> Date: 13 March 2013
15:00:01 <pfps> zakim, who is on the phone?

Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is on the phone?

15:00:01 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, pfps

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, pfps

15:00:02 <Zakim> On IRC I see pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, AZ, tbaker, gavinc, davidwood, cygri, SteveH, yvesr, manu, sandro, ericP, manu1, mischat, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, AZ, tbaker, gavinc, davidwood, cygri, SteveH, yvesr, manu, sandro, ericP, manu1, mischat, trackbot

15:00:58 <gavinc> Zakim, this is RDFwg

Gavin Carothers: Zakim, this is RDFwg

15:00:58 <Zakim> ok, gavinc; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, gavinc; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM

15:01:07 <gavinc> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Gavin Carothers: Zakim, who is on the phone?

15:01:07 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.408.992.aaaa, Guus_Schreiber, GavinC

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see +1.408.992.aaaa, Guus_Schreiber, GavinC

15:01:17 <pfps> zakim, aaaa is me

Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, aaaa is me

15:01:17 <Zakim> +pfps; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +pfps; got it

15:01:53 <Zakim> +PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH

15:02:13 <Zakim> + +081165aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +081165aabb

15:02:21 <gavinc> I think everyone else is over in LDP talking about how DELETE works ;)

Gavin Carothers: I think everyone else is over in LDP talking about how DELETE works ;)

15:02:25 <AZ> Zakim, aabb is me

Antoine Zimmermann: Zakim, aabb is me

15:02:25 <Zakim> +AZ; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AZ; got it

15:02:30 <PatH> i hear silence...

Patrick Hayes: i hear silence...

15:02:42 <PatH> ah, hi.

Patrick Hayes: ah, hi.

15:03:40 <Zakim> -PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH

15:03:46 <Zakim> +Souri

Zakim IRC Bot: +Souri

15:03:49 <Zakim> +??P10

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10

15:03:55 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P10

Gregg Kellogg: zakim, I am ??P10

15:03:55 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +gkellogg; got it

15:04:00 <Zakim> + +1.707.874.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.707.874.aacc

15:04:08 <cgreer> zakim, aacc is me

Charles Greer: zakim, aacc is me

15:04:08 <Zakim> +cgreer; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +cgreer; got it

15:04:30 <Zakim> +PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH

15:05:11 <tbaker> is irc-only today

Thomas Baker: is irc-only today

15:05:40 <gavinc> scribe: gavinc

(Scribe set to Gavin Carothers)

15:05:40 <gavinc> chair: Guus
15:05:43 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

15:05:49 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me

Andy Seaborne: zakim, IPCaller is me

15:05:49 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it

15:06:22 <gavinc> Guus: I promise to keep the meeting short.

Guus Schreiber: I promise to keep the meeting short.

15:06:33 <Zakim> + +1.650.265.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.650.265.aadd

15:06:41 <pfps> minutes look fine to me

Peter Patel-Schneider: minutes look fine to me

15:06:44 <Guus> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 06 March telecon:     http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-03-06

Guus Schreiber: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 06 March telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-03-06

15:06:45 <gavinc> ... DST not the same in EU for another few weeks

... DST not the same in EU for another few weeks

15:06:47 <zwu2> zakim, +aadd is me

Zhe Wu: zakim, +aadd is me

15:06:47 <Zakim> sorry, zwu2, I do not recognize a party named '+aadd'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, zwu2, I do not recognize a party named '+aadd'

15:06:59 <zwu2> zakim, +1.650.265.aadd is me

Zhe Wu: zakim, +1.650.265.aadd is me

15:06:59 <Zakim> +zwu2; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +zwu2; got it

15:06:59 <gavinc> ... minutes accepted.

... minutes accepted.

15:07:00 <Guus> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 06 March telecon:     http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-03-06

Guus Schreiber: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 06 March telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-03-06

15:07:12 <Guus> RESOLVED: to accept the minutes of the 06 March telecon:     http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-03-06

RESOLVED: to accept the minutes of the 06 March telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-03-06

15:07:37 <gavinc> topic: Action Items

1. Action Items

15:08:00 <gavinc> AZ: I already have most of my review written. Trying to be as complete as possible.

