15:40:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #json-ld
15:40:27 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/10/12-json-ld-irc
15:40:28 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public
15:40:28 <ivan> Meeting: JSON-LD Working Group Telco
15:40:28 <ivan> Chair: azaroth42
15:40:28 <ivan> Date: 2018-10-12
15:40:28 <ivan> Regrets+
15:40:28 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2018Oct/0005.html
15:40:29 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2018-10-12: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2018Oct/0005.html
15:43:46 <azaroth> azaroth has joined #json-ld
15:54:35 <ajs6f> ajs6f has joined #json-ld
15:56:53 <ivan> present+
15:56:58 <azaroth> present+
16:01:09 <gkellogg> present+ Gregg_Kellogg
16:01:35 <ajs6f> present+
16:01:39 <ivan> regrets+ simon
16:01:41 <azaroth> regrets+ workergnome
16:03:31 <jeff_mixter> jeff_mixter has joined #json-ld
16:03:42 <jeff_mixter> present+
16:04:03 <azaroth> scribenick: jeff_mixter
16:04:13 <azaroth> TOPIC: approve minutes
16:04:25 <azaroth> PROPOSAL: approve minutes of the last call https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2018/2018-10-05-json-ld
16:04:26 <gkellogg> +1
16:04:27 <ajs6f> +1
16:04:29 <azaroth> +1
16:04:30 <jeff_mixter> +1
16:04:32 <ivan> +1
16:04:36 <timCole> timCole has joined #json-ld
16:04:44 <azaroth> RESOLVED: approve minutes of the last call https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2018/2018-10-05-json-ld
16:04:59 <azaroth> TOPIC: Announcements / Reminders
16:05:50 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: any other announcements? TPAC!
16:05:58 <azaroth> TOPIC: Logistics
16:06:16 <azaroth> Draft Agenda for TPAC F2F: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qTLztv7nqbYuUsZbwhPhOyG5tHTJrTt9tGKWnD5Xa5A/edit#
16:06:42 <timCole> present+ Tim_Cole
16:07:05 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: have a look at the draft agenda for TPAC meeting. discusses issues that we need to talk about in our face to face meeting with reasonable chunks of time and tries to not overlap with other groups
16:07:24 <jeff_mixter> ... breaks are endtimes are still up in the air
16:08:02 <jeff_mixter> ajs6f: lunch is fixed?
16:08:11 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: yes
16:08:54 <jeff_mixter> ... hour for lunch seems good. half hour for breaks
16:09:12 <jeff_mixter> ... some breaks can be moved but not the ones next to joint meetings
16:09:22 <jeff_mixter> ivan: nice park nearby to decompress
16:09:54 <gkellogg> q+
16:09:59 <azaroth> ack gkellogg
16:10:00 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: are their blocks of time we might want to talk about
16:10:17 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: 1:30 - 3:30 blocks seems like it could go long
16:10:46 <jeff_mixter> ... we have time on Friday to do follow-up on things
16:11:10 <jeff_mixter> ajs6f: on Thursday the context frame stuff - seems likes some of the issues are closed
16:11:31 <jeff_mixter> ... nevermind
16:11:40 <timCole_> timCole_ has joined #json-ld
16:12:28 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: friday afternoon we could compress the 1:30 - 3:30. Or push on to 5:30 and have hour and a half slot
16:12:57 <jeff_mixter> ajs6f: how quickly can we get to an agreement but leave a few details for Greg and others to sort out details?
16:13:58 <jeff_mixter> ajs6f: 11:00 -12:30 is that part of the joint meeting?
16:14:00 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: yes
16:14:12 <jeff_mixter> ... issue that we have they others care about
16:15:10 <jeff_mixter> ajs6f: we have common things with Web Of Things. Do we have set things to chat about or is it just a grab bag of things?
