<trackbot> Date: 13 November 2013

<scribe> scribe: AZ

<PatH> ill be on the phone in minute

Admin

<davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 6 Nov telecon:

<davidwood> https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-11-06

<AndyS> +1

<davidwood> RESOLVED to accept the minutes of the 6 Nov telecon: https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-11-06

<davidwood> Review of action items

<davidwood> Proposed to spend 10 minutes clean action-item list:

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open

davidwood: we have a lot of action items, some have to be cleaned

<sandro> https://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/users/my

davidwood: I'd like to have a draft about new features of RDF 1.1

<gavinc> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-trig-20131105/#sec-differences

gavinc: there is a section on differences between RDF 1.1 TriG and old TriG

davidwood: I need point to sandro's slides

<sandro> What's New in RDF 1.1

<gkellogg> http://www.w3.org/News/Public/

gkellogg: there is not a previous version of JSON-LD to show differences

<gkellogg> Call for review by JSON-LD has great summaries, thinks to Sandro

<sandro> W3C Invites Implementations of five Candidate Recommendations for version 1.1 of the Resource Description Framework (RDF)

pfps: for Semantics, it's enough to show the differences in entailments, not all the technical differences

sandro: I'll probably have something ready re. ACTION 98 for next
...: week

<yvesr> yep

<yvesr> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-primer/index.html

yvesr: Guus and I are working on the primer (ACTION-159)
... it's been updated a lot

davidwood: you should list previous editors

ericP: we will make some more days and will consider it closed if no response comes up

davidwood: we should wait about a month before closing

PatH: I've not yet reviewed AZ's draft, will do soon
... Guus sent an email saying he could not review AZ's draft

davidwood: in this case, let us push the deadline to next week

<sandro> action-33?

<trackbot> action-33 -- Dan Brickley to Danbri, you wanted to note a bug in RDFS spec; it references Primer example 16 -- an example that doesn't even use rdf:value. -- due 2012-12-01 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/33

<sandro> action-73?

<trackbot> action-73 -- Fabien Gandon to Implement http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-03#resolution_2 (editorial changes to RDF/XML -- due 2012-03-31 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/73

pfps: the easiest is to repurpose ACTION 33 onto Guus

Arnaud: I proposed to work on the RDFS document, but it seemed there was not much to do, but I can help now

<sandro> actiion-194?

<sandro> action-194?

<trackbot> action-194 -- Guus Schreiber to Add to RDF Primary and ISSUE about multi-language representation -- due 2012-11-05 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/194

sandro: will check for ISSUE 73

davidwood: ACTION 194 should read "Add to RDF Primer an ISSUE about multi-language representation"
... but only Guus can say it is

<AndyS> Note licensing issues re BNF and WebIDL (for JSON-LD) - can W3C confirm?

davidwood: documents published in CR, yoohoo
... let us postpone discussions on Dataset semantics to next week

CR implementations

<davidwood> Implementation reports:

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/#Implementation_reports

<PatH> reading this log in isolation might be puzzling to future historians.

<gavinc> poke implementors?

sandro: CR documents have links to implementation reports

<pfps> I just sent out direct email to a list of implementers of systems that can perform RDF entailment asking them to run the tests

gavinc: we did not ask implementers to produce proper implementation reports

sandro: we know most of the people who implement this spec, we can email them

gavinc: implementations of Turtle probably implement other syntaxes
... I'll contact people by email for this
... are Andy and Gregg happy with the test suite

<PatH> Should we send comments on the primer to the editors at this stage or wait until later?

gkellogg: happy with the test suite

<PatH> will do

yvesr: we welcome comments to primer

<davidwood> ▪ Turtle: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Turtle_Candidate_Recommendation_Comments

<davidwood> ▪ Other documents: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/CR_comments_Concepts_Semantics_TriG_N-Triples_N-Quads

CR comments

davidwood: everything's been address for Turtle

ericP: 13 is a nack, otherwise is fine
... I have to contact David Robillard to know if he wants to formally object

<ericP> ... over a test suite

<AndyS> I don't see a reply to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Feb/0031.html (want to ref it for TriG comment)

<davidwood> ISSUE-170

<trackbot> ISSUE-170 -- CR comment: Normative links to RDF-1.1 Concepts -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/170

ISSUE 170 is about ntriples and nquads that have no reference to RDF 1.1 Concepts

<davidwood> ISSUE-171

<trackbot> ISSUE-171 -- CR comment: backwards compatibility with respect to UTF-8/US-ASCII -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/171

gavinc: ISSUE 171 is also in relation to nquads
... implementations of the previous nquads are never strictly following the old nquads specification
... so I would just say "no" to handling ISSUE 171

<davidwood> ISSUE-172

<trackbot> ISSUE-172 -- CR comment: Case-sensitivity of base and prefix directives -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/172

gavinc: we haven't written a response to ISSUE 172
... "Ack" in the page on other comments means we acknowledge (as opposed to the page for Turtle comments)
... I cannot point to anything because the decision hasn't been made public

AndyS: we can point to the resolution to publish as a CR

RDF Schema

sandro: Guus did the edits

davidwood: but Guus is not listed as an editor

<davidwood> Changes: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-schema/index.html#PER-changes

davidwood: all the minor changes have been agreed upon
...: we need reviewers

<PatH> Is the editor list still correct?

