15:48:41 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #json-ld
15:48:41 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/05/08-json-ld-irc
15:48:44 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:48:44 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan
15:49:00 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2020-05-08: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2020May/0008.html
15:49:01 <ivan> Date: 2020-05-08
15:49:01 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-json-ld-wg/2020May/0008.html
15:49:01 <ivan> Chair: bigbluehat
15:49:01 <ivan> Meeting: JSON-LD Working Group Telco
15:53:07 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #json-ld
15:53:24 <azaroth> present+
15:55:28 <ivan> present+
16:01:37 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #json-ld
16:03:18 <bigbluehat> present+
16:04:12 <dlehn> present+
16:04:31 <pchampin> present+
16:05:03 <gkellogg> present+
16:09:00 <bigbluehat> scribenick: gkellogg
16:09:01 <gkellogg> scribe+
16:11:01 <bigbluehat> Topic: Announcements / Reminders?
16:11:21 <bigbluehat> Subtopic: let's throw a party for our success! :)
16:11:34 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: as noted, the end of PR is after the end of the working group
16:11:36 <azaroth> PR: https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/   :)
16:11:41 <bigbluehat> scribe+
16:12:05 <gkellogg> ivan: it’s not a problem that end of PR is after end of WG. The publishing of a REC is a Team decision, not really a WG decision.
16:12:28 <gkellogg> … There might be a few days off, but we can extend by a couple of weeks, if necessary.
16:12:46 <ivan> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/json-ld11/
16:12:47 <azaroth> WG Note: https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11-streaming/    :)
16:12:54 <ivan> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/jsonld-charter/
16:13:18 <gkellogg> … Please get your AC reps to vote on the charter.
16:14:43 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: there's some RDF* conversations happening on Twitter
16:14:54 <bigbluehat> ...much about the JSON-LD integration/expression of the new things there
16:15:02 <bigbluehat> ...could we work on that stuff in the maintenance group?
16:15:10 <bigbluehat> ivan: we're in a "don't ask" period of time right now
16:15:25 <bigbluehat> ...if the new Process comes into the picture, then we can make some changes that could make it possible
16:15:28 <gkellogg> ivan: we’re in a gray zone, for right now. If the new process comes into the picture, an incremental change of the recommendation becomes possible. In theory, the WG may be able to do that.
16:15:31 <bigbluehat> ...but it's just a theory right now
16:16:09 <gkellogg> … I’ve made the noises in the Team that this group would like to be able to do incremental improvement, but we can’t right now.
16:17:10 <gkellogg> … The problem with RDF*, is that there is no underlying datamodel. The two CGs can collaborate.
16:19:13 <gkellogg> bigbluehat: The CGs can work together.
16:20:00 <gkellogg> ivan: No comment :)
16:20:55 <gkellogg> topic: JSON-LD*
16:23:17 <gkellogg> s/:)/:(/
16:23:58 <bigbluehat> Subtopic: recommended context redirs
16:24:05 <bigbluehat> s/redirs/redirects
16:24:07 <gkellogg> ivan: Is the group fine with with the recommended context, then I can set up redirections.
16:24:52 <bigbluehat> q+
16:24:54 <gkellogg> … That involves the redirections for the RDFa innitial context (html, RDF/XML, Turtle, and JSON-LD), pluss the json-ld context.
16:25:20 <bigbluehat> ack bigbluehat
16:25:39 <gkellogg> bigbluehat: why change names?
16:25:54 <gkellogg> ivan: because management is done on GitHub, but they should be served from w3.org
16:26:29 <gkellogg> … It’s easier to do with .htaccess, rather than a 302 redirect.
16:27:10 <gkellogg> azaroth: If it’s a redirect, then when you go to the official name, you get redirected, so a copy/paste will be from the redirected location, not w3.org.
16:27:38 <gkellogg> ivan: If you look at the website, it’s also a redirect, but you don’t see that in the browser’s address bar.
16:28:22 <gkellogg> pchampin: I think the htaccess rules are similar to a redirect, but technically, it’s not a redirect. It’s really a proxy.
16:28:39 <azaroth> > RewriteRule ^info/sitemap.xml http://api.info.futures.co.uk/sitemap.xml [P]
16:28:50 <ivan> RewriteEngine on
16:28:51 <ivan> RewriteBase /2018/json-ld-wg/
16:28:51 <ivan> # make everything HTTPS
16:28:51 <ivan> RewriteCond %{HTTPS} =off
16:28:51 <ivan> RewriteRule (.*) https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/$1 [L]
16:28:51 <ivan> # This tree is proxied from (and maintained in) GitHub
16:28:51 <ivan> <Limit PUT>
16:28:52 <azaroth> Per https://stackoverflow.com/questions/27504762/reverse-proxy-htaccess
16:28:52 <ivan>   Require all denied
16:28:52 <ivan> </Limit>
16:28:52 <ivan> # maps to github,io
16:28:52 <ivan> RewriteRule (.*)  https://w3c.github.io/json-ld-wg/$1 [P]
16:29:07 <gkellogg> bigbluehat: that’s what I was asking that we do.
16:29:10 <azaroth> The [P] is the magic bit :)
16:29:26 <azaroth> +1 :)
16:29:31 <gkellogg> +1
16:29:32 <pchampin> +1
16:29:36 <bigbluehat> +1
16:29:36 <ivan> +1
16:31:40 <gkellogg> ivan: Let’s be practical, I’m the one maintaining that stuff, so I can really have license to do it how I feel best.
16:31:57 <bigbluehat> PROPOSAL: rewrite original initial/recommended context URLs to GitHub for JSON-LD Maintenance Group to maintain longterm
16:32:06 <gkellogg> +1
16:32:13 <ivan> +1
16:32:14 <bigbluehat> +1
16:32:17 <azaroth> +1
16:32:21 <pchampin> +1
16:32:45 <bigbluehat> RESOLVED: rewrite original initial/recommended context URLs to GitHub for JSON-LD Maintenance Group to maintain longterm
16:34:05 <bigbluehat> Topic: Open issue
16:34:09 <bigbluehat> Subtopic: Compacting IRIs associated to multi types values/nodes #484
16:34:17 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/484
16:35:59 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: we'll add a new test for this--which is OK post PR
16:36:05 <bigbluehat> ...it will be a good test of adding tests after PR
16:36:42 <bigbluehat> ...we may need a more formal way of monitoring these changes under the Maintenance Group
16:36:55 <bigbluehat> ...so that's partly why this is worth discussing here
16:37:25 <gkellogg> ivan: The future WG will need to decide. I’m not sure how formal other groups are for doing this. It’s not a process question.
16:37:34 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: there is an RDF Test curation CG
16:37:45 <bigbluehat> ...and it has some recent activity to add some SPARQL cases
16:37:50 <bigbluehat> ...which Andy Seaborne put in
16:38:00 <bigbluehat> ivan: and what's their process?
16:38:08 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: people submit PRs
16:38:16 <bigbluehat> ...I encourage discussion on the PR or on the mailing list
16:38:25 <bigbluehat> ...and then based on discussion we merge it or don't merge it
16:38:39 <bigbluehat> ...there's even an old one that's unmerged which never got enough consensus
16:38:49 <bigbluehat> ...and nothing's come along to unblock it
16:39:02 <bigbluehat> ...but anyway, there is a curation group that maintains the tests
16:39:22 <bigbluehat> ...there was some thought to update the implementation reports
16:39:39 <bigbluehat> ...but it was assigned to Eric and it never happened...think it just ran out of steam behind it
16:39:55 <bigbluehat> ...but there is this CG, and our charter is specifically for managing these types of things
16:40:07 <bigbluehat> ...regarding what a future WG/CG might do
16:40:12 <bigbluehat> ...they would have authority for it
16:40:20 <bigbluehat> ...and currently our current WG does have authority over this
16:40:26 <bigbluehat> ...and so we should decide a process for this
16:40:40 <bigbluehat> ivan: I'd propose we just discuss these as we have been, and if we're all fine with it, we merge it
16:40:59 <gkellogg> ivan: my proposal is that we decide whether or not to add a test and the maintanance group can agree with the CG on what happens.
16:41:31 <gkellogg> … If the chairs of the CG and WG are common, there are other considerations.
16:41:50 <gkellogg> … For this case, we can agree to do this as we did before.
16:42:18 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: more specifically, do we create a PR for tests, get buy-in for the PR, have a meeting, and then reach a resolution before we merge it?
16:42:29 <bigbluehat> ivan: this is not a normative change thing, so I don't think that's necessary
16:42:37 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: works for me
16:43:34 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: yep. it will all happen on GitHub
16:43:52 <bigbluehat> ...and silence will--after a time period--equal approval
16:43:59 <bigbluehat> ivan: anything else?
16:44:20 <gkellogg> ivan: We have a bit more than a month left. Is there anyting more this WG intends to do?
16:44:33 <gkellogg> … There are some pending NOTES that seem stalled.
16:45:00 <gkellogg> bigbluehat: Those things could be published by the CG in the json-ld.org space, and then brought to this or a future WG.
16:45:16 <gkellogg> ivan: do we need to keep meeting?
16:45:48 <gkellogg> bigbluehat: We can set up a call in the CG to replace this and invite a wider group.
16:46:02 <gkellogg> … That might get more people involved.
16:46:56 <gkellogg> … Maybe meet in 2 weeks on the 22nd, with more people hopefully.
16:47:49 <gkellogg> … The CG chairs can decide on minuting.
16:48:19 <gkellogg> ivan: formally speaking, the WG doesn’t have any more to do.
16:48:49 <gkellogg> … I’ll ask about continued use of the Zoom account by the CG.
16:49:14 <bigbluehat> PROPOSAL: no more official WG calls (unless needed to deal with PR vote issues); CG will use this same space/time (and possibly Zoom) to run future calls for community growth/awareness
16:49:21 <azaroth> +1
16:49:23 <gkellogg> +1
16:49:25 <bigbluehat> +1
16:49:35 <dlehn> +1
16:50:35 <bigbluehat> RESOLVED: no more official WG calls (unless needed to deal with PR vote issues); CG will use this same space/time (and possibly Zoom) to run future calls for community growth/awareness
16:51:01 <gkellogg> dlehn: We have a bunch of GH branches.
16:51:41 <gkellogg> … For example, the charter repo has a bunch of old branches lying around.
16:55:05 <ivan> zakim, end meeting
16:55:05 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been azaroth, ivan, bigbluehat, dlehn, pchampin, gkellogg
16:55:07 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:55:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/05/08-json-ld-minutes.html Zakim
16:55:11 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, ivan; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
16:55:15 <Zakim> Zakim has left #json-ld
16:58:49 <gkellogg> bigbluehat: CG stuff relating to json-ld on GHPages and CORS proxy requirements.
19:48:46 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #json-ld
21:29:03 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #json-ld