16:15:33 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: there was a long email this morning about stuff to talk about. more to come later on that
16:16:15 <jeff_mixter> ... certain things will likely be really important like Contexts - don't want your smart frig freaking out
16:17:08 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: any further thoughts or suggestions on the agenda?
16:17:33 <ivan> present+ bigbluehat
16:17:43 <jeff_mixter> ... other logistics to cover?
16:18:05 <azaroth> SUBTOPIC: Echidna update
16:19:41 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: as of last night we did get all 3 specs through. sent out links to the mailing list. One of them will appear to to be published on Friday and the other 2 on Saturday. Only can publish from the master branch. It needs to publish with something that respec can render
16:20:01 <jeff_mixter> ... on suggestion was to use raw Git but it is at end of life and there are a few exploits
16:20:43 <jeff_mixter> ... respec might be able to do this. But the mime type needs to be really specific. Just make sure Master is what we want to publish and then push to the Publication branch
16:21:27 <jeff_mixter> ... update specs so the previous version is OK. Do not publish diffs from the previous version. We are encouraged to do that but requires some manual work
16:21:35 <jeff_mixter> ... feedback on that?
16:22:29 <jeff_mixter> ivan: this will remain a manual thing. which might be better because diffs on spelling mistakes are rather useless. If we make it auto - we will get tons of diffs on minor editorial changes
16:22:39 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: any further thoughts/questions?
16:22:46 <ivan> q+
16:23:28 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: we started maintaining class diffs that allow us to highlight the change sections. We could simply that if we want
16:23:45 <azaroth> ack ivan
16:23:45 <jeff_mixter> ... whole mech could stand to be styled better
16:24:20 <bigbluehat> q+ to ask for issues for styling and these highlight features
16:24:28 <jeff_mixter> ivan: we can publish a new version at any time so we need to create a strategy on how/when to publish
16:24:37 <azaroth> ack bigbluehat
16:24:37 <Zakim> bigbluehat, you wanted to ask for issues for styling and these highlight features
16:25:01 <jeff_mixter> bigbluehat: make some issue for highlighting and styling
16:25:07 <jeff_mixter> ... happy to help with some of these
16:25:21 <jeff_mixter> .. they are really nice and helpful
16:25:45 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: the example buttons are another example
16:25:56 <azaroth> q?
16:26:11 <azaroth> TOPIC: Issues
16:26:29 <azaroth> SUBTOPIC: IRI Compaction wording
16:26:30 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: on to issue.
16:26:43 <azaroth> link: https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/75
16:27:08 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: first one seems like a misunderstanding about the algorithm. Greg clarified in the issue. no issue and we can close
16:27:19 <ivan> q+
16:27:35 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: maybe more descriptive overview could be helpful
16:27:46 <azaroth> ack ivan
16:28:35 <jeff_mixter> ivan: the comment came in 8 days ago and the response came in 8 days ago as well. We should probably wait 1 week when we have issue from external members.
16:29:26 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: close or make note about editorial changes?
16:29:47 <ajs6f> +1 to editorial.
16:29:53 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: make it editorial and look to make sure the description is more robust
16:30:05 <jeff_mixter> ivan: marked as editorial and will add reference to the notes
16:30:32 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: we can close without further discussion
16:30:53 <azaroth> PROPOSAL: Mark #75 as editorial, for Gregg to consider whether additional text is needed to explain how to read the algorithm steps
16:30:55 <gkellogg> +1
16:30:55 <azaroth> +1
16:31:00 <jeff_mixter> +1
16:31:01 <ivan> +1
16:31:24 <ajs6f> +1
16:31:25 <bigbluehat> +1
16:31:30 <timCole_> +1
16:31:32 <azaroth> RESOLVED: Mark #75 as editorial, for Gregg to consider whether additional text is needed to explain how to read the algorithm steps
16:31:48 <azaroth> SUBTOPIC: Node types in @context
16:31:49 <ivan> Link: https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/76
16:32:58 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: I think this falls into the out of scope category.