<PatH> Dan B & Guha?

<PatH> OK

<sandro> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Nov/0043.html

davidwood: Guus considered he should not be listed because the changes are so minor

<PatH> Might want to just let Guha know.

davidwood: should we contact Guha and danbri to republish under his name

sandro: we need to be sure Dan will not work on it anymore

<PatH> is giving a hard deadline related to giving a hard time?

<sandro> it's more like doing hard time, PatH

<PatH> :-)

PatH: we must add the new datatypes

<pfps> +1.1

<PatH> +1.1 Schema

<sandro> +0.7 RDF 1.1: Schema

ericP: the word "schema" is confusing
... schema usually refers to constraints

<gavinc> SOL... ;)

<AndyS> PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>

<sandro> RDF 1.1 Vocabulary

<markus> what about just "RDFS 1.1"

<sandro> "The rdf: and rdfs: Namespace Document"

PatH: there is not only one vocabulary

<gavinc> RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.1: RDF Schema

<gavinc> ... is that BETTER?!

<PatH> RDF 1.1 My Very FIrst RDF Vocabulary

<PatH> +1

sandro: for many people "vocabulary" and "ontology" are synonyms

<Arnaud> RDF 1.1 Vocabulary Description Language: RDFS

<pchampin> what about "core vocabulary"?

<PatH> +1 to "RDFS" and not spelling it out.

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_first

Arnaud: why not just rename it RDFS and not spell out

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#first

<gavinc> ... 5 weeks ...

<PatH> A lot of section 5 is already in an appendix in Semantics.

sandro: it could go to the name space document

<pfps> if RDFS goes, then RDF Primer becomes more important

<gavinc> If < x,y > is in IEXT(I(rdfs:range)) and < u,v > is in IEXT(x) then v is in ICEXT(y)

<gavinc> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-mt/#rdfs-interpretations

pfps: primer should have something on schema

<yvesr> there is something about RDFS in the primer
...: and we have to be sure that all the things in schema that matters are in primer

<yvesr> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-primer/index.html#section-vocabulary

<yvesr> (in a section called 'RDF Vocabularies', interestingly)

<Arnaud> pulling the document altogether seems a bit too drastic to me

<sandro> A triple of the form:

<sandro> R rdfs:comment L

<sandro> states that L is a human readable description of R.

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_comment

sandro: RDFS says what the terms informally means

<gavinc> rdfs:comment rdfs:range rdfs:Literal .

<markus> +1 to create namespace documents

sandro: I'd like to turn this document into 2 namespace documents

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_container

gavinc: the two vocbaularies are completely intertwined so you would need it to be one document

<pfps> the discussion is about getting rid of RDF Schema document in favour of namespace documents and extra stuff in Primer

<davidwood> Thanks to pfps for taking over ACTION-33

<pfps> the actual work on RDF Schema might be worthwhile, as that stuff may end up elsewhere

<PatH> It contains this masterpiece which should be preserved:"Just as a hen house may have the property that it is made of wood, that does not mean that all the hens it contains are made of wood, a property of a container is not necessarily a property of all of its members."

AOB

gavinc: I don't think we will have XMLLiteral and rdf:HTML as normative because we won't have anything to reference

<PatH> They are referred to normatively in Semantics

<PatH> I thinkso

<PatH> Seems like a very noisy post-adjournment session.

<davidwood> Adjourned

<Guus> trackbot, end meeting

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/ACTION 73/ACTION 98/
Succeeded: s/implementation/implementations/
Found Scribe: AZ
Inferring ScribeNick: AZ
Default Present: Arnaud, gkellogg, pfps, GavinC, yvesr, AndyS, +1.781.642.aaaa, AZ, David_Wood, ericP, PatH, Souri, pchampin, markus, FabGandon, Guus_Schreiber
Present: Arnaud gkellogg pfps GavinC yvesr AndyS +1.781.642.aaaa AZ David_Wood ericP PatH Souri pchampin markus FabGandon Guus_Schreiber

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 13 Nov 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/11/13-rdf-wg-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.