None.
14:13:35 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/08/24-rdf-wg-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/08/24-rdf-wg-irc ←
14:13:37 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:13:39 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 73394 ←
14:13:39 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 47 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 47 minutes ←
14:13:40 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:13:40 <trackbot> Date: 24 August 2011
14:13:51 <ivan> Chair: ivan
14:51:12 <ivan> Regrets: pchampin, azimmerm, David Wood, Guus Schreiber
14:55:35 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 41 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started ←
14:55:42 <Zakim> +gavinc
Zakim IRC Bot: +gavinc ←
14:55:52 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
14:55:52 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
14:55:54 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
14:58:54 <manu1> zakim, code?
Manu Sporny: zakim, code? ←
14:58:54 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), manu1 ←
14:59:04 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
14:59:10 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P2
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ??P2 ←
14:59:10 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu1; got it ←
14:59:31 <Zakim> +tomayac
Zakim IRC Bot: +tomayac ←
15:00:10 <Zakim> + +44.207.923.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.207.923.aaaa ←
15:00:38 <ivan> zakim, aaaa is Yves
Ivan Herman: zakim, aaaa is Yves ←
15:00:38 <Zakim> +Yves; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Yves; got it ←
15:01:03 <ivan> scribenick: tomayac
(Scribe set to Thomas Steiner)
15:01:16 <moustaki> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Yves Raimond: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
15:01:16 <Zakim> On the phone I see gavinc, Ivan, manu1, tomayac, Yves
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see gavinc, Ivan, manu1, tomayac, Yves ←
15:01:43 <ivan> -> Last meeting's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-17
Ivan Herman: -> Last meeting's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-17 ←
15:01:46 <Zakim> + +1.443.212.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.443.212.aabb ←
15:01:53 <ivan> Topic: Admin
15:02:02 <AlexHall> zakim, aabb is me
Alex Hall: zakim, aabb is me ←
15:02:02 <Zakim> +AlexHall; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AlexHall; got it ←
15:02:11 <SteveH_> Zakim, what's the code?
Steve Harris: Zakim, what's the code? ←
15:02:11 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), SteveH_
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), SteveH_ ←
15:02:20 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
15:02:28 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
15:02:28 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
15:02:30 <yvesr> Zakim, Yves is me
Yves Raimond: Zakim, Yves is me ←
15:02:30 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +yvesr; got it ←
15:02:31 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
15:02:33 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:02:33 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:02:36 <yvesr> Zakim, mute me
Yves Raimond: Zakim, mute me ←
15:02:36 <Zakim> yvesr should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: yvesr should now be muted ←
15:02:39 <Zakim> +??P13
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13 ←
15:02:44 <SteveH_> Zakim, ??p13 is me
Steve Harris: Zakim, ??p13 is me ←
15:02:44 <Zakim> +SteveH_; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH_; got it ←
15:03:00 <Zakim> +Scott_Bauer
Zakim IRC Bot: +Scott_Bauer ←
15:03:01 <iand> zakim, +??p12 is me
Ian Davis: zakim, +??p12 is me ←
15:03:01 <Zakim> sorry, iand, I do not recognize a party named '+??p12'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, iand, I do not recognize a party named '+??p12' ←
15:03:02 <Zakim> -Scott_Bauer
Zakim IRC Bot: -Scott_Bauer ←
15:03:06 <iand> zakim, +??P12 is me
Ian Davis: zakim, +??P12 is me ←
15:03:06 <Zakim> sorry, iand, I do not recognize a party named '+??P12'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, iand, I do not recognize a party named '+??P12' ←
15:03:08 <SteveH> Zakim, SteveH_ is me
Steve Harris: Zakim, SteveH_ is me ←
15:03:08 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it ←
15:03:14 <iand> zakim, ??P12 is me
Ian Davis: zakim, ??P12 is me ←
15:03:14 <Zakim> +iand; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +iand; got it ←
15:03:17 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
15:03:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see gavinc, Ivan, manu1, tomayac, yvesr (muted), AlexHall, MacTed (muted), iand, SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see gavinc, Ivan, manu1, tomayac, yvesr (muted), AlexHall, MacTed (muted), iand, SteveH ←
15:03:19 <Zakim> On IRC I see iand, SteveH, AlexHall, yvesr, Scott_Bauer, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, LeeF, ivan, tomayac, manu1, gavinc, ericP, sandro, trackbot, NickH, manu
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see iand, SteveH, AlexHall, yvesr, Scott_Bauer, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, LeeF, ivan, tomayac, manu1, gavinc, ericP, sandro, trackbot, NickH, manu ←
15:03:38 <Zakim> +Scott_Bauer
Zakim IRC Bot: +Scott_Bauer ←
15:03:42 <ivan> Last meeting's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-17
Ivan Herman: Last meeting's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-17 ←
15:03:57 <ivan> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 17 Aug telecon
Ivan Herman: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 17 Aug telecon ←
15:04:14 <tomayac> Topic: Accept Minutes from August 17
15:04:39 <tomayac> issues with many red boxes. ericP was the scribe
issues with many red boxes. ericP was the scribe ←
15:05:00 <tomayac> ivan: seems to have been a problem with the script. sandro takes care of that.
Ivan Herman: seems to have been a problem with the script. sandro takes care of that. ←
15:05:21 <tomayac> ivan: maybe keep the minutes open, ask ericP, sandro to review.
Ivan Herman: maybe keep the minutes open, ask ericP, sandro to review. ←
15:05:24 <Zakim> +LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF ←
15:05:47 <tomayac> PROPOSED keep the minutes open and ask sandro and ericP to review them
PROPOSED keep the minutes open and ask sandro and ericP to review them ←
15:05:47 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview ←
15:06:10 <tomayac> ivan: most actions on people who are absent
Ivan Herman: most actions on people who are absent ←
15:06:10 <ivan> ACTION-74?
15:06:10 <trackbot> ACTION-74 -- Manu Sporny to send JSON discussion preparation message to public-rdf-wd -- due 2011-08-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-74 -- Manu Sporny to send JSON discussion preparation message to public-rdf-wd -- due 2011-08-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW ←
15:06:10 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/74
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/74 ←
15:06:24 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Aug/0060.html
Manu Sporny: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Aug/0060.html ←
15:06:27 <tomayac> manu: action-74 has been done
Manu Sporny: ACTION-74 has been done ←
15:06:54 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open ←
15:06:56 <tomayac> ivan: for the other actions, we have to wait for people to come back
Ivan Herman: for the other actions, we have to wait for people to come back ←
15:07:07 <ivan> ACTION-69?
