16:05:36 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #json-ld
16:05:36 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/02/07-json-ld-irc
16:05:39 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:05:40 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan
16:05:48 <ivan> Date: 2020-02-07
16:05:48 <ivan> Agenda:https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2020Feb/0001.html
16:05:48 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2020-02-07: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2020Feb/0001.html
16:05:49 <ivan> Chair: bigbluehat
16:05:49 <ivan> Meeting: JSON-LD Working Group Telco
16:33:14 <azaroth> azaroth has joined #json-ld
16:55:18 <rubensworks> rubensworks has joined #json-ld
16:57:46 <azaroth> present+
17:00:08 <azaroth> scribenick: azaroth
17:00:10 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #json-ld
17:00:11 <rubensworks> present+
17:00:24 <bigbluehat> present+
17:00:48 <ivan> present+
17:01:32 <azaroth> TOPIC: approve minutes of previous call https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2020/2020-01-24-json-ld
17:01:47 <azaroth> PROPOSAL: approve minutes of previous call https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2020/2020-01-24-json-ld
17:01:49 <azaroth> +1
17:01:55 <bigbluehat> +1
17:01:55 <rubensworks> +1
17:02:03 <timCole> timCole has joined #json-ld
17:02:09 <azaroth> RESOLVED: approve minutes of previous call https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2020/2020-01-24-json-ld
17:02:12 <ivan> +1
17:02:26 <timCole> present+
17:03:14 <dlehn_> present+
17:03:23 <azaroth> TOPIC: Announcements / Reminders
17:03:38 <pchampin_> pchampin_ has joined #json-ld
17:03:43 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Any announcements / reminders?
17:03:47 <azaroth> ... have a specific ask
17:03:59 <azaroth> ... No? Any implementation status reports?
17:04:02 <azaroth> q+
17:04:08 <bigbluehat> ack azaroth
17:04:13 <bigbluehat> scribe+ bigbluehat
17:04:15 <rubensworks> q+
17:04:42 <bigbluehat> azaroth: so, Greg (who works with Rob) has gone through more of the spec
17:04:46 <bigbluehat> ...but that's not new news
17:05:16 <bigbluehat> ...in Python, though, there's a separate from the PyLD project and they've been making good progress
17:05:17 <ajs6f> ajs6f has joined #json-ld
17:05:23 <ajs6f> present+
17:05:26 <bigbluehat> ...rdflib and rdflib-jsonld
17:05:35 <bigbluehat> ack rubensworks
17:05:46 <azaroth> rubensworks: Have been working on the streaming parser implementation lately
17:05:57 <azaroth> ... things are going well. Don't see any major issues to parse in a streaming way
17:06:10 <azaroth> ... most of the spec tests currently pass, so hope to be done with it by the end of the month
17:06:36 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Very valuable! ANy other news?
17:06:59 <bigbluehat> add to https://json-ld.org/#developers-description
17:07:17 <azaroth> ... one thing to ask is if anyone directly or through other groups know of things, we should make sure it gets added to the developer description in json-ld.org
17:07:24 <azaroth> ... including tagging for what they support
17:07:40 <azaroth> ... to help people decide which to use. If you can take it on, great, otherwise I will try to do it
17:07:55 <azaroth> rubensworks: working on the parser now, will do serializer later but shouldn't be any issues
17:08:28 <azaroth> bigbluehat: rdflib. PHP is getting stale. Ruby is good with Gregg
17:08:46 <azaroth> dlehn: We don't use PHP actively unless someone picks up the torch it'll stay where it is
17:08:58 <azaroth> bigbluehat: I think there was work going on in java
17:09:03 <azaroth> ... don't know about the bottom row in general
17:09:20 <azaroth> ... any status would be appreciated, now or later in issues in the json-ld.org repo
17:09:26 <pchampin_> present+
17:09:27 <azaroth> ... any other reminders?
