14:53:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
14:53:27 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/05/21-rdf-star-irc
14:53:30 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:53:30 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin
14:53:33 <pchampin> meeting: RDF-star
14:53:39 <pchampin> date: 21 May 2021
14:53:47 <pchampin> chair: pchampin
14:54:27 <pchampin> Previous meeting: https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/Minutes/2021-05-14.html
14:54:27 <pchampin> Next meeting: https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/Minutes/2021-05-28.html
14:54:43 <pchampin> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star/2021May/0062.html
14:54:43 <agendabot> clear agenda
14:54:43 <agendabot> agenda+ Announcements and newcomers
14:54:43 <agendabot> agenda+ Open actions
14:54:43 <agendabot> agenda+ Media types
14:54:43 <agendabot> agenda+ Open-ended discussions
14:55:17 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #rdf-star
14:59:06 <james> james has joined #rdf-star
14:59:17 <james> present+
14:59:41 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
15:00:11 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:00:46 <ora> present+
15:00:54 <pchampin> present+
15:01:09 <thomas> thomas has joined #rdf-star
15:01:37 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
15:01:40 <rivettp> rivettp has joined #rdf-star
15:01:47 <rivettp> present+
15:02:05 <gkellogg> present+
15:03:14 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-star
15:03:14 <thomas> present+
15:03:32 <AndyS> present+
15:03:41 <olaf> present+
15:05:00 <ora> For obvious reasons I will not volunteer...
15:05:03 <pchampin> zakim, pick a scribe
15:05:03 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose thomas
15:05:06 <william> william has joined #rdf-star
15:06:11 <pchampin> scribe: olaf
15:06:31 <TallTed> present+
15:06:34 <olaf> pchampin: new people on the call !
15:06:48 <olaf> ... but not in IRC
15:07:08 <pchampin> zakim, next agendum
15:07:08 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements and newcomers -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:07:35 <olaf> pchampin: announcements anyone?
15:07:39 <olaf> ... none, it seems
15:07:44 <pchampin> zakim, next agendum
15:07:44 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, pchampin
15:07:53 <pchampin> q?
15:08:06 <TallTed> that's ancient!
15:08:11 <TallTed> q-
15:08:16 <pchampin> zakim, next agendum
15:08:16 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Open actions -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:08:30 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aaction
15:08:48 <olaf> pchampin: open actions on me
15:08:58 <olaf> ... still late on the charter for a possible WG
15:09:21 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/164
15:09:27 <olaf> ... another open one is about SPARQL service description
15:09:34 <olaf> ... not addressed yet
15:09:45 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/165
15:09:48 <olaf> ... for the following reason
15:10:39 <olaf> ... for the first final report we need tidying up the intro and SPARQL ???
15:11:00 <pchampin> q?
15:11:08 <olaf> ... propose to close this action
15:11:34 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/121
15:11:38 <AndyS> For issue #121 : PR https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/pull/172  Currently "draft" - Direction complete.  Presentation and HTML needs attention.  Includes tests.
15:11:41 <olaf> ... outstanding issue in the report was SPARQL comparison of RDF-star triples
15:11:54 <olaf> AndyS: have made a draft
15:12:03 <olaf> ... which includes tests
15:12:29 <olaf> ... has good coverage
15:12:41 <olaf> ... including ordering of embedded triples
15:13:14 <olaf> ... because of the use case related to duplicates
15:13:41 <olaf> ... the defined ordering is somewhat arbitrary
15:13:43 <ora> arbitrary, but predictable, yes?
15:13:55 <olaf> ... other ways of ordering can be achieved by using the built-in functions
15:14:16 <pchampin> q?
15:14:34 <james> q+
15:14:40 <pchampin> ack james
15:15:30 <olaf> james: what about stable results?
15:16:04 <olaf> AndyS: SPARQL order by has an extension point for unknow data types
15:16:19 <olaf> ... hence, not possible to define the ordering
15:16:35 <olaf> ... the extension will change the order
15:16:45 <olaf> james: agree for unknow datatypes
15:17:03 <olaf> ... still useful to provide an order for everything that is known
15:17:29 <olaf> AndyS: yes that would be useful
15:17:55 <olaf> ... happy to say that implementations should define the ordering
15:18:45 <olaf> q+
15:18:49 <pchampin> ack olaf
15:19:13 <olaf> olaf: is this a general SPARQL issue?
15:19:25 <olaf> james: it is broader
15:19:45 <olaf> ... but there is a SPARQL-star element to it
15:20:15 <AndyS> Action: AndyS: Add text on "good practice" to have a stable ordering.
15:20:17 <olaf> pchampin: as mentioned by Andy, we don't have the right people in our group to address this
15:20:40 <pchampin> q?
15:20:51 <olaf> ... may be added to the charter for he WG
15:20:57 <olaf> s/he/the
15:23:05 <AndyS> Action compete: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/pull/172#issuecomment-846030677
15:23:20 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/94
15:23:23 <AndyS> s/compete/recorded/
15:23:30 <olaf> pchampin: next action is about example in the overview part
15:23:46 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/pull/171
15:23:58 <olaf> ... tidied up the intro
15:24:18 <olaf> ... split text into backgroun + history section and an overview section
15:24:34 <olaf> ... and added missing example about SPARQL-star Update
15:24:49 <olaf> ... already got some corrections by TallTed
15:25:01 <thomas> q+
15:25:12 <pchampin> ack thomas
15:25:13 <olaf> ... proposal to leave this PR open for a few workdays for people to comment
15:25:17 <R__Michael> R__Michael has joined #rdf-star
15:25:30 <olaf> thomas: RDF/XML has an id attribute
15:26:15 <olaf> ... which is a shortcut notation to annotate a triple
15:26:27 <olaf> ... less verbose than RDF-star
15:26:42 <olaf> ... different perspective
15:27:09 <olaf> ... but shouldn't just say that RDF/XML has no solution to the problem that is the focus of RDF-star
15:27:19 <olaf> pchampin: okay, that mention can be removed
15:27:45 <olaf> ... please propose a change in the PR
15:28:12 <pchampin> q?
15:29:02 <olaf> pchampin: #94 can be closed once the PR is merged
15:29:19 <R__Michael> sure!
15:29:21 <R__Michael> Hello folks!
15:29:21 <olaf> pchampin: new person on the call (Michael Cary)
15:29:42 <olaf> ... unfortunately, sound problems
15:29:54 <R__Michael> My current role is chief architect at a company called IHS Markit. I'm overseing a new divison that is buiding some exciting stuff
15:30:11 <R__Michael> I've been passionate about the semantic web for some time, but very interested in participating and giving back to the community here.
15:30:29 <R__Michael> RDF* