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: firstname.lastname@example.org 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 relationsip 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 & foormats
- This discussion is interesting but should not be on the critical path of this WG.
Discuss whether in our dataset syntax, triples of the dataset's default graph MUST or MAY be surrounded by curly braces.
Related question: How can a human tell a Turtle document from a TriG document?
PROPOSED: In TriG, triples of the dataset's default graph [MUST|MAY] be surrounded by curly braces.
PROPOSED: Implementations that parse and store information from TriG documents MAY turn the TriG default graph into a named graph with a name chosen in an implementation-dependent way.
PROPOSED: The WG suggests it's a good practice to put metadata about a TriG document in the document's default graph.