17:09:32 <azaroth> TOPIC: Issues
17:09:45 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Dug through syntax, api and framing ... didn't find anything discussable, it's all editorial
17:09:57 <azaroth> bigbluehat: pierre-antoine, anything you want to raise or highlight?
17:10:27 <azaroth> pchampin_: Nothing to discuss :)
17:10:47 <azaroth> TOPIC: Best Practices
17:11:11 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Adam has done a lot of work on BP issues recently
17:11:33 <azaroth> ajs6f: Mostly workflow issues -- some duplicates. Was tapping people about new sections to move forward
17:11:43 <azaroth> ... example for order in the context matters, where it normally doesn't
17:11:50 <azaroth> ... but does in one particular place.
17:12:05 <azaroth> ... Some other very similar ones, where there's some uncertainty should ahve an example
17:12:18 <azaroth> ... eg language maps and multilingual, with the choices and what you get from each
17:12:37 <azaroth> ... other than that there's some streaming ones, should close one, and just a mention that streaming is possible
17:12:43 <azaroth> ... but it has to obey certain rules to work
17:12:48 <azaroth> ... those are the biggest ones that I saw
17:12:58 <azaroth> ... a few smaller ones but mostly typos
17:13:05 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-bp/issues/3
17:13:06 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Why don't we look at streaming
17:13:13 <azaroth> SUBTOPIC: Streaming best practice
17:13:39 <azaroth> rubensworks: historically issue 4 was earlier, but in a different tracker and then moved to BP repository
17:13:56 <azaroth> ... I made 3 as a way to summarize the things that are needed to parse efficiently in a streaming manner
17:14:04 <ajs6f>  /me +1 to closing #4
17:14:12 <azaroth> ... I think that we can close 4, but I should go through it in more detail to make sure we don't lose anything
17:14:16 <azaroth> ... that isn't in #3
17:14:49 <azaroth> ... It would be safe to write some text about those guidelines that I mention in #3, but Gregg appeared to agree with most of it except for the properties
17:15:06 <azaroth> ... the special case where contexts are applied to specific properties, and we would need some more work
17:15:12 <azaroth> ...  that we should still look into
17:15:22 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Are you up for doing some of the work for the doc?
17:15:32 <azaroth> rubensworks: Can help with that, but next 2 weeks are very busy
17:15:41 <azaroth> ... only be able to work on it after that, if that's okay
17:16:01 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Some time is better than never!  Even just sections and rough pointers for where to flesh out and what you have in mind
17:16:16 <azaroth> ... any content is great and it can be polished later
17:16:36 <azaroth> ... in #4 Adam suggested that this could be a stand alone note, but I don't think we have time to add a new note
17:16:42 <ajs6f> q+
17:16:45 <azaroth> ... It would also need promotion
17:16:46 <bigbluehat> ack azaroth
17:16:49 <bigbluehat> ack ajs6f
17:17:00 <rubensworks> q+
17:17:06 <azaroth> ajs6f: The impetus behind it was that it's not part of the specs directlhy, but we do want to specify precisely
17:17:27 <azaroth> ... in an ideal world it would be nice to have a separate formal note, but not a spec, and the BP doc would just refer to it
17:17:52 <azaroth> ... but whatever mention in the BP doc should be informal rather than pseudo-normative
17:18:08 <azaroth> ... don't think we have time for a careful spec either, especially in a BP doc
17:18:20 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Get what we can into the BP doc
17:18:38 <azaroth> ajs6f: Can potentially publish a note later. Can see what use people make of the notes in the BP doc
17:18:48 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Ruben, you mentioned [...?]
17:18:55 <azaroth> ... should we leave that one open?
17:19:09 <bigbluehat> s/[...?]/wanting to close #4
17:19:11 <azaroth> s/[...?]/wanting to close issue #4/
17:19:30 <azaroth> bigbluehat: You wanted to go through issue 4 to see what was there
17:19:39 <azaroth> rubensworks: Assign it to me and I can see if we can close it
17:19:49 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Happy to leave opening and closing to you
17:19:56 <azaroth> ... can leave #3 open as the primary topic
17:20:04 <azaroth> ... has a good looking outline
17:20:45 <azaroth> rubensworks: about the note, I also think it's valuable to have it at  some point. Maybe not in the scope of this WG. Problem I have now is that when I discover JSON-LD docs I want to parse, I have to assume that they are not stream-enabled to be parsed
17:20:58 <azaroth> ... so I parse them the normal way, and can't use the optimizations for streaming parsing
17:21:17 <azaroth> ... good to add a specific content type or similar to say that it can be parsed in a streaming way
17:21:18 <azaroth> q+
17:21:24 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Maybe a profile?
17:21:24 <bigbluehat> ack rubensworks
17:21:29 <bigbluehat> ack azaroth
17:21:47 <bigbluehat> azaroth: it seems to ajs6f's point about formality/informality of the BP...
17:22:03 <bigbluehat> ...that if we wanted to have event a profile parameter/IRI, that it would raise it to a Note
17:22:10 <ivan> +1 to Rob
17:22:13 <bigbluehat> ...because we'd want to refer to it from the IANA profile
17:22:25 <bigbluehat> ...so this does seem like something to consider
17:22:35 <bigbluehat> ...I agree with rubensworks that if you don't know you can stream it, you won't
17:22:51 <bigbluehat> ...so there needs to be something in the header that tells you it's possible
17:23:09 <bigbluehat> ...and perhaps we need to discuss priority of the notes
17:23:15 <bigbluehat> q?
17:23:24 <azaroth> bigbluehat: I think with priority of notes it's who works on what
17:23:32 <azaroth> ... if they show up then they've been prioritized :)
17:23:49 <azaroth> ... if folks want to work on streaming, that's great. We're not stealing time from one to the other
17:23:53 <rubensworks> q+
17:23:59 <azaroth> ... Have the time to discuss
17:24:04 <azaroth> ... Ivan is this something we can do
17:24:11 <azaroth> ivan: We can add as many notes as we can write
17:24:12 <bigbluehat> ack rubensworks
17:24:21 <azaroth> rubensworks: What are the requirements for such a note?
17:24:33 <azaroth> ... should be  more extensive than a section in a  BP doc
17:24:47 <azaroth> bigbluehat: I think the biggest part is the profile parameters section, but start with whatever you have
17:25:02 <azaroth> ... Is there more plumbing we should set up, Ivan?
17:25:13 <azaroth> ivan: In a note we can do what we want.
17:25:23 <azaroth> rubensworks: Where should it live? Also in the BP repo?
17:25:33 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Maybe we should use it as a notes repo
17:25:38 <ajs6f> q+
17:25:45 <azaroth> ivan: what do you guys want?
17:25:46 <bigbluehat> ack ajs6f
17:26:12 <azaroth> ivan: don't expect me to make the decision :) To make a new repo is 10 minutes max. You tell me
17:26:29 <azaroth> ajs6f: Was going to ask if we change it to a notes repo, then the BP is a note?
17:26:35 <azaroth> bigbluehat: It's a note already
17:26:44 <azaroth> ... the only one we have content for
17:27:03 <azaroth> ivan: the only practical thing, if we want to use things like echidna, it makes it harder if there's 5 notes in one repo
17:27:14 <azaroth> ... but if  we publish only once, it's not a big deal
17:27:25 <azaroth> q+
17:27:29 <bigbluehat> ack azaroth
17:27:41 <bigbluehat> azaroth: a thought about publishing frequency
17:28:04 <bigbluehat> ...for a note, having lots and lots of working drafts seems  useful to draw attention to it and possibly get input
17:28:22 <bigbluehat> ...so, I'd prefer we set it up with the best tooling to get drafts into the public
17:28:34 <azaroth> ivan: we can set up echidna  that every commit to master  is auto published
17:28:40 <azaroth> bigbluehat: That  sounds great
17:28:50 <azaroth> ... a repo for each note
17:29:15 <azaroth> ivan: One for BP, one for CBOR. Now  there's a nice bikeshed question ... what  name for the repo?