16:33:36 <jeff_mixter> ... close with a will not fix with other issue as precedence. kick back to community group for how this should be handled in the future
16:33:59 <dlehn> present+ David_Lehn
16:34:04 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: no need to kick it to the community group. This can be done with framing.
16:34:11 <ivan> q+
16:34:13 <bigbluehat> q+
16:34:46 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: the desire was to not have explicit but rather implicit defs
16:34:51 <ajs6f> q+
16:34:58 <jeff_mixter> ... i.e. adding triples via the context
16:35:11 <azaroth> ack ajs6f
16:36:27 <azaroth> ack ivan
16:36:28 <jeff_mixter> ajs6f: note that once again this issue revolves around type of dataype and type of resource. we are not going to change this. We need to document this very clearly to help prevent this type of misunderstanding
16:37:20 <jeff_mixter> ivan: agree with Adam and additionally framing seems more like presenting the data based on a template. But since framing can be used for transformation then it must be emphasized much more than it currently is.
16:37:30 <timCole_> q+
16:37:33 <azaroth> ack bigbluehat
16:37:44 <azaroth> q+ to distinguish @default from grddl
16:37:47 <jeff_mixter> bigbluehat: ditto on Ivan
16:38:05 <jeff_mixter> ... need to better describe framing and what it is and what it can do
16:38:46 <ajs6f> q+
16:38:52 <ajs6f> q-
16:38:54 <jeff_mixter> ... this desire from the issue is not the first time we have heard this issue. We should look at them and ask if framing can do this, why are people not finding it?
16:39:12 <jeff_mixter> ... this problem will not go away
16:39:24 <azaroth> ack timCole_
16:39:42 <ajs6f> q+ to say that I suspect that some people are not "seeing" framing because it's younger and isn't widely-implemented or as well-known
16:40:54 <jeff_mixter> timCole_: tend to agree that framing is powerful for data transformation. but framing conflates a bunch of processing and slows things down in general. Might want to consider that and debate if we should pull things apart a bit
16:41:04 <azaroth> q?
16:41:06 <azaroth> ack azaroth
16:41:06 <Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to distinguish @default from grddl
16:41:45 <gkellogg> Add content using @default
16:42:12 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: want to clarify that my understanding of framing is that adding data to the graph is by @reverse properties and with @default but these do not allow you to randomly move data around.
16:42:39 <gkellogg> q+
16:42:57 <jeff_mixter> ... we could be clearer about this but also be opinionated about what it should do and what we are willing to add
16:43:28 <jeff_mixter> ... adding a bunch of stuff is not ideal. Keep it simple and focused
16:43:30 <azaroth> q?
16:43:32 <azaroth> ack ajs6f
16:43:32 <Zakim> ajs6f, you wanted to say that I suspect that some people are not "seeing" framing because it's younger and isn't widely-implemented or as well-known
16:44:11 <jeff_mixter> ajs6f: agree with Ben and impression is that we see this so often because framing is newer and there is less uptake
16:44:53 <jeff_mixter> ... is it out of our arena to introduce a document that demonstrate how to do what Tim's student wanted to do?
16:44:56 <azaroth> q?
16:44:58 <azaroth> ack gkellogg
16:45:40 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: to the last point, we could/should add this to the framing document. We should also add some to the API document that separates transformation and points them to the framing doc
16:46:27 <jeff_mixter> ... about how far we go, we could imagine framing as more of query language. There was pushback - it is for framing. framing is not that.
16:46:46 <jeff_mixter> ... there is a upcoming W3C workshop about standardizing graph data
16:47:03 <bigbluehat> q+
16:47:06 <azaroth> ack bigbluehat
16:48:21 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: do we put in a reference to framing or should we just close it?