15:07:07 <trackbot> ACTION-69 -- Gavin Carothers to update Turtle issue list to reflect current status -- due 2011-07-27 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-69 -- Gavin Carothers to update Turtle issue list to reflect current status -- due 2011-07-27 -- OPEN ←
15:07:07 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/69
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/69 ←
15:07:09 <tomayac> ivan: one action on gavin
Ivan Herman: one action on gavin ←
15:07:20 <tomayac> gavin: action on me is done
Gavin Carothers: action on me is done ←
15:07:26 <PatH> I will be on IRC but probably not on the phone for this telecon.
Patrick Hayes: I will be on IRC but probably not on the phone for this telecon. ←
15:07:31 <tomayac> ivan: action-69 closed
Ivan Herman: ACTION-69 closed ←
15:07:38 <tomayac> ivan: action-78 closed
Ivan Herman: ACTION-78 closed ←
15:07:50 <tomayac> ivan: one action on pat. pat on irc.
Ivan Herman: one action on pat. pat on irc. ←
15:08:06 <tomayac> ivan: i will take care of open actions to be closed
Ivan Herman: i will take care of open actions to be closed ←
15:08:12 <ivan> Topic: F2F
15:08:15 <Zakim> + +44.164.235.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.164.235.aacc ←
15:08:18 <tomayac> ivan: f2f
Ivan Herman: f2f ←
15:08:28 <NickH> Zakim, +44.164.235.aacc is me
Nicholas Humfrey: Zakim, +44.164.235.aacc is me ←
15:08:28 <Zakim> +NickH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +NickH; got it ←
15:08:45 <tomayac> ivan: pending issue for the f2f counterpart
Ivan Herman: pending issue for the f2f counterpart ←
15:08:56 <yvesr> Zakim, unmute me
Yves Raimond: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:08:56 <Zakim> yvesr should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: yvesr should no longer be muted ←
15:09:02 <tomayac> ivan: people interested in a bbc-hosted site
Ivan Herman: people interested in a bbc-hosted site ←
15:09:09 <tomayac> ivan: offer still valid?
Ivan Herman: offer still valid? ←
15:09:22 <tomayac> yves: pending manager approval
Yves Raimond: pending manager approval ←
15:09:28 <PatH> I have a very old action which I confess I no longer can remember what exactly it actions me to do. Maybe someone with a better memory can jog me off-line in due course.
Patrick Hayes: I have a very old action which I confess I no longer can remember what exactly it actions me to do. Maybe someone with a better memory can jog me off-line in due course. ←
15:09:32 <tomayac> ivan: where is that?
Ivan Herman: where is that? ←
15:09:48 <tomayac> yves: says location
Yves Raimond: says location ←
15:10:13 <tomayac> ivan: hoping this will work out
Ivan Herman: hoping this will work out ←
15:10:15 <gavinc> Not exactly cheap in Boston either. :( Gone up since I was last there
Gavin Carothers: Not exactly cheap in Boston either. :( Gone up since I was last there ←
15:10:27 <tomayac> ivan: anything else on that, yves?
Ivan Herman: anything else on that, yves? ←
15:10:42 <tomayac> ivan: will be organized by PERSON
Ivan Herman: will be organized by Olivier Thereaud ←
15:10:55 <ivan> s/PERSON/Olivier Thereaud/
15:10:56 <PatH> or persons unknown?
Patrick Hayes: or persons unknown? ←
15:11:07 <yvesr> Thereaux
Yves Raimond: Thereaux ←
15:11:25 <ivan> Topic: JSON work progress & planning
15:11:32 <yvesr> Zakim, mute me
Yves Raimond: Zakim, mute me ←
15:11:34 <Zakim> yvesr should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: yvesr should now be muted ←
15:11:39 <tomayac> ivan: unsure where to start
Ivan Herman: unsure where to start ←
15:11:50 <tomayac> ivan: w/o going into the details
Ivan Herman: w/o going into the details ←
15:12:02 <tomayac> ivan: manu and ian, just say a view words on the documents
Ivan Herman: manu and ian, just say a view words on the documents ←
15:12:28 <tomayac> ian: based on the talis format
Ian Davis: based on the talis format ←
15:12:37 <tomayac> ian: put up a working draft
Ian Davis: put up a working draft ←
15:12:43 <tomayac> ian: came out of the f2f
Ian Davis: came out of the f2f ←
15:12:54 <tomayac> ian: draft is an overview of the format
Ian Davis: draft is an overview of the format ←
15:12:57 <Zakim> +EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: +EricP ←
15:13:06 <PatH> to be, or not to be, that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind of man to take up arms against a sea of hackers, and by opposing RDF them, or...
Patrick Hayes: to be, or not to be, that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind of man to take up arms against a sea of hackers, and by opposing RDF them, or... ←
15:13:34 <tomayac> ivan: to have an idea, beyond the spec, do you have an idea of # of implementations and adopters, ian?
Ivan Herman: to have an idea, beyond the spec, do you have an idea of # of implementations and adopters, ian? ←
15:13:41 <tomayac> ian: at least half a dozen
Ian Davis: at least half a dozen ←
15:13:53 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Aug/0060.html
Manu Sporny: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Aug/0060.html ←
15:13:54 <tomayac> manu: wrote a quick email
Manu Sporny: wrote a quick email ←
15:14:13 <tomayac> manu: based on initial set of feature of digital bazaar
Manu Sporny: based on initial set of feature of digital bazaar ←
15:14:20 <tomayac> manu: about 90% feature-complete
Manu Sporny: about 90% feature-complete ←
15:14:36 <tomayac> manu: continuing on public-linked-json@
Manu Sporny: continuing on public-linked-json@ ←
15:14:50 <tomayac> manu: including non-typical semwebbers
Manu Sporny: including non-typical semwebbers ←
15:15:07 <tomayac> manu: editorially 70-80% feature-complete
Manu Sporny: editorially 70-80% feature-complete ←
15:15:25 <tomayac> manu: four interoperable implementations, javascript, python, php, c++
Manu Sporny: four interoperable implementations, javascript, python, php, c++ ←
15:15:31 <tomayac> manu: erlang in the works
Manu Sporny: erlang in the works ←
15:15:38 <tomayac> manu: people seem to like it
Manu Sporny: people seem to like it ←
15:15:47 <tomayac> manu: implemented in seevl.net by apassant
Manu Sporny: implemented in seevl.net by apassant ←
15:16:08 <tomayac> ivan: let's start w/ the knife fight
Ivan Herman: let's start w/ the knife fight ←
15:16:23 <tomayac> ivan: calling thomas
Ivan Herman: calling thomas ←
15:16:45 <ivan> scribenick: manu1
(Scribe set to Manu Sporny)
15:17:07 <manu1> Thomas: I sent an e-mail to the mailing list - JSON Emergency Brake - a bit controversial
Thomas Steiner: I sent an e-mail to the mailing list - JSON Emergency Brake - a bit controversial ←
15:17:26 <manu1> Thomas: I made sure to check w/ all parties involved before sending it out...