Antoine Zimmermann: I already have most of my review written. Trying to be as complete as possible.

15:08:11 <Zakim> +??P20

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P20

15:08:16 <markus> zakim, ??P20 is me

Markus Lanthaler: zakim, ??P20 is me

15:08:16 <Zakim> +markus; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +markus; got it

15:08:19 <gavinc> Guus: Keeping action open.

Guus Schreiber: Keeping action open.

15:08:30 <gavinc> ... we'll come back to semantics.

... we'll come back to semantics.

15:08:48 <pfps> q+

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+

15:08:57 <gavinc> Topic: Semantics

2. Semantics

15:09:17 <gavinc> pfps: I don't see how we can move forward with the objection from AZ.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't see how we can move forward with the objection from AZ.

15:09:35 <AZ> q+

Antoine Zimmermann: q+

15:09:42 <gavinc> PatH: Apart from the objection, there are sections that haven't been written. HTML linking to fix, now using Respec, should go faster.

Patrick Hayes: Apart from the objection, there are sections that haven't been written. HTML linking to fix, now using Respec, should go faster.

15:09:52 <pfps> I don't see that any of the issues that Pat is reporting should stop FPWD publication.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't see that any of the issues that Pat is reporting should stop FPWD publication.

15:10:12 <gavinc> Guus: Shall we start with AZ's last email?

Guus Schreiber: Shall we start with AZ's last email?

15:10:26 <gavinc> AZ: I said that the current description of blank node scope should be removed from the document.

Antoine Zimmermann: I said that the current description of blank node scope should be removed from the document.

15:10:43 <gavinc> ... should go back to the RDF 2004 for blank node semantics.

... should go back to the RDF 2004 for blank node semantics.

15:10:58 <gavinc> ... It introduces a number of new concepts that we haven't talked about.

... It introduces a number of new concepts that we haven't talked about.

15:11:19 <gavinc> ... Blank node scope has been discussed, but hasn't been agreed upon.

... Blank node scope has been discussed, but hasn't been agreed upon.

15:11:30 <gavinc> ... Adds other concepts that haven't been discussed.

... Adds other concepts that haven't been discussed.

15:12:09 <gavinc> ... ??? ...

... ??? ...

15:12:26 <gavinc> ... Should introduce issues for all new concepts introduced in Semantics.

... Should introduce issues for all new concepts introduced in Semantics.

15:12:53 <gavinc> ... The main reason is that if it's only kept in the semantics document, then some people won't see them.

... The main reason is that if it's only kept in the semantics document, then some people won't see them.

15:13:23 <gavinc> ... confident in editors of concepts and semantics ...

... confident in editors of concepts and semantics ...

15:14:05 <gavinc> ... the process is not right, editors shouldn't introduce concepts

... the process is not right, editors shouldn't introduce concepts

15:14:59 <gavinc> PatH: Two issues. Should ??? be in the spec at all. 2nd issue, which document should it be in. (??? blank node scope)

Patrick Hayes: Two issues. Should ??? be in the spec at all. 2nd issue, which document should it be in. (??? blank node scope)

15:15:33 <AZ> Ok, right, Semantics and Concepts should cross reference, I agree

Antoine Zimmermann: Ok, right, Semantics and Concepts should cross reference, I agree

15:15:53 <gavinc> ... Which material goes in which document is a largely editorial choice. Noted that this material should go in RDF Concepts as a NOTE in the semantics document.

... Which material goes in which document is a largely editorial choice. Noted that this material should go in RDF Concepts as a NOTE in the semantics document.

15:17:16 <gavinc> pfps: The problem is that there are outstanding issues that haven't been addressed.

Peter Patel-Schneider: The problem is that there are outstanding issues that haven't been addressed.

15:17:27 <gavinc> ... a number of them are technical.

... a number of them are technical.

15:17:44 <Zakim> +??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21

15:17:52 <pchampin> zakim, ??P21 is me

Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, ??P21 is me

15:17:52 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +pchampin; got it

15:18:19 <gavinc> ... Chicken and egg problem. How are we going to get them addressed appropriately? This is a plee to get the semantics decided before we worry about semi-colons.