17:29:20 <azaroth> bigbluehat: json-ld-stream ?
17:29:28 <bigbluehat> our repos https://github.com/w3c?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=json-ld-&type=&language=
17:29:31 <ivan> +1
17:29:32 <timCole> +1
17:29:33 <pchampin_> +1
17:30:06 <bigbluehat> PROPOSAL: add json-ld-streaming repo; automate all note repos with echidna to publish on each commit
17:30:14 <azaroth> +1
17:30:15 <ivan> +1
17:30:16 <ajs6f> +1
17:30:17 <rubensworks> +1
17:30:17 <bigbluehat> +1
17:30:26 <timCole> +1
17:30:31 <dlehn> +1
17:30:42 <azaroth> ivan: first we have to go tyhrough the pedestrian  way, and then we  can publish each time
17:30:54 <azaroth> bigbluehat: some time  in the next couple of weeks we make a drafty working draft
17:30:56 <bigbluehat> RESOLVED: add json-ld-streaming repo; automate all note repos with echidna to publish on each commit
17:31:12 <azaroth> ivan: that's something we  have a plan to republish CR, and  not via echidna  but a new CR
17:31:38 <azaroth> ... I have some  time  constraints about  that. I sent a separate note, but I will have a trip to the US at the end of Feb and then a week out 10th of March
17:31:54 <azaroth> ... so the timing might have some consequences
17:32:19 <azaroth> ... that said, the whole procedure has been moved to github, so I believe that chairs can also initiate a FPWD by making an issue
17:32:27 <azaroth> ... and FPWD is more automatic than anything else
17:32:32 <azaroth> ... but still a discussion to have with the webmaster
17:32:40 <bigbluehat> q?
17:33:18 <azaroth> azaroth: if it's a matter of a week or so, then no need to rush
17:33:27 <azaroth> bigbluehat: can always use GH previews for discussion in the  mean time
17:33:39 <azaroth> ... ivan do you want an action for the repo?
17:33:45 <azaroth> ACTION: ivan to set up json-ld-streaming repo
17:34:04 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Okay another issue...
17:34:13 <azaroth> ... is anyone working on CBOR note?
17:34:18 <pchampin_> q+
17:34:23 <bigbluehat> ack pchampin_
17:34:37 <azaroth> pchampin_: A number of issues were raised, he intends to work on it
17:34:46 <azaroth> ... still have to process the issues that were sent
17:34:51 <azaroth> ... and interested to contribute
17:34:54 <azaroth> bigbluehat: awesome
17:35:16 <azaroth> ... one side note, GH will not automatically subscribe you to the repos, so go in and watch them
17:35:29 <azaroth> ... lots of people watching the CBOR note
17:35:49 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-bp/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc
17:35:59 <azaroth> ... Go through the BP in most active order
17:36:20 <azaroth> ... done streaming, first one is ordering impact on protected
17:36:49 <azaroth> rubensworks: this issue was created to clarify that for protection of terms that order is important
17:37:12 <azaroth> ... in the first snippet, the overriding of the term would result in a failure, but if you reverse the contexts, the failure doesn't happen
17:37:21 <azaroth> ... so clarify order is important
17:37:30 <azaroth> bigbluehat: where you introduce the protection has an effect
17:37:37 <azaroth> ... protected in the middle of the list is different from at the end
17:37:53 <azaroth> ... anyone want to help on this?
17:38:16 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-bp/issues/2
17:38:28 <azaroth> bigbluehat: dlehn did you work on this?
17:38:47 <azaroth> ... Or was it more dlongley?