Thomas Steiner: I made sure to check w/ all parties involved before sending it out... ←
15:17:32 <ivan> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Aug/0131.html Thomas' email
Ivan Herman: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Aug/0131.html Thomas' email ←
15:17:42 <manu1> Thomas: Tried not to offend anyone...
Thomas Steiner: Tried not to offend anyone... ←
15:18:31 <manu1> Thomas: I was co-editor of JSON spec. Ian comes up w/ first commit for RDF/JSON - then we could iterate over it.
Thomas Steiner: I was co-editor of JSON spec. Ian comes up w/ first commit for RDF/JSON - then we could iterate over it. ←
15:19:35 <manu1> Thomas: I was involved in public-linked-json list - paid attention as a listener... in-between two specs... overall, I felt that what we see in RDF/JSON is something that comes from the RDF camp - it doesn't really feel like JSON at all. We need to pull the emergency brake and stop the work on RDF/JSON and focus on JSON-LD.
Thomas Steiner: I was involved in public-linked-json list - paid attention as a listener... in-between two specs... overall, I felt that what we see in RDF/JSON is something that comes from the RDF camp - it doesn't really feel like JSON at all. We need to pull the emergency brake and stop the work on RDF/JSON and focus on JSON-LD. ←
15:20:06 <manu1> Thomas: From the POV of a JavaScript developer, it doesn't feel like native JSON. It's a culture clash...
Thomas Steiner: From the POV of a JavaScript developer, it doesn't feel like native JSON. It's a culture clash... ←
15:20:30 <manu1> Thomas: JSON-LD is relatively easily mapped to triples. So, why do we have both?
Thomas Steiner: JSON-LD is relatively easily mapped to triples. So, why do we have both? ←
15:20:39 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
15:21:01 <iand> q+ to say I am agnostic
Ian Davis: q+ to say I am agnostic ←
15:21:05 <manu1> Thomas: RDF/JSON feels like NTriples in JSON.
Thomas Steiner: RDF/JSON feels like NTriples in JSON. ←
15:21:20 <PatH> Is there any RDF that CANT be represented in JSON-LD?
Patrick Hayes: Is there any RDF that CANT be represented in JSON-LD? ←
15:21:20 <manu1> q+ to say that I feel pretty strongly about JSON-LD
q+ to say that I feel pretty strongly about JSON-LD ←
15:21:25 <ivan> scribenick: tomayac
(Scribe set to Thomas Steiner)
15:21:32 <ivan> ack iand
Ivan Herman: ack iand ←
15:21:32 <Zakim> iand, you wanted to say I am agnostic
Zakim IRC Bot: iand, you wanted to say I am agnostic ←
15:21:33 <LeeF> It's definitely not a matter of "should be used for". More a matter of "is used for"
Lee Feigenbaum: It's definitely not a matter of "should be used for". More a matter of "is used for" ←
15:21:45 <tomayac> ian: i am agnostic
15:21:58 <tomayac> ian: it's not ideomatic json
Ian Davis: it's not ideomatic json ←
15:22:10 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
15:22:26 <ivan> ack manu1
Ivan Herman: ack manu1 ←
15:22:26 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to say that I feel pretty strongly about JSON-LD
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to say that I feel pretty strongly about JSON-LD ←
15:22:33 <tomayac> ian: just a convenience format, mostly out of talis' needs
Ian Davis: just a convenience format, mostly out of talis' needs ←
15:22:38 <gavinc> +q to say that TopQuadrant's position has changed
Gavin Carothers: +q to say that TopQuadrant's position has changed ←
15:22:42 <tomayac> manu: not so agnostic, feel strongly about json-ld
Manu Sporny: not so agnostic, feel strongly about json-ld ←
15:23:00 <tomayac> manu: main concern i have, we could do a lot for linked data adoption
Manu Sporny: main concern i have, we could do a lot for linked data adoption ←
15:23:17 <tomayac> manu: i feel that json-ld is targeted at an audience we don't cover yet
Manu Sporny: i feel that json-ld is targeted at an audience we don't cover yet ←
15:23:27 <tomayac> manu: they don't want to go into the sparql, triple world
Manu Sporny: they don't want to go into the sparql, triple world ←
15:23:33 <PatH> my question is: JSON-LD maps to triples, but can it encode any RDF at all? Or is some part of RDF missing? What would it take to extend json-ld to cover all of RDF?
Patrick Hayes: my question is: JSON-LD maps to triples, but can it encode any RDF at all? Or is some part of RDF missing? What would it take to extend json-ld to cover all of RDF? ←
15:23:38 <tomayac> manu: they want linked data, but don#t want to do much to get it
Manu Sporny: they want linked data, but don#t want to do much to get it ←
15:23:54 <tomayac> manu: data exchange format for rdf people
Manu Sporny: data exchange format for rdf people ←
15:24:00 <gavinc> PatH, I think rather JSON-LD can encode things that RDF -can't-.
Gavin Carothers: PatH, I think rather JSON-LD can encode things that RDF -can't-. ←
15:24:12 <PatH> Maube , gavin, but what about the other way?
Patrick Hayes: Maube , gavin, but what about the other way? ←
15:24:16 <tomayac> manu: you already have ntriples, rdf/xml, turtle, etc.
Manu Sporny: you already have ntriples, rdf/xml, turtle, etc. ←
15:24:21 <LeeF> And yet despite those, people use RDF/JSON (or similar)
Lee Feigenbaum: And yet despite those, people use RDF/JSON (or similar) ←
15:24:35 <LeeF> This is a standardization group.
Lee Feigenbaum: This is a standardization group. ←
15:24:35 <tomayac> manu: creating ntriples in json doesn't solve any problems imho
Manu Sporny: creating ntriples in json doesn't solve any problems imho ←
15:24:58 <iand> wasn't this all sketched out in a table by sandro?
Ian Davis: wasn't this all sketched out in a table by sandro? ←
15:25:02 <tomayac> manu: i feel that it doesn't necessarily grow the number of linked data
Manu Sporny: i feel that it doesn't necessarily grow the number of linked data ←
15:25:16 <LeeF> iand, yes, though i'm not sure the table was ever accepted by everyone :)
Lee Feigenbaum: iand, yes, though i'm not sure the table was ever accepted by everyone :) ←
15:25:17 <tomayac> manu: json-ld attempts to move the existing json already oth there to a new level
Manu Sporny: json-ld attempts to move the existing json already oth there to a new level ←
15:25:30 <tomayac> manu: in order to get far more meaning
Manu Sporny: in order to get far more meaning ←
15:25:42 <tomayac> manu: converned of the use cases
Manu Sporny: converned of the use cases ←
15:25:55 <tomayac> manu: we have two technologies to tackle those
Manu Sporny: we have two technologies to tackle those ←
15:26:08 <tomayac> manu: it's like the microdata, rdfa thing again
Manu Sporny: it's like the microdata, rdfa thing again ←
15:26:22 <tomayac> manu: ivan, you didn't want this comparison
Manu Sporny: ivan, you didn't want this comparison ←
15:26:29 <tomayac> manu: heavy overlap of use cases
Manu Sporny: heavy overlap of use cases ←
15:26:33 <PatH> I see a future here where json-ld seduces a lot of people into useiing RDF wihtout realizing they are using it. Which is great, but then what happens when they wake up and smell the RDF coffee: are they stranded by the limitations of json-ld, or can they move smpoothly intobeing real semweb people without having to learn a whole new set of tools?