... Chicken and egg problem. How are we going to get them addressed appropriately? This is a plee to get the semantics decided before we worry about semi-colons.

15:18:38 <gavinc> ... we're the handmaiden of the people who want to do the design.

... we're the handmaiden of the people who want to do the design.

15:19:03 <gavinc> +q to say oh yes there was.

+q to say oh yes there was.

15:19:24 <gavinc> pfps: I don't think there is a better way then to publish this in a FPWD.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't think there is a better way then to publish this in a FPWD.

15:19:35 <gavinc> PatH: It's a draft after all!

Patrick Hayes: It's a draft after all!

15:19:46 <gavinc> Guus: I was going to propose that.

Guus Schreiber: I was going to propose that.

15:19:49 <gavinc> -q

-q

15:20:01 <gavinc> ... it's important that we get a FPWD out.

... it's important that we get a FPWD out.

15:20:25 <gavinc> pfps: I think that we SHOULD a way forward on RDF graphs sharing blank nodes.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I think that we SHOULD a way forward on RDF graphs sharing blank nodes.

15:20:48 <gavinc> ... I don't know if it's THE way we'll end up using, and it doesn't have to match exactly what's in RDF concepts.

... I don't know if it's THE way we'll end up using, and it doesn't have to match exactly what's in RDF concepts.

15:21:23 <gavinc> PatH: There shouldn't be a difference of opinion that's unacknowledged between RDF concepts, and RDF semantics.

Patrick Hayes: There shouldn't be a difference of opinion that's unacknowledged between RDF concepts, and RDF semantics.

15:21:56 <gavinc> Guus: I'd like to decide today on publishing a FPWD.

Guus Schreiber: I'd like to decide today on publishing a FPWD.

15:22:02 <gavinc> ... what needs to be done to make that possible?

... what needs to be done to make that possible?

15:22:25 <gavinc> PatH: I think putting a more prominent issue note would be adequate?

Patrick Hayes: I think putting a more prominent issue note would be adequate?

15:23:15 <gavinc> AZ: Best we can do, to go forward.

Antoine Zimmermann: Best we can do, to go forward.

15:24:15 <cgreer> That's exactly the word JSON-LD-SYNTAX uses re blank nodes -- controversial :)

Charles Greer: That's exactly the word JSON-LD-SYNTAX uses re blank nodes -- controversial :)

15:24:19 <cygri> ISSUE-43?

Richard Cyganiak: ISSUE-43?

15:24:19 <trackbot> ISSUE-43 -- Revisit "Suggestion that Qnames should be allowed as values for attributes such as rdf:about" -- closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-43 -- Revisit "Suggestion that Qnames should be allowed as values for attributes such as rdf:about" -- closed

15:24:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/43

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/43

15:24:38 <pfps> Which issue is blank node scope, or should there be a new one?

Peter Patel-Schneider: Which issue is blank node scope, or should there be a new one?

15:24:39 <gavinc> PROPOSED: to publish Semantics as FPWD marking the section on blank node scope as an ISSUE

PROPOSED: to publish Semantics as FPWD marking the section on blank node scope as an ISSUE

15:24:48 <cgreer> +1

Charles Greer: +1

15:24:56 <pfps> +1

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1

15:24:57 <Souri> +1

Souripriya Das: +1

15:24:58 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

15:24:58 <zwu2> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

15:24:59 <AZ> AZ: the document can be published on the condition that the part on bnode scope is clearly made distinct

Antoine Zimmermann: the document can be published on the condition that the part on bnode scope is clearly made distinct [ Scribe Assist by Antoine Zimmermann ]

15:25:00 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmermann: +1

15:25:00 <markus> +1

Markus Lanthaler: +1

15:25:01 <gavinc> +1

+1

15:25:07 <gkellogg> +1

Gregg Kellogg: +1

15:25:16 <Guus> +1 for PatH

Guus Schreiber: +1 for PatH

15:25:16 <gavinc> PatH: +1

Patrick Hayes: +1

15:25:43 <gavinc> RESOLVED: Publish Semantics as FPWD marking the section on blank node scope as an ISSUE

RESOLVED: Publish Semantics as FPWD marking the section on blank node scope as an ISSUE

15:25:51 <pchampin> +1

Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1

15:26:21 <pfps> unfortunately, I am unlikely to be able to be at the meeting next week

Peter Patel-Schneider: unfortunately, I am unlikely to be able to be at the meeting next week

15:26:32 <tbaker> +1

Thomas Baker: +1

15:26:50 <gavinc> Guus: If we can resolve in the next two or three weeks we should be on track.