16:48:22 <bigbluehat> q+
16:48:25 <azaroth> ack bigbluehat
16:49:18 <jeff_mixter> bigbluehat: I asked about that issue and I think we should point arrows between specs. I am planning some work and would like help with encouraging and pointing people to the right spec
16:49:42 <ivan> q+
16:49:49 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: give a few days more and mark it as editorial
16:50:05 <azaroth> ack ivan
16:50:09 <ivan> q-
16:50:35 <azaroth> PROPOSAL: Mark #76 as editorial for Gregg (et al) to consider pathways between specs such as API to Framing
16:50:38 <gkellogg> +1
16:50:39 <jeff_mixter> +1
16:50:39 <azaroth> +1
16:50:40 <timCole_> +1
16:50:40 <ivan> +1
16:50:43 <ajs6f> +2
16:50:54 <ajs6f> +1
16:50:55 <bigbluehat> +1
16:51:03 <azaroth> RESOLVED: Mark #76 as editorial for Gregg (et al) to consider pathways between specs such as API to Framing
16:51:14 <azaroth> SUBTOPIC: Empty Lists
16:51:19 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/18
16:51:53 <gkellogg> q+
16:52:24 <ivan> q+
16:52:35 <azaroth> ack gkellogg
16:53:12 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: couple of things. how to assert there is nothing? sort of counter to RDF but you can create an empty list
16:53:34 <jeff_mixter> ... one issue, is rdf:null the same as an empty list?
16:53:54 <azaroth> Similarly, rdf:type / @type are not identical
16:54:01 <jeff_mixter> ... we do not turn rdf:nil into an empty list
16:54:21 <jeff_mixter> ... should we have something to encode this in JSON-ld?
16:54:44 <jeff_mixter> ... this can go away in compaction so the info might be lost
16:55:13 <jeff_mixter> ... there is a null keyword that could be used
16:55:24 <azaroth> q?
16:55:40 <jeff_mixter> ... seems like a way to complicate a narrow issue. More of an editorial explanation
16:55:40 <azaroth> ack ivan
16:56:30 <azaroth> @container:@set vs @container:@list
16:56:38 <jeff_mixter> ivan: add one more problem - we have the situation in JSON-ld that [] as a syntax is used 2 diff ways based on context. If we introduce and use [] as valid syntax, we would create invalid graphs
16:57:11 <jeff_mixter> ... if the object is a set of objects, we might create graph with subject predicate but no object
16:57:19 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: the algorithm would not allow that
16:57:36 <jeff_mixter> ivan: but in JSON-ld i create a valid triple or an error
16:57:37 <ajs6f> q+ it looks like L for L rdf:rest rdf:nil has one element
16:57:51 <ajs6f> q+ to offer that it seems like L for L rdf:rest rdf:nil has one element
16:58:06 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: if it is not valid, it just would not produce anything
16:58:15 <jeff_mixter> ivan: [] present potential errors
16:58:29 <ajs6f> q- to say nm, I was reading wrongly
16:59:13 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: the expansion algorithm removes properties whose's values are null
16:59:33 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: the RDF transform would throw out an empty array
17:00:18 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: you would only end up in this state if it was @container@list
17:01:21 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: are we OK or should we talk more next week
17:01:30 <jeff_mixter> azaroth: editorial or close
17:02:09 <ivan> present+ dlehn
17:02:09 <jeff_mixter> gkellogg: seems editorial but we have a lot of that now. So maybe just close
17:02:29 <azaroth> PROPOSAL: Close #18 nothing to do, as we don't process rdf: terms separately in the syntax
17:02:34 <ivan> +1
17:02:35 <azaroth> +1
17:02:36 <timCole_> +1
17:02:39 <gkellogg> +1
17:02:42 <bigbluehat> +1
17:02:44 <jeff_mixter> +1
17:02:47 <ajs6f> +0
17:03:47 <azaroth> RESOLVED: Close #18 nothing to do, as we don't process rdf: terms separately in the syntax
17:04:33 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:04:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/10/12-json-ld-minutes.html ivan