Patrick Hayes: I see a future here where json-ld seduces a lot of people into useiing RDF wihtout realizing they are using it. Which is great, but then what happens when they wake up and smell the RDF coffee: are they stranded by the limitations of json-ld, or can they move smpoothly intobeing real semweb people without having to learn a whole new set of tools? ←
15:26:44 <tomayac> manu: concerned that two last calls are published
Manu Sporny: concerned that two last calls are published ←
15:26:50 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
15:26:53 <tomayac> manu: people might get very confused
Manu Sporny: people might get very confused ←
15:27:03 <tomayac> manu: hoping we avoid that
Manu Sporny: hoping we avoid that ←
15:27:15 <tomayac> manu: no one talked about microdata two years ago
Manu Sporny: no one talked about microdata two years ago ←
15:27:19 <gavinc> PatH, I don't think there is any RDF that can't be expressed in JSON-LD
Gavin Carothers: PatH, I don't think there is any RDF that can't be expressed in JSON-LD ←
15:27:37 <ivan> ack gavinc
Ivan Herman: ack gavinc ←
15:27:37 <Zakim> gavinc, you wanted to say that TopQuadrant's position has changed
Zakim IRC Bot: gavinc, you wanted to say that TopQuadrant's position has changed ←
15:27:44 <PatH> OK, great. Then I vote that we adopt json-ld
Patrick Hayes: OK, great. Then I vote that we adopt json-ld ←
15:27:45 <iand> actually I see it differently, people may be seduced by having a nice JSON format so they write systems to consume it, but why do they need RDF at all?
Ian Davis: actually I see it differently, people may be seduced by having a nice JSON format so they write systems to consume it, but why do they need RDF at all? ←
15:27:57 <tomayac> gavin: our position has changed a bit
Gavin Carothers: our position has changed a bit ←
15:28:10 <tomayac> gavin: we spent some time using and looking at json-ld
Gavin Carothers: we spent some time using and looking at json-ld ←
15:28:13 <PatH> Well, that is their problem. If they don;t need it, fine. BUt I supsect that many of them will, and those are the ones I care about.
Patrick Hayes: Well, that is their problem. If they don;t need it, fine. BUt I supsect that many of them will, and those are the ones I care about. ←
15:28:24 <tomayac> gavin: we haven't implemented rdf/json
Gavin Carothers: we haven't implemented rdf/json ←
15:28:40 <iand> i think it's a mistake to hide the rdf model from developers because it's non-intuitive for many OO developers
Ian Davis: i think it's a mistake to hide the rdf model from developers because it's non-intuitive for many OO developers ←
15:28:46 <tomayac> gavin: unlikely we will implement rdf/json, we see limited value, different from the opinion we had a couple of months ago
Gavin Carothers: unlikely we will implement rdf/json, we see limited value, different from the opinion we had a couple of months ago ←
15:29:06 <tomayac> ivan: on path's question
Ivan Herman: on pat's question ←
15:29:08 <PatH> If nobody is going to implement it, its dead in the water.
Patrick Hayes: If nobody is going to implement it, its dead in the water. ←
15:29:17 <ivan> s/path's/pat's/
15:29:19 <tomayac> manu: answering path's question
Manu Sporny: answering pat's question ←
15:29:26 <gavinc> I will say that TQ isn't everyone ;)
Gavin Carothers: I will say that TQ isn't everyone ;) ←
15:29:29 <NickH> RDF/XML = RDF for XML developers
Nicholas Humfrey: RDF/XML = RDF for XML developers ←
15:29:29 <NickH> JSON-LD = RDF for JSON developers
Nicholas Humfrey: JSON-LD = RDF for JSON developers ←
15:29:31 <tomayac> manu: no rdf that can't be expressed in json-ld
Manu Sporny: no rdf that can't be expressed in json-ld ←
15:29:32 <NickH> ?
15:29:35 <ivan> s/path's/pat's/
15:29:35 <iand> manu1: does it have graph support?
Ian Davis: manu1, does it have graph support? ←
15:29:36 <gavinc> And there are implementations of RDF/JSON
Gavin Carothers: And there are implementations of RDF/JSON ←
15:29:42 <NickH> Worried that JSON-LD hides the triples too much
Nicholas Humfrey: Worried that JSON-LD hides the triples too much ←
15:29:47 <tomayac> manu: working on lists
Manu Sporny: working on lists ←
15:29:48 <gavinc> RDF/XML is NOT RDF for XML developers, take that back! ;)
Gavin Carothers: RDF/XML is NOT RDF for XML developers, take that back! ;) ←
15:29:58 <tomayac> ivan: does it have graph support?
Ivan Herman: does it have graph support? ←
15:30:07 <tomayac> manu: what do you mean?
Manu Sporny: what do you mean? ←
15:30:08 <PatH> Hey, rdf?XML hides the triples very effectively.
Patrick Hayes: Hey, rdf?XML hides the triples very effectively. ←
15:30:15 <PatH> rdf/xml
Patrick Hayes: rdf/xml ←
15:30:15 <LeeF> s/manu1:/manu1,/
15:30:19 <tomayac> ian: (clarifies)
15:30:20 <NickH> PatH: yes!
Patrick Hayes: yes! [ Scribe Assist by Nicholas Humfrey ] ←
15:30:36 <tomayac> manu: we can do graph literals, and we could support graph identifiers
Manu Sporny: we can do graph literals, and we could support graph identifiers ←
15:30:46 <ericP> <g1> { <s1> <p1> <o1> } <g2> { <s2> <p2> <o2> } vs. <s1> <p1> { <s2> <p2> <o2> }
Eric Prud'hommeaux: <g1> { <s1> <p1> <o1> } <g2> { <s2> <p2> <o2> } vs. <s1> <p1> { <s2> <p2> <o2> } ←
15:30:52 <ericP> i read graph literals as the latter
Eric Prud'hommeaux: i read graph literals as the latter ←
15:30:57 <PatH> what about blank nodes? I dont see how to get them into json-ld from a quick read.
Patrick Hayes: what about blank nodes? I dont see how to get them into json-ld from a quick read. ←
15:31:50 <PatH> I guess that is meta-scribing.