Guus Schreiber: If we can resolve in the next two or three weeks we should be on track.

15:27:08 <gavinc> ... do we have a series?

... do we have a series?

15:27:14 <pfps> given that I am happy with the current situation, my participation is probably not necessary

Peter Patel-Schneider: given that I am happy with the current situation, my participation is probably not necessary

15:27:19 <gavinc> PatH: Did I misread something?

Patrick Hayes: Did I misread something?

15:27:34 <gavinc> Guus: I don't like series editors.

Guus Schreiber: I don't like series editors.

15:27:52 <gavinc> PatH: Will remove. I thought I was supposed to.

Patrick Hayes: Will remove. I thought I was supposed to.

15:28:13 <AZ> As pfps said, we should have a decision on ISSUE 97

Antoine Zimmermann: As pfps said, we should have a decision on ISSUE-97

15:28:17 <AZ> (related to semantics)

Antoine Zimmermann: (related to semantics)

15:28:40 <AZ> q+

Antoine Zimmermann: q+

15:28:46 <gavinc> q?

q?

15:28:50 <pfps> q-

Peter Patel-Schneider: q-

15:29:04 <Guus> ack AZ

Guus Schreiber: ack AZ

15:29:18 <gavinc> AZ: Would like us to have a decision on ISSUE-97.

Antoine Zimmermann: Would like us to have a decision on ISSUE-97.

15:29:22 <gavinc> ISSUE-97?

ISSUE-97?

15:29:22 <trackbot> ISSUE-97 -- Should the semantics of RDF graphs be dependent on a vocabulary? -- closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-97 -- Should the semantics of RDF graphs be dependent on a vocabulary? -- closed

15:29:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/97

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/97

15:30:21 <gavinc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0041.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0041.html

15:30:45 <AZ> AZ: we should reopen ISSUE 97, make a decision and close it again

Antoine Zimmermann: we should reopen ISSUE-97, make a decision and close it again [ Scribe Assist by Antoine Zimmermann ]

15:30:59 <gavinc> gavinc: Can't find proposal.

Gavin Carothers: Can't find proposal.

15:31:03 <gavinc> pfps: Don't have one.

Peter Patel-Schneider: Don't have one.

15:31:12 <gavinc> ... it's in the email.

... it's in the email.

15:31:27 <gavinc> Guus: Should have put this on the agenda.

Guus Schreiber: Should have put this on the agenda.

15:31:53 <gavinc> ... no objections on mailing list?

... no objections on mailing list?

15:32:24 <gavinc> pfps: well... I mean it's a change, there was chatter. RDF systems don't do what semantics says.

Peter Patel-Schneider: well... I mean it's a change, there was chatter. RDF systems don't do what semantics says.

15:32:34 <gavinc> ... SPARQL systems do something else.

... SPARQL systems do something else.

15:32:52 <gavinc> ... It's NOT a counter example, as SPARQL has an explicit "scope graph"

... It's NOT a counter example, as SPARQL has an explicit "scope graph"

15:33:10 <gavinc> ... the "scope graph" plugs a hole in the 2004 semantics.

... the "scope graph" plugs a hole in the 2004 semantics.

15:33:25 <AZ> q+

Antoine Zimmermann: q+

15:33:27 <gavinc> ... the change to the semantics is in agreement with the way SPARQL works.

... the change to the semantics is in agreement with the way SPARQL works.

15:33:29 <AZ> I did

Antoine Zimmermann: I did

15:33:37 <AZ> (provide the response)

Antoine Zimmermann: (provide the response)

15:35:00 <gavinc> AZ: Consequences of the change are not non-existent.

Antoine Zimmermann: Consequences of the change are not non-existent.

15:35:57 <gavinc> pfps: I'm unaware of any system that doesn't do the right thing here.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm unaware of any system that doesn't do the right thing here.

