From RDF Working Group Wiki
Wednesdays at 11am US Eastern time for 75 minutes 17:00 Paris/Berlin/A'dam; 16:00 London) Telephone US: +1.617.761.6200 SIP: email@example.com Zakim code: 73394 IRC channel: #rdf-wg on irc.w3.org on port 6665 Zakim instructions: http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html RRSAgent instructions: http://www.w3.org/2002/03/RRSAgent Scribe list: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Scribes
- Chair: Guus Schreiber
- Scribe: Pierre-Antoine Champin
- Alternate: Richard Cyganik
Minutes of last meeting
PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 17 Oct telecon:
Review of action items
- Mon-Tue 29-30 Oct, Lyon, France, co-located with TPAC.
- Next telecon: 05 November 2012
Discussion started with:
Three discussions appear to be going on in the thread:
- 1. Relationship JSON-LD <=> RDF
- E.g. Peter's questions (in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Oct/0107.html)
- Is JSON-LD a serialization syntax for all RDF graphs?
- Is JSON-LD only a serialization syntax for RDF graphs?
- Answer from Gregg (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Oct/0111.html) suggests that the answer is at least the first relationship exists.
- 2. Description of the JSON-LD&RDF relationship in the documents
- Concern of Michael (paraphrased): if JSON-LD is providing a serialization for RDF graphs that the RDF WG is going to endorse, then this relationship between JSON-LD and RDF must be clearly specified in a normative document.
- Efforts of Richard to align JSON-LD and RDF Concepts
- See JSON-LD Issue 168
- Discussion point: are the ongoing editing efforts sufficient to address this concern? Actions required?
- 3. Linked Data & formats
- This discussion is interesting but should not be on the critical path of this WG.
- Short progress update on status of responses
Should we capture the following resolutions (implicit in minutes previous telecon):
PROPOSED: The WG makes no normative statement on whether implementations that parse and store information from TriG documents MAY or MAY NOT turn the TriG default graph into a named graph with a name chosen in an implementation-dependent way.
PROPOSED: The WG will provide in the Primer non-normative suggestions for putting metadata about a TriG document in the document's default graph.