Patrick Hayes: I guess that is meta-scribing. ←
15:32:03 <tomayac> ivan: what about blank nodes
Ivan Herman: what about blank nodes ←
15:32:08 <tomayac> manu: full blank node support
Manu Sporny: full blank node support ←
15:32:18 <PatH> OK, great. I'm a believer.
Patrick Hayes: OK, great. I'm a believer. ←
15:32:22 <tomayac> manu: people wanted us to describe the full process w/o calling rdf
Manu Sporny: people wanted us to describe the full process w/o calling rdf ←
15:32:35 <tomayac> manu: we were able to not reinvent rdf
Manu Sporny: we were able to not reinvent rdf ←
15:32:44 <NickH> Does JSON-LD have any relation to RDFa profiles?
Nicholas Humfrey: Does JSON-LD have any relation to RDFa profiles? ←
15:32:46 <tomayac> manu: we say unlabeled node instead of blank node
Manu Sporny: we say unlabeled node instead of blank node ←
15:33:07 <ericP> "unlabeled node" is even consistent with the RDF concepts
Eric Prud'hommeaux: "unlabeled node" is even consistent with the RDF concepts ←
15:33:08 <tomayac> manu: blank node support is there, and it made the normalization algorithm a nitemare
Manu Sporny: blank node support is there, and it made the normalization algorithm a nitemare ←
15:33:26 <ericP> q?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q? ←
15:33:38 <MacTed> q+
Ted Thibodeau: q+ ←
15:33:40 <tomayac> nickh: does json-ld have any relation to rdfa profiles?
Nicholas Humfrey: does json-ld have any relation to rdfa profiles? ←
15:33:44 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:33:44 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
15:33:46 <tomayac> nickh: it seems very similar
Nicholas Humfrey: it seems very similar ←
15:34:03 <tomayac> nickh: we don't want to make the same error as w/ rdf/xml w/ hiding triples
Nicholas Humfrey: we don't want to make the same error as w/ rdf/xml w/ hiding triples ←
15:34:17 <tomayac> manu: the only relation to rdfa profiles is the @context
Manu Sporny: the only relation to rdfa profiles is the @context ←
15:34:34 <manu1> "@context": "http://example.org/mycontext"
Manu Sporny: "@context": "http://example.org/mycontext" ←
15:34:39 <tomayac> manu: in @context you can define the context
Manu Sporny: in @context you can define the context ←
15:34:58 <tomayac> manu: meant to be put inline, but would be nice to be able to just declare it somewhere
Manu Sporny: meant to be put inline, but would be nice to be able to just declare it somewhere ←
15:35:00 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:35:13 <tomayac> manu: it can be a separate document
Manu Sporny: it can be a separate document ←
15:35:34 <tomayac> manu: same format as inline, just as a separate document
Manu Sporny: same format as inline, just as a separate document ←
15:35:43 <tomayac> manu: it's a simple key/value map
Manu Sporny: it's a simple key/value map ←
15:35:51 <tomayac> manu: it has also type coercion rules
Manu Sporny: it has also type coercion rules ←
15:36:04 <tomayac> manu: we don't want to make the rdf/xml error of hiding triples
Manu Sporny: we don't want to make the rdf/xml error of hiding triples ←
15:36:09 <tomayac> manu: we do this error
Manu Sporny: we do this error ←
15:36:13 <tomayac> manu: we hide triples
Manu Sporny: we hide triples ←
15:36:27 <tomayac> manu: we wanted to present developers objects, not triples
Manu Sporny: we wanted to present developers objects, not triples ←
15:36:40 <ivan> ack MacTed
Ivan Herman: ack MacTed ←
15:36:44 <MacTed> RDF/JSON is limited to RDF. JSON-LD allows for other Linked Data models/implementations -- *with* full support for RDF.
Ted Thibodeau: RDF/JSON is limited to RDF. JSON-LD allows for other Linked Data models/implementations -- *with* full support for RDF. ←
15:36:44 <MacTed> RDF is limited to HTTP IRIs. JSON-LD allows for non-HTTP IRIs, among other things.
Ted Thibodeau: RDF is limited to HTTP IRIs. JSON-LD allows for non-HTTP IRIs, among other things. ←
15:36:45 <tomayac> manu: triples can be easily and losslessly extracted, though
Manu Sporny: triples can be easily and losslessly extracted, though ←
15:37:05 <tomayac> macted: json-ld seems to be a json superset
Ted Thibodeau: json-ld seems to be a json superset ←
15:37:47 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
15:37:48 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:37:48 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:37:51 <tomayac> macted: believe that json-ld won't break any rdf
Ted Thibodeau: believe that json-ld won't break any rdf ←
15:37:54 <ivan> ack me
Ivan Herman: ack me ←
15:38:08 <NickH> Can you parse something similar to Talis JSON as JSON-LD?
Nicholas Humfrey: Can you parse something similar to Talis JSON as JSON-LD? ←
15:38:10 <tomayac> ivan: i don't know whether we need to go into too much technical details
Ivan Herman: i don't know whether we need to go into too much technical details ←
15:38:19 <tomayac> ivan: rdfa has moved away from profiles
Ivan Herman: rdfa has moved away from profiles ←
15:38:20 <iand> NickH: not really
Nicholas Humfrey: not really [ Scribe Assist by Ian Davis ] ←
15:38:34 <tomayac> ivan: a little amazed that json-ld still uses profiles
Ivan Herman: a little amazed that json-ld still uses profiles ←
15:38:41 <iand> q+ to ask about datatypes
Ian Davis: q+ to ask about datatypes ←
15:38:45 <NickH> ok, thanks
Nicholas Humfrey: ok, thanks ←
15:38:47 <ivan> ack iand
Ivan Herman: ack iand ←
15:38:47 <Zakim> iand, you wanted to ask about datatypes
Zakim IRC Bot: iand, you wanted to ask about datatypes ←
15:38:51 <tomayac> manu: we do it, as web devs are a different crowd than rdf people
Manu Sporny: we do it, as web devs are a different crowd than rdf people ←
15:39:38 <gavinc> +q to mention that the RDF WG may NOT be the best place to finish developing JSON-LD
Gavin Carothers: +q to mention that the RDF WG may NOT be the best place to finish developing JSON-LD ←
15:40:02 <iand> my question was can json-ld represent properties that have multiple values with different datatypes
Ian Davis: my question was can json-ld represent properties that have multiple values with different datatypes ←
15:40:04 <gavinc> iand: Can you have properties with values with different datatypes?