15:36:36 <pfps> PROPOSAL: reoopen and close ISSUE-97 to make RDF interpretations interpret all IRIs

PROPOSED: reoopen and close ISSUE-97 to make RDF interpretations interpret all IRIs

15:37:11 <gavinc> PROPOSAL: reoopen and close ISSUE-97 to make RDF interpretations interpret all IRIs as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0041.html

PROPOSED: reoopen and close ISSUE-97 to make RDF interpretations interpret all IRIs as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0041.html

15:37:12 <pfps> +1

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1

15:37:15 <Guus> +1

Guus Schreiber: +1

15:37:16 <AZ> I emmitted claims that it has consequences, but I admit now that the advantages overcome the minor changes

Antoine Zimmermann: I emmitted claims that it has consequences, but I admit now that the advantages overcome the minor changes

15:37:16 <gkellogg> +1

Gregg Kellogg: +1

15:37:20 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmermann: +1

15:37:23 <gavinc> +0 (doesn't really understand)

+0 (doesn't really understand)

15:37:25 <pfps> path +1

Peter Patel-Schneider: path +1

15:37:26 <Guus> +1 from Pat

Guus Schreiber: +1 from Pat

15:37:29 <cgreer> +1

Charles Greer: +1

15:37:31 <pchampin> +1

Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1

15:37:32 <markus> +1

Markus Lanthaler: +1

15:37:57 <gavinc> RESOLVED: reopen and close ISSUE-97 to make RDF interpretations interpret all IRIs as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0041.html

RESOLVED: reopen and close ISSUE-97 to make RDF interpretations interpret all IRIs as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0041.html

15:38:53 <gavinc> ISSUE-107?

ISSUE-107?

15:38:53 <trackbot> ISSUE-107 -- Revised definition of blank nodes -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-107 -- Revised definition of blank nodes -- open

15:38:53 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/107

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/107

15:39:05 <gavinc> pfps: Attempt to close ISSUE-107 next week?

Peter Patel-Schneider: Attempt to close ISSUE-107 next week?

15:39:27 <AZ> ow, I'm afraid one week will not be enough

Antoine Zimmermann: ow, I'm afraid one week will not be enough

15:39:38 <Guus> q?

Guus Schreiber: q?

15:39:45 <Guus> ack AZ

Guus Schreiber: ack AZ

15:39:46 <gavinc> Guus: That concludes semantics.

Guus Schreiber: That concludes semantics.

15:39:48 <pfps> I'll put out a message - the idea will be to try to get discussion started - if one week is insufficient then so be ti

Peter Patel-Schneider: I'll put out a message - the idea will be to try to get discussion started - if one week is insufficient then so be ti

15:40:03 <cgreer> scribe: cgreer

(Scribe set to Charles Greer)

15:40:22 <gavinc> topic: TriG/N-Triples/N-Quads

3. TriG/N-Triples/N-Quads

15:40:36 <cgreer> gavinc: There are three syntaxes that are close to FPWD

Gavin Carothers: There are three syntaxes that are close to FPWD

15:40:53 <cgreer> ... I missed wrong production in wrong doc, this will be changed.

... I missed wrong production in wrong doc, this will be changed.

15:40:58 <cgreer> ... Otherwise they're ready

... Otherwise they're ready

15:41:09 <AndyS> FPWD -- go for it!

Andy Seaborne: FPWD -- go for it!

15:41:31 <cgreer> gavinc: There's an error in TriG, need to add turtle as reference

Gavin Carothers: There's an error in TriG, need to add turtle as reference

15:41:49 <cgreer> ... Error in n-quads where I refer to triple rather than statement... known issues not yet fixed

... Error in n-quads where I refer to triple rather than statement... known issues not yet fixed

15:42:15 <cgreer> Guus: We need reviews

Guus Schreiber: We need reviews

15:42:45 <gkellogg> I'll bite

Gregg Kellogg: I'll bite

15:42:47 <cgreer> gavinc: I'd hope that reviewers can take all three

Gavin Carothers: I'd hope that reviewers can take all three

15:43:01 <cgreer> andys: I'm happy with them as is

Andy Seaborne: I'm happy with them as is

15:43:16 <cgreer> Guus: Without review?

Guus Schreiber: Without review?

15:43:30 <cgreer> andys: I think they're ready for FPWD level

Andy Seaborne: I think they're ready for FPWD level

15:43:34 <PatH> I just posted an updated semantics document version. Hopefully this will pass muster.

Patrick Hayes: I just posted an updated semantics document version. Hopefully this will pass muster.

15:43:38 <cgreer> Guus: I interpret that statement as a review

Guus Schreiber: I interpret that statement as a review

15:43:41 <cgreer> WOOT

WOOT

15:43:59 <cgreer> gavinc: The only one that needs more attention is n-quads

Gavin Carothers: The only one that needs more attention is n-quads

15:44:20 <cgreer> ... n-quads is newer, nobody has seen it yet

... n-quads is newer, nobody has seen it yet

15:44:38 <cgreer> andys: my statement was about n-triples

Andy Seaborne: my statement was about n-triples

15:44:48 <cgreer> ... but we shouldn't set the barrier too high

... but we shouldn't set the barrier too high

15:45:11 <cgreer> gavinc: n-triples has already been published as well, and reviewed

Gavin Carothers: n-triples has already been published as well, and reviewed

15:45:17 <cgreer> ... this step just extracts it

... this step just extracts it

15:45:26 <cgreer> Guus: agreed to publish all three?

Guus Schreiber: agreed to publish all three?

15:45:35 <cgreer> gkellogg: I can postpone review

Gregg Kellogg: I can postpone review

15:46:05 <cgreer> gavinc: do we intend to take n-triples and n-quads to recommendation?

Gavin Carothers: do we intend to take n-triples and n-quads to recommendation?

15:46:19 <cgreer> ... extension says they're both notes

... extension says they're both notes

15:46:26 <cgreer> Guus: did we have some other agreement?

Guus Schreiber: did we have some other agreement?

15:46:38 <cgreer> ... we can assume they're notes for now

... we can assume they're notes for now

15:47:03 <cgreer> PROPOSED: take TriG, n-triples and n-quads to FPWD

PROPOSED: take TriG, n-triples and n-quads to FPWD

15:48:01 <markus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0091.html

Markus Lanthaler: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0091.html

15:48:07 <cgreer> thanks

thanks

15:48:15 <gkellogg> +1

Gregg Kellogg: +1

15:48:18 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmermann: +1

15:48:21 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

15:48:21 <pfps> +1

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1

15:48:23 <zwu2> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

15:48:23 <Guus> +1

Guus Schreiber: +1

15:48:24 <cgreer> +1

+1

15:48:25 <pchampin> +1

Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1

15:48:26 <gavinc> +1

Gavin Carothers: +1

15:48:26 <tbaker> +1

Thomas Baker: +1

15:48:26 <markus> +1

Markus Lanthaler: +1

15:48:26 <PatH> I have to leave very soon. Guus, let me know if you need any other edits done to get +1

Patrick Hayes: I have to leave very soon. Guus, let me know if you need any other edits done to get +1

15:48:38 <Souri> +1

Souripriya Das: +1

15:48:44 <PatH> +1

Patrick Hayes: +1

15:48:48 <AZ> Zakim, who's noisy?

Antoine Zimmermann: Zakim, who's noisy?

15:48:53 <cgreer> RESOLVED: take TriG, n-triples and n-quads to FPWD according to  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0091.html

RESOLVED: take TriG, n-triples and n-quads to FPWD according to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Mar/0091.html

15:49:00 <Zakim> AZ, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus_Schreiber (47%), AndyS (64%)

Zakim IRC Bot: AZ, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus_Schreiber (47%), AndyS (64%)

15:49:07 <PatH> the semantics to fpwd.

Patrick Hayes: the semantics to fpwd.

15:50:20 <cgreer> gavinc: Eric's not my co-editor now.  I need direction.

Gavin Carothers: Eric's not my co-editor now. I need direction.

15:50:50 <cgreer> topic: Progress on other docs

4. Progress on other docs

15:51:10 <PatH> I vote with the majority on all other issues.

Patrick Hayes: I vote with the majority on all other issues.

