<TallTed> trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Date: 27 March 2013

<Guus> scribe?

<scribe> scribe: Arnaud

<AndyS> Will redial (I'm muted)

Admin

subtopic: Accepting minutes of last meeting March 20

<pfps> minutes are fine

guus: any objections?

resolved: minutes of March 20 accepted

subtopic: Review of action items

guus: anyone wants to declare victory?
... none, moving on

Progress FPWD requests

guus: need to agree on proposed shortnames

<AndyS> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Request-FPWD-Semantics-TriG-NTriples-Nquads

<gavinc> +1 to short names

<ivan> yes

<gavinc> Yes

<gavinc> yes

<TallTed> +1

sandro: hyphens in both shortnames and mediatypes?

gavinc: yes

guus: would like gavinc to add to the wiki on n-quads

gavinc: not sure there is much to add

guus and gavinc talk about STOD and abstract sections

discussion on cvs access

talks about requirements for FPWD

manu: would like to talk about JSON-LD before Turtle

Turtle

guus: status?

<ericP> Disp of CR Comments

guus: let's start with the status of the test suite

ericp: working on issues that need to be closed to be done with test suite
... issues mostly around definition of the base when running a test
... saw pushback on description of the algorithm

sandro: why not let them use the location they ask for?

ericp: will need to move stuff out of mercurial into www space
... that will set the base to the directory it is put in

<gavinc> ericP, yes, once there are two LICENSE files that comply with the http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/04-testsuite-copyright.html

sandro: wants to make sure the base isn't hardcoded

<gavinc> We should TAG the test suite after we agree we're done

<gavinc> +q

gavinc: think we should tag the repository when we think we are done
... and state what license applies
... believe andy was fine with that

<Guus> can we have a publication request for test suite on the table?

ericp: gavinc can you ask that all contributors are ok with that?

<AndyS> Andy is fine - when text ready I'll change the copy in hg

gavinc: ok

ericp: presume we are going to tell the world in April we're not going to change it anymore
... there were several comments we will decline, like normalization of bnodes

<Guus> proposal to publish?

ericp: another one was about ordering of triples

<gavinc> +q question for team... is http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants-200409/ the required grant for the test cases still?

<gavinc> +q to ask a question for team... is http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants-200409/ the required grant for the test cases still?

<gavinc> -q question

guus: apart from the location, is there any other issues stopping us from publishing?

ericp: one issue is about whether we test what is outside of NFC

andy: ???

ericp: suggest the answer is no

guus: can we have a proposal to publish?

<AndyS> AndyS: Test good practice and not do worry about non-NFC : tests are often examples as well conformance

guus: would like a link and a proposal

gavinc: it's not been tagged yet so we don't have a URL to share

<ericP> PROPOSED:

guus: this has been lingering for weeks

gavinc: we have 2 contributors who are not members of the WG

<ivan> no idea:-(

<gavinc> "If the Contribution is to be published by a Group in a Recommendation Track document governed by the W3C Patent Policy, all parties must agree to the W3C Patent Policy License Requirements. Participants agreed to these Requirements by joining the group. Non-participants must agree to these Requirements either by joining the Group (if eligible) or by agreeing to the terms of Grant I."

gavinc: confident they will agree to the license but we need to make sure that's the case

<gavinc> -q

davidwood: I don't know what they have agreed to since they haven't joined the wG

guus: will move to json-ld and come back to turtle later

JSON-LD

<manu1> My understanding is that RDF WG wanted to publish LCWDs for all JSON-LD REC-track

<manu1> documents by end of March.

<manu1> JSON-LD CG agreed to publish the JSON-LD Syntax and Algorithms specifications as

<manu1> Final Community Group Specifications (FCGS) and prep the RDF WG Last Call (LC)

<manu1> documents for publication on April 4th 2013.