17:39:01 <azaroth> dlehn: I'd have to take a look. Partly involved but not core.
17:39:04 <azaroth> rubensworks: I can also help
17:39:24 <azaroth> bigbluehat: that woudl be super. I can assign to you for now
17:39:29 <azaroth> ... thank you very much
17:39:37 <azaroth> ... streaming got some love, so lets look at #13
17:39:54 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-bp/issues/13
17:39:57 <azaroth> ... JSON-LD to RDF to JSON-LD ... what can happen with things being moved around
17:40:10 <azaroth> ... anyone has a handle on this that could write it up?
17:40:31 <azaroth> ... [crickets] ...
17:40:53 <azaroth> ... feels pretty core to JSON-LD developer. don't want crickets on every issue
17:41:21 <azaroth> ... what's the best way to handle it? All are of interest and we all want to see them written ... how to put them into the path?
17:41:33 <azaroth> ... Ruben was dealing with the streaming head on, so taking notes in public
17:41:39 <azaroth> ... anyone working on this stuff and coudl do the same?
17:41:53 <azaroth> dlehn: A question ... what sort of text do we want?  More like a tutorial, a teaching thing?
17:42:12 <azaroth> bigbluehat: I think it's what you should know in order to do it well. Do this, don't do that
17:42:26 <azaroth> dlehn: Might want to show why the other options are bad, and then it turns into a book
17:42:44 <azaroth> bigbluehat: more minimal versions are fine. Just want some content that we as a group are aware that some things are tricky
17:42:50 <azaroth> ... doesn't need to be a book
17:43:01 <azaroth> ... looking for draft content that can make its way in and then be edited
17:43:27 <azaroth> ... json-ld continues to take it on the chin for people not understanding how to use it properly
17:44:06 <azaroth> ... in VC, everything got assigned to someone, not to do the work, but to find someone who can do  the work
17:44:18 <azaroth> ... perhaps we need to come at this another way
17:44:22 <azaroth> ... perhaps involving the CG
17:44:29 <azaroth> q?
17:44:34 <azaroth> q+
17:44:50 <bigbluehat> ack azaroth
17:44:58 <bigbluehat> azaroth: I think involving the CG could be an interesting way
17:45:02 <bigbluehat> ...but the question is how to organize it
17:45:08 <bigbluehat> ...if not via these calls
17:45:22 <bigbluehat> ...we could try the mailing list
17:45:26 <bigbluehat> ...but it's pretty quiet there
17:45:31 <bigbluehat> ...so probably not many folks would show up
17:45:54 <bigbluehat> ...one way to pick one issue and at least make progress--per call--to try and get notes down during the call
17:46:02 <bigbluehat> ...and then we can tidy those up later
17:46:21 <azaroth> bigbluehat: +1 on that
17:46:22 <bigbluehat> ...so maybe we can use call time for getting notes down
17:46:32 <azaroth> ... anyone up for that?
17:47:04 <azaroth> ... can do a blended approach - a larger piece of work can be handed out, but for smaller ones we can note-jam and (e.g.) get the round tripping covered
17:47:09 <azaroth> +1 to approach
17:47:16 <azaroth> ... does that seem okay?
17:47:22 <pchampin_> +1
17:47:39 <azaroth> ... 13 minutes left ...
17:47:51 <azaroth> ... Lets look at 13, the round tripping one
17:48:03 <azaroth> ... take a minute to go through comments together and then as people have thoughts, chime in
17:48:29 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-bp/issues/13
17:48:38 <pchampin_> q+
17:48:43 <bigbluehat> ack pchampin_
17:49:03 <azaroth> pchampin_: TO be sure ... the original  text of the issue mentions lists of lists which is out of date for lack of support
17:49:26 <ivan> q+
17:49:27 <azaroth> bigbluehat: BP should call out when one is required to accomplish it, people can already have json-ld content
17:49:31 <bigbluehat> ack ivan
17:49:59 <azaroth> ivan: rob, I think you raised this ... what do we mean by round-tripping. Strictly rdf model level, or is it from a particular serialization and round trip back tot he closest one?