15:51:11 <gavinc> subtopic: JSON-LD

4.1. JSON-LD

15:52:02 <gavinc> scribe: gavinc

(Scribe set to Gavin Carothers)

15:52:02 <trackbot> ISSUE-105 -- Graphs, datasets, authoritative representations, and content negotiation -- closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-105 -- Graphs, datasets, authoritative representations, and content negotiation -- closed

15:52:02 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/105

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/105

15:52:14 <Zakim> -PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH

15:52:35 <gavinc> gkellogg: The decision from ISSUE-105 is not in Concepts yet.

Gregg Kellogg: The decision from ISSUE-105 is not in Concepts yet.

15:52:59 <gavinc> Guus: Check with editor to see if there an issue or just editorial

Guus Schreiber: Check with editor to see if there an issue or just editorial

15:53:33 <gavinc> markus: we addressed almost all issues sandro raised.

Markus Lanthaler: we addressed almost all issues sandro raised.

15:53:46 <gavinc> ... should we reserve all @words as keywords.

... should we reserve all @words as keywords.

15:53:59 <Zakim> -cgreer

Zakim IRC Bot: -cgreer

15:54:21 <gavinc> ... Sandro recommended doing that, we decided not to enforce that in the algorithm

... Sandro recommended doing that, we decided not to enforce that in the algorithm

15:54:38 <cgreer> lost audio

Charles Greer: lost audio

15:54:47 <gavinc> ... we decided to simply ignore @terms that aren't defined, just like other undefined terms

... we decided to simply ignore @terms that aren't defined, just like other undefined terms

15:55:27 <gavinc> ... only two sections that contain normative statements

... only two sections that contain normative statements

15:55:39 <AndyS> I found it a bit more complicated - the normative section B refers to the non-norm sections.

Andy Seaborne: I found it a bit more complicated - the normative section B refers to the non-norm sections.

15:56:49 <gavinc> ... the stuff about numbers are in the algorithm spec, not the syntax spec.

... the stuff about numbers are in the algorithm spec, not the syntax spec.

15:57:03 <gavinc> ... could add more examples with numbers, but we already have a lot of examples

... could add more examples with numbers, but we already have a lot of examples

15:57:23 <Guus> q?

Guus Schreiber: q?

15:57:41 <gavinc> ... there are a few minor thins in algorithms that need to be ironed out.

... there are a few minor things in algorithms that need to be ironed out.

15:58:04 <Souri> s/thins/things/
16:00:25 <Zakim> -Souri

Zakim IRC Bot: -Souri

16:00:26 <Zakim> -pfps

Zakim IRC Bot: -pfps

16:00:26 <zwu2> bye

Zhe Wu: bye

16:00:27 <Zakim> -gkellogg

Zakim IRC Bot: -gkellogg

16:00:31 <Zakim> -Guus_Schreiber

Zakim IRC Bot: -Guus_Schreiber

16:00:33 <Zakim> -AndyS

Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS

16:00:33 <Zakim> -AZ

Zakim IRC Bot: -AZ

16:00:34 <Zakim> -zwu2

Zakim IRC Bot: -zwu2

16:00:35 <Zakim> -markus

Zakim IRC Bot: -markus

16:00:37 <Zakim> -GavinC

Zakim IRC Bot: -GavinC

16:00:42 <Guus> trackbot, end meeting

Guus Schreiber: trackbot, end meeting

16:00:42 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees

16:00:42 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.408.992.aaaa, Guus_Schreiber, GavinC, pfps, PatH, +081165aabb, AZ, Souri, gkellogg, +1.707.874.aacc, cgreer, AndyS, zwu2, markus,

Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been +1.408.992.aaaa, Guus_Schreiber, GavinC, pfps, PatH, +081165aabb, AZ, Souri, gkellogg, +1.707.874.aacc, cgreer, AndyS, zwu2, markus,

16:00:45 <Zakim> ... pchampin

Zakim IRC Bot: ... pchampin

16:00:50 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes

16:00:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/03/13-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/03/13-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot

16:00:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye

16:00:51 <RRSAgent> I see no action items

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see no action items



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#3) generated 2013-03-20 15:09:58 UTC by 'gcarothe', comments: None