Ian Davis: Can you have properties with values with different datatypes? [ Scribe Assist by Gavin Carothers ] ←
15:40:17 <manu1> "foo:bar": [{"@iri": "http://example.org"}, {"@literal": "foo"}, {"@literal": "foo", "@datatype": "xsd:bar"}]
Manu Sporny: "foo:bar": [{"@iri": "http://example.org"}, {"@literal": "foo"}, {"@literal": "foo", "@datatype": "xsd:bar"}] ←
15:40:31 <tomayac> manu: responding to ian's question via code sample
Manu Sporny: responding to ian's question via code sample ←
15:40:54 <tomayac> ian: parsing the json, yes, question answered
Ian Davis: parsing the json, yes, question answered ←
15:41:00 <tomayac> ivan: how do we move forward?
Ivan Herman: how do we move forward? ←
15:41:10 <tomayac> ivan: my understanding from the amsterdam f2f
Ivan Herman: my understanding from the amsterdam f2f ←
15:41:29 <tomayac> ivan: we were moving towards rdf/json as low level exchange format
Ivan Herman: we were moving towards rdf/json as low level exchange format ←
15:41:39 <tomayac> ivan: and json-ld in an incubator mode
Ivan Herman: and json-ld in an incubator mode ←
15:41:49 <tomayac> ivan: at some time look at json-ld again
Ivan Herman: at some time look at json-ld again ←
15:41:58 <PatH> FWIW, my only gripe with the -ld document so far is some minor wording changes (mostly avoiding the word 'define' in various places).
Patrick Hayes: FWIW, my only gripe with the -ld document so far is some minor wording changes (mostly avoiding the word 'define' in various places). ←
15:42:24 <manu1> PatH, the language is rough and needs to be cleaned up...
Manu Sporny: PatH, the language is rough and needs to be cleaned up... ←
15:42:25 <tomayac> ivan: has the incubator mode of json-ld come to a stage where we can look at it again
Ivan Herman: has the incubator mode of json-ld come to a stage where we can look at it again ←
15:42:45 <tomayac> tomayac: +1 on having a look at it again
Thomas Steiner: +1 on having a look at it again ←
15:42:47 <gavinc> +1 to looking at JSON-LD again
Gavin Carothers: +1 to looking at JSON-LD again ←
15:42:48 <manu1> +1 to look at JSON-LD again.
Manu Sporny: +1 to look at JSON-LD again. ←
15:42:49 <iand> happy for WG to look at json-ld again
Ian Davis: happy for WG to look at json-ld again ←
15:42:51 <iand> +1
15:42:52 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:42:52 <LeeF> -1
Lee Feigenbaum: -1 ←
15:42:56 <NickH> +1 to look at JSON-LD again.
Nicholas Humfrey: +1 to look at JSON-LD again. ←
15:43:06 <tomayac> ivan: leef, can you explain?
Ivan Herman: leef, can you explain? ←
15:43:06 <PatH> +1
Patrick Hayes: +1 ←
15:43:12 <gavinc> q?
Gavin Carothers: q? ←
15:43:18 <tomayac> leef: i don't think this wg is the right group
Lee Feigenbaum: i don't think this wg is the right group ←
15:43:21 <manu1> q+ to discuss the right group
Manu Sporny: q+ to discuss the right group ←
15:43:34 <yvesr> +1
Yves Raimond: +1 ←
15:43:36 <tomayac> leef: it should be addressed more by a web apps-ish group
Lee Feigenbaum: it should be addressed more by a web apps-ish group ←
15:43:41 <ivan> ack gavinc
Ivan Herman: ack gavinc ←
15:43:41 <Zakim> gavinc, you wanted to mention that the RDF WG may NOT be the best place to finish developing JSON-LD
Zakim IRC Bot: gavinc, you wanted to mention that the RDF WG may NOT be the best place to finish developing JSON-LD ←
15:43:43 <tomayac> leef: just look up the old minutes
Lee Feigenbaum: just look up the old minutes ←
15:43:51 <tomayac> gavin: sharing lee's concern
Gavin Carothers: sharing lee's concern ←
15:43:52 <PatH> I dont see 'look at' as meaning 'take control of'.
Patrick Hayes: I dont see 'look at' as meaning 'take control of'. ←
15:44:06 <PatH> So I understand lee's concern but thinkit is misplaced.
Patrick Hayes: So I understand lee's concern but thinkit is misplaced. ←
15:44:09 <LeeF> PatH, I agree - the part I didn't add is that we have limited time & resources in the group
Lee Feigenbaum: PatH, I agree - the part I didn't add is that we have limited time & resources in the group ←
15:44:24 <PatH> probably me on IRC.
Patrick Hayes: probably me on IRC. ←
15:44:35 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
15:44:36 <tomayac> gavin: i don't think we have the right people to finsih json-ld
Gavin Carothers: i don't think we have the right people to finsih json-ld ←
15:44:40 <ivan> ack manu1
Ivan Herman: ack manu1 ←
15:44:40 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to discuss the right group
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to discuss the right group ←
15:44:44 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:44:48 <tomayac> manu: sharing the same concerns of gavin
Manu Sporny: sharing the same concerns of gavin ←
15:44:53 <NickH> yes, I agree that this might not be the right group of people
Nicholas Humfrey: yes, I agree that this might not be the right group of people ←
15:45:01 <tomayac> manu: everyone in this group is fantastic and has a strong history in rdf
Manu Sporny: everyone in this group is fantastic and has a strong history in rdf ←
15:45:12 <LeeF> Exactly. Couldn't agree more with what Manu just said
Lee Feigenbaum: Exactly. Couldn't agree more with what Manu just said ←
15:45:17 <yvesr> manu1, the BBC does, I would think
Yves Raimond: manu1, the BBC does, I would think ←
15:45:25 <tomayac> manu: but i don't think enough people in this wg use javascript and json enough in their daily lives
Manu Sporny: but i don't think enough people in this wg use javascript and json enough in their daily lives ←
15:45:31 <SteveH> we use loads of JSON and Javascript
Steve Harris: we use loads of JSON and Javascript ←
15:45:44 <LeeF> We use loads of JSON and JavaScript too, but not in the way that JSON-LD views the world
Lee Feigenbaum: We use loads of JSON and JavaScript too, but not in the way that JSON-LD views the world ←
15:45:44 <SteveH> a bit of a simplistic generalisation
Steve Harris: a bit of a simplistic generalisation ←
15:45:45 <tomayac> manu: the people on public-linked-json@ are the right people imho
Manu Sporny: the people on public-linked-json@ are the right people imho ←
15:45:51 <iand> we should also look (briefly) at the microdata json serialization which has some overlap
Ian Davis: we should also look (briefly) at the microdata json serialization which has some overlap ←
15:45:54 <gavinc> I did/do, but it's not exactly a TopQuadrant strong point at the moment.
Gavin Carothers: I did/do, but it's not exactly a TopQuadrant strong point at the moment. ←
15:46:01 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
15:46:05 <ivan> ack ivan
Ivan Herman: ack ivan ←
15:46:06 <PatH> Who is in charge of json-ld right now? Can we simply advise them in a friendly way?
Patrick Hayes: Who is in charge of json-ld right now? Can we simply advise them in a friendly way? ←
15:46:18 <tomayac> ivan: putting on the official hat
Ivan Herman: putting on the official hat ←
15:46:30 <tomayac> ivan: we do not have a group that could take the place
Ivan Herman: we do not have a group that could take the place ←
15:46:31 <manu1> PatH - I'm the current editor and am running the calls, at the moment.
Manu Sporny: PatH - I'm the current editor and am running the calls, at the moment. ←
15:46:36 <PatH> suits you, Ivan.
Patrick Hayes: suits you, Ivan. ←
15:46:47 <tomayac> ivan: the rdf group is still the closest one that could standardize this
Ivan Herman: the rdf group is still the closest one that could standardize this ←
15:47:00 <tomayac> ivan: spinning off a separate wg would slow down the process
Ivan Herman: spinning off a separate wg would slow down the process ←
15:47:27 <LeeF> q+
Lee Feigenbaum: q+ ←
15:47:43 <tomayac> ivan: also what tomayac said: if this work is going in the right direction, then publishing rdf/json is a strange message to send out
Ivan Herman: also what tomayac said: if this work is going in the right direction, then publishing rdf/json is a strange message to send out ←
15:47:52 <iand> q+
15:47:59 <ivan> ack LeeF
Ivan Herman: ack LeeF ←
15:48:01 <tomayac> ivan: we need to avoid any kind of message that could be misunderstood
Ivan Herman: we need to avoid any kind of message that could be misunderstood ←
15:48:19 <SteveH> +1 to LeeF
Steve Harris: +1 to LeeF ←
15:48:20 <tomayac> leef: not sure if it's practicable: but maybe this group should do either
Lee Feigenbaum: not sure if it's practicable: but maybe this group should do either ←
15:48:26 <manu1> +1 to what Lee said - this group has enough on its plate.
Manu Sporny: +1 to what Lee said - this group has enough on its plate. ←
15:48:26 <PatH> Is the issue that the intended audience would distrust the spec if it was emitted by this group? NOthing we can do about that if so. OR is it that we are less than ideally qualified to s=write this? If that is the issue, I suggest that we trust manu and make comments on drafts without being obstructive.
Patrick Hayes: Is the issue that the intended audience would distrust the spec if it was emitted by this group? NOthing we can do about that if so. OR is it that we are less than ideally qualified to s=write this? If that is the issue, I suggest that we trust manu and make comments on drafts without being obstructive. ←
15:48:32 <tomayac> leef: we're busy w/ the core stuff
Lee Feigenbaum: we're busy w/ the core stuff ←
15:48:57 <tomayac> leef: speaking for myself, we should not publish either
Lee Feigenbaum: speaking for myself, we should not publish either ←
15:48:58 <ivan> ack iand
Ivan Herman: ack iand ←
15:49:08 <tomayac> ivan: not worried about the charter, quick remark
Ivan Herman: not worried about the charter, quick remark ←
15:49:24 <PatH> I think that something needs to be given the W3C imprimateur. That matters to a lot of people out there.
Patrick Hayes: I think that something needs to be given the W3C imprimateur. That matters to a lot of people out there. ←
15:49:35 <gavinc> In other words, can we write a JSON-LD-Triples ;)
Gavin Carothers: In other words, can we write a JSON-LD-Triples ;) ←
15:49:35 <LeeF> PatH, I think the issue is the second. (At least, that's (one of) my concern)
Lee Feigenbaum: PatH, I think the issue is the second. (At least, that's (one of) my concern) ←
15:50:03 <LeeF> PatH, I think it matters less to the people who are the core audience of JSON-LD, but that's purely speculation on my part
Lee Feigenbaum: PatH, I think it matters less to the people who are the core audience of JSON-LD, but that's purely speculation on my part ←
15:50:17 <PatH> Well, then, I dont see that as an issue. Y'all trust me to write the model theory, I m happy to trust manu to write the JSON stuff.
Patrick Hayes: Well, then, I dont see that as an issue. Y'all trust me to write the model theory, I m happy to trust manu to write the JSON stuff. ←
15:50:39 <PatH> OR whoever feels they know what they are talking about :-)
Patrick Hayes: OR whoever feels they know what they are talking about :-) ←
15:50:55 <gavinc> I just want to make sure we can get more feedback from other JSON developers
Gavin Carothers: I just want to make sure we can get more feedback from other JSON developers ←
15:51:01 <iand> my question was: is there a profile of JSON-LD that subsumes what the purpose of RDF/JSON is, i.e. a regular structure that requires no parsing on client
Ian Davis: my question was: is there a profile of JSON-LD that subsumes what the purpose of RDF/JSON is, i.e. a regular structure that requires no parsing on client ←
15:51:23 <PatH> Yes, we always need that pre-publiish-last-call-comments stuff to go on, might take a little longer for this one.
Patrick Hayes: Yes, we always need that pre-publiish-last-call-comments stuff to go on, might take a little longer for this one. ←
15:51:24 <tomayac> manu: there is a structure that is an array of objects
Manu Sporny: there is a structure that is an array of objects ←
15:51:30 <NickH> iand, a bit like N-Triples couple be a subset of Turtle but can be parsed faster?
Nicholas Humfrey: iand, a bit like N-Triples couple be a subset of Turtle but can be parsed faster? ←
15:51:38 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
15:51:44 <tomayac> manu: you can write it in such a way that it's only one level deep, normalization takes care of that
Manu Sporny: you can write it in such a way that it's only one level deep, normalization takes care of that ←
15:51:53 <iand> yes, like ntriples/turtle
Ian Davis: yes, like ntriples/turtle ←
15:52:05 <tomayac> manu: flat structure, ends up looking very much like turtle
Manu Sporny: flat structure, ends up looking very much like turtle ←
15:52:10 <tomayac> ivan: 5 more minutes
Ivan Herman: 5 more minutes ←
15:52:14 <gavinc> 15 more minutes
Gavin Carothers: 15 more minutes ←
15:52:23 <tomayac> ivan: not appropriate to decide something now
Ivan Herman: not appropriate to decide something now ←
15:52:26 <PatH> just as long as it uses UTF-8...
Patrick Hayes: just as long as it uses UTF-8... ←
15:52:31 <iand> manu: would you be able to send an example to the wg list?