<manu1> The documents are available here:

<manu1> JSON-LD 1.0 (LCWD)

<manu1> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/json-ld/raw-file/default/spec/WD/json-ld-syntax/20130404/index.html

<manu1> JSON-LD 1.0: Algorithms and API (LCWD)

<manu1> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/json-ld/raw-file/default/spec/WD/json-ld-api/20130404/index.html

<manu1> This group will need to decide whether or not they want to publish those

<manu1> documents as Last Call WDs on April 4th 2013 with the caveat that the editors

<manu1> will integrate decisions made on the JSON-LD call yesterday, fix pubrule

<manu1> issues, as well as make any editorial changes requested by RDF WG before

<manu1> April 4th 2013.

manu explains what the status is from his understanding and asks whether they have to create WDs or what

scribe: does anybody disagree with taking these two docs to last call?

sandro: would expect the decision to be taken in a week from now

davidwood: agree with sandro, review is due in a week

sandro: haven't completed review of the syntax

manu: getting all review comments in the spec, editors think they have done that
... but also some commenters haven't necessarily agreed with the disposition

guus: we can wait one or two week for LC

<gavinc> Comments now, better then 2nd LC

guus: would prefer to have consensus on the comments

davidwood: won

't reach consensus though

<gavinc> No, thus the need for a grant ;)

manu: other thing is if we get another set of comments from sandro, this may push us back for a month

<davidwood> We will need to respond to all commenters, but may not agree

manu: want to make sure WG is aware

guus: always a possibility, we'll have to deal with it

manu: if sandro can respond to comments and I'll respond to David Booth comments

guus: in two weeks is fine, if ready in a week it's better

sandro: json-ld.org lists some implementations, we should have that on the w3c website

<gavinc> ... C. Relationship to RDF isn't normative?

manu: all of json-ld mercurial is on w3c website

<gavinc> It has MUSTs

<gavinc> and refers to JSON-LD-API

sandro: can you browse it?

manu: no

<markus> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/json-ld/raw-file/default/index.html

manu: but if you go to the link markus just pasted you can get to it
... it's on the w3c website

sandro: a bit confusing, not sure this is enough
... communication is important

manu: also have a link in the spec
... it's on the json-ld website though

sandro: really should have a link to a www.w3.org page
... test suite results should also be there

manu: still working on that

<gavinc> Turtle's reports are in dvcs

<gavinc> no one complained yet

Turtle (back)

ericp: got some proposal

<ericP> .PROPOSED: accept tests-ttl revision 1bd3ae36aebf as the presumed final Turtle test suite.

<ericP> .ACTION: Gavin to provide license text, asking submitters of comments 21 and 28 if they are willing to share their submitted tests with no IP restrictions and under the proposed license.

<ericP> .ACTION Gavin to tag 1bd3ae36aebf as "TurtleCRtests2013"

<ericP> .ACTION ericP (with Sandro) to copy or proxy TurtleCRtests2013 to http://www.w3.org/2013/TurtleCRtests/..., updating all base or ttl references to http://example/base/ to be http://www.w3.org/2013/TurtleCRtests/

<AndyS> .ACTION AndyS Update license statement on contributed files.

<AndyS> .ACTION AndyS Update license statement on his contributed files.

<gavinc> AndyS, magic text is: Distributed under both the <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/04-testsuite-license">W3C Test Suite License</a> and the <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/03-bsd-license">W3C 3-clause BSD License</a>. To contribute to a W3C Test Suite, see the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-testcases">policies and contribution forms</a>.

<AndyS> So non-NFC in test suite?

guus: exactly the proposal I was asking for, any concerns?

<sandro> -1 on putting "CR" in the base

ericp: want to remove the non NFC test suite

<AndyS> 4 tests cause non_NFC warning (but I pass the test - it's a warning)

sandro: who has passed all these tests?

gavinc: greg

<gavinc> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/file/8aacaffa3c52/rdf-turtle/reports

<ericP> .ACTION: ericP to remove #localName_with_PN_CHARS_BASE_character_boundaries

sandro: don't agree on CR in the base, this test suite isn't just for CR it will remain for the Rec

ericp: I think only greg and myself have run those tests
... but anybody who've run them before should pass these

<gavinc> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/rev/6e2055fe64f0

guus: sandro, is that enough?

sandro: if that is true, then yes

<AndyS> Jena passes with 34 warnings.

gavinc: having a single manifest was done on people's request, they shouldn't have a problem with it

<Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask who has passed this test suite

sandro: ok approving it now and see if there are any complaints

<sandro> sandro: I guess I'm okay with approving these tests on Eric and Greg's reports of having passed all of them, provisionally, to see if anyone else complains.

andy: can we really still pretend people who passed the tests before pass the new ones?

gavinc: people were confused about where the tests were

<sandro> +1 gavin: let's make the cleaned up test suite clearly available for people to try

ericp: don't agree, comments indicate people know

guus: given all the editorial actions that have been listed, can we approve the proposal?