17:50:14 <azaroth> ... rdf has "wonderful" feature of a zillion different ways to express it
17:50:31 <bigbluehat> azaroth: I was thinking that if you have JSON-LD and you parse it into the abstract graph
17:50:48 <bigbluehat> ...then manipulate it and re-serialize it, that you end up at the same place.
17:51:08 <bigbluehat> ...does all of the information in the JSON-LD make it into the RDF graph and then back into the output JSON-LD
17:51:22 <bigbluehat> ...and then there's framing to make sure you get it exactly into the same tree structure...or not
17:52:07 <bigbluehat> ...if you're JSON-LD with blank nodes and go into RDF and back into JSON-LD then those blank nodes will vanish
17:52:15 <bigbluehat> ...so work to be done on this issue is still correct
17:52:26 <bigbluehat> ...find the things that are important to note in these scenarios
17:52:43 <pchampin_> q+
17:52:48 <bigbluehat> ...and document in the best practice: if you want to have your data round-tripable, here's what you should and shouldn't do
17:53:07 <bigbluehat> ...and Gregg's comments that follow around array ordering is interesting...especially if you're thinking JSON
17:53:38 <bigbluehat> ...and thinking only JSON-LD then you get consistent blank node naming, but not if you go through RDF
17:54:21 <bigbluehat> ivan: CURIE in JSON-LD then into Turtle, does the CURIE stay the same? or are the rules different?
17:54:25 <bigbluehat> azaroth: I don't know
17:54:30 <bigbluehat> ack pchampin_
17:54:56 <azaroth> pchampin_: the way I read this was round trip between rdf abstract syntax and json-ld
17:55:06 <azaroth> ... I don't know if I can round trip turtle to turtle
17:55:28 <azaroth> ... in fact I know that I can't, e.g. the curies, as the implementations don't have a notion of prefixes as they're not part of the abstract syntax
17:55:41 <azaroth> ... shouldn't talk about other syntaxes, only abstract and json-ld
17:55:45 <azaroth> +1 to pa
17:56:03 <azaroth> pchampin_: Maybe it's worth mentioning that ... other syntaxes have their own problems that we can't address
17:56:08 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Good points!
17:56:24 <azaroth> ... do we feel like we have a complete  list on the issue?
17:56:35 <azaroth> ... or can we write in other issues to the issue
17:56:48 <azaroth> ... the things that we're up against and whether  we can solve them
17:57:19 <azaroth> azaroth: throw in whatever notes you can
17:57:32 <azaroth> bigbluehat: consolidate and summarize from what you've read above would be good
17:57:43 <azaroth> ... or just take that on to makesure the end of the issue we have something to take forward
17:57:50 <azaroth> ... rather than rereading the whole time
17:58:06 <azaroth> ... next friday is valentine's day
17:58:26 <azaroth> I am out the following week tho
17:59:56 <azaroth> ... meet on regular schedule
18:00:09 <azaroth> ... best practices and note  jams ...we'll get better at it :)
18:00:09 <ivan> zakim, end meeting
18:00:09 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been azaroth, rubensworks, bigbluehat, ivan, timCole, dlehn_, ajs6f, pchampin_
18:00:11 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:00:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/07-json-ld-minutes.html Zakim
18:00:12 <azaroth> TOPIC: Adjourn
18:00:15 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, ivan; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
18:00:19 <Zakim> Zakim has left #json-ld
18:00:47 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
18:00:47 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in https://www.w3.org/2020/02/07-json-ld-actions.rdf :
18:00:47 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ivan to set up json-ld-streaming repo [1]
18:00:47 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2020/02/07-json-ld-irc#T17-33-45