Manu Sporny: would you be able to send an example to the wg list? [ Scribe Assist by Ian Davis ] ←
15:53:18 <tomayac> ivan: my feeling is that on one hand json-ld might be more appropriate to happen in a separate community group that could be merged into a separate wg
Ivan Herman: my feeling is that on one hand json-ld might be more appropriate to happen in a separate community group that could be merged into a separate wg ←
15:53:36 <tomayac> ivan: the second thing is we might suspend rdf/json work
Ivan Herman: the second thing is we might suspend rdf/json work ←
15:53:45 <tomayac> ivan: maybe even completely stop it
Ivan Herman: maybe even completely stop it ←
15:54:01 <tomayac> ivan: rdf/json might be subsumed by json-ld
Ivan Herman: rdf/json might be subsumed by json-ld ←
15:54:15 <tomayac> ivan: this wg might focus on graphs etc.
Ivan Herman: this wg might focus on graphs etc. ←
15:54:19 <iand> +1 to ivan
15:54:22 <manu1> +1 to ivan
Manu Sporny: +1 to ivan ←
15:54:22 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
15:54:25 <tomayac> ivan: only my opinion, or others agree?
Ivan Herman: only my opinion, or others agree? ←
15:54:28 <NickH> +1
Nicholas Humfrey: +1 ←
15:54:30 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:54:40 <tomayac> ivan: proposing to stop the json discussion
Ivan Herman: proposing to stop the json discussion ←
15:54:40 <PatH> not sure what we are voting on
Patrick Hayes: not sure what we are voting on ←
15:54:55 <tomayac> ivan: reporting to the chairs, the discussion should go on via email
Ivan Herman: reporting to the chairs, the discussion should go on via email ←
15:54:59 <PatH> +1
Patrick Hayes: +1 ←
15:55:22 <LeeF> PatH, did you just vote affirmatively for an explicitly unknown question? :)
Lee Feigenbaum: PatH, did you just vote affirmatively for an explicitly unknown question? :) ←
15:55:23 <tomayac> ivan: two more minutes to go
Ivan Herman: two more minutes to go ←
15:55:35 <PatH> I thought my question was answered...
Patrick Hayes: I thought my question was answered... ←
15:55:46 <LeeF> ah ok, i missed that :D
Lee Feigenbaum: ah ok, i missed that :D ←
15:55:48 <tomayac> ivan: ntriple issue and utf8
Ivan Herman: ntriple issue and utf8 ←
15:55:48 <PatH> OK, put the knives awy now, guys.
Patrick Hayes: OK, put the knives awy now, guys. ←
15:56:11 <gavinc> +q did the chairs/staff get the the comments from last week and emails about opening up the mailing list?
Gavin Carothers: +q did the chairs/staff get the the comments from last week and emails about opening up the mailing list? ←
15:56:20 <gavinc> +q to ask if the chairs/staff get the the comments from last week and emails about opening up the mailing list?
Gavin Carothers: +q to ask if the chairs/staff get the the comments from last week and emails about opening up the mailing list? ←
15:56:29 <tomayac> ivan: proposes to adjourn the meeting
Ivan Herman: proposes to adjourn the meeting ←
15:56:40 <PatH> OK, bye all.
Patrick Hayes: OK, bye all. ←
15:56:45 <tomayac> ivan: ideally in one week we could have a final decision on the json issue
Ivan Herman: ideally in one week we could have a final decision on the json issue ←
15:56:52 <tomayac> ivan: meeting adjourned
Ivan Herman: meeting adjourned ←
15:56:56 <tomayac> leef: Topic: Mailing List
Lee Feigenbaum: Topic: Mailing List ←
15:57:06 <tomayac> leef: what was up w/ the mailing list?
Lee Feigenbaum: what was up w/ the mailing list? ←
15:57:25 <tomayac> leef: (explains) people from rdf-comments@ could not subscribe / post
Lee Feigenbaum: (explains) people from rdf-comments@ could not subscribe / post ←
15:57:43 <tomayac> leef: they are not wg members, but expected they could subscribe
Gavin Carothers: they are not wg members, but expected they could subscribe ←
15:58:17 <tomayac> ivan: this structure is not so unusual to have two mailing lists, also on other wgs
Ivan Herman: this structure is not so unusual to have two mailing lists, also on other wgs ←
15:58:20 <gavinc> s/leef/gavinc
15:58:26 <tomayac> ivan: by desing
Ivan Herman: by design ←
15:58:42 <tomayac> ivan: we can rediscussed, but w/o the chairs, can't comment
Ivan Herman: we can rediscussed, but w/o the chairs, can't comment ←
15:58:53 <tomayac> s/desing/design/
15:58:59 <tomayac> ivan: no strong feeling about it
Ivan Herman: no strong feeling about it ←
15:59:13 <tomayac> ivan: if the majority decides to change it, we change it
Ivan Herman: if the majority decides to change it, we change it ←
15:59:20 <tomayac> ivan: adjounred, second time
Ivan Herman: adjounred, second time ←
15:59:30 <iand> bye all
15:59:31 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
15:59:33 <yvesr> bye!
Yves Raimond: bye! ←
15:59:35 <Zakim> -yvesr
Zakim IRC Bot: -yvesr ←
15:59:39 <Zakim> -manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu1 ←
15:59:42 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
15:59:45 <Zakim> -AlexHall
Zakim IRC Bot: -AlexHall ←
15:59:47 <Zakim> -NickH
Zakim IRC Bot: -NickH ←
15:59:55 <Zakim> -gavinc
Zakim IRC Bot: -gavinc ←
15:59:57 <Zakim> -Scott_Bauer
Zakim IRC Bot: -Scott_Bauer ←
16:00:01 <Zakim> -iand
Zakim IRC Bot: -iand ←
16:00:10 <Zakim> -LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: -LeeF ←
16:00:20 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
16:00:20 <Zakim> On the phone I see tomayac, SteveH, EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see tomayac, SteveH, EricP ←
16:00:21 <Zakim> On IRC I see mischat, iand, SteveH, yvesr, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, LeeF, ivan, tomayac, manu1, gavinc, ericP, sandro, trackbot, NickH, manu
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see mischat, iand, SteveH, yvesr, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, LeeF, ivan, tomayac, manu1, gavinc, ericP, sandro, trackbot, NickH, manu ←
16:00:29 <Zakim> -SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH ←
16:00:35 <ivan> trackbot, end telcon
Ivan Herman: trackbot, end telcon ←
16:00:35 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←
16:00:35 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been gavinc, Ivan, manu1, tomayac, +44.207.923.aaaa, +1.443.212.aabb, AlexHall, MacTed, yvesr, Scott_Bauer, SteveH, iand, LeeF, NickH, EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been gavinc, Ivan, manu1, tomayac, +44.207.923.aaaa, +1.443.212.aabb, AlexHall, MacTed, yvesr, Scott_Bauer, SteveH, iand, LeeF, NickH, EricP ←
16:00:36 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←
16:00:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/08/24-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/08/24-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot ←
16:00:37 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←
16:00:37 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see no action items ←
Formatted by CommonScribe