<ericP> ACTION: Gavin to provide license text, asking submitters of comments 21 and 28 if they are willing to share their submitted tests with no IP restrictions and under the proposed license. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/27-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-243 - Provide license text, asking submitters of comments 21 and 28 if they are willing to share their submitted tests with no IP restrictions and under the proposed license. [on Gavin Carothers - due 2013-04-03].

guus: eric can you put the proposal back with the updated URI

<ericP> ACTION Gavin to tag 1bd3ae36aebf as "Turtletests2013"

<trackbot> Created ACTION-244 - Tag 1bd3ae36aebf as "Turtletests2013" [on Gavin Carothers - due 2013-04-03].

<ericP> ACTION ericP (with Sandro) to copy or proxy Turtletests2013 to http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/..., updating all base or ttl references to http://example/base/ to be http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/

<trackbot> Created ACTION-245 - (with Sandro) to copy or proxy Turtletests2013 to http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/..., updating all base or ttl references to http://example/base/ to be http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/ [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2013-04-03].

<ericP> ACTION: ericP to remove #localName_with_PN_CHARS_BASE_character_boundaries [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/27-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-246 - Remove #localName_with_PN_CHARS_BASE_character_boundaries [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2013-04-03].

eric creating the actions first

<ericP> ACTION: Gavin to tag 1bd3ae36aebf as "Turtletests2013" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/27-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action03]

<ericP> ACTION: ericP (with Sandro) to copy or proxy Turtletests2013 to http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/..., updating all base or ttl references to http://example/base/ to be http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/ [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/27-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-247 - Tag 1bd3ae36aebf as "Turtletests2013" [on Gavin Carothers - due 2013-04-03].

<trackbot> Created ACTION-248 - (with Sandro) to copy or proxy Turtletests2013 to http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/..., updating all base or ttl references to http://example/base/ to be http://www.w3.org/2013/Turtletests/ [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2013-04-03].

<ericP> PROPOSED: accept tests-ttl revision 1bd3ae36aebf as the presumed final Turtle test suite.

<AndyS> So we're going with some UNASSIGNED_UNICODE_CHARACTER in PATH depending in Unicode version?

ericp: I believe yes

<sandro> +1 assuming the licenses are added, and with the understanding that we can undo this if people don't like the tests

<ericP> +1

<TallTed> +1

<gavinc> +1

+1

<Guus> +1

<davidwood> +1

<pfps> +?

<ivan> 1

resolved: accept tests-ttl revision 1bd3ae36aebf as the presumed final Turtle test suite.

<sandro> where is the table or turtle test results, gkellogg ?

<davidwood> -(i)^2

guus: aob?
... meeting adjourned!

<sandro> eric, pfps

<gavinc> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Turtle_Candidate_Recommendation_Comments#Issues

<markus> bye

<TallTed> I think guus was asking for followup on the write-access to hg/cvs/whatever

<Guus> peter, who promised to help?

<pfps> someone said that they would help, but I'm not sure who

<pfps> ppatelsc

<Guus> trackbot, end meeting

<pfps> ppatelsc pfpschneider@gmail.com

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137  of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/done/due/
Succeeded: s/months/a month/
Found Scribe: Arnaud
Inferring ScribeNick: Arnaud
Default Present: Sandro, pfps, ericP, AndyS, Guus, davidwood, Ivan, markus, Arnaud, GavinC, TallTed, AZ, MHausenblas
Present: Sandro pfps ericP AndyS Guus davidwood Ivan markus Arnaud GavinC TallTed AZ MHausenblas
Found Date: 27 Mar 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/03/27-rdf-wg-minutes.html
People with action items: ericp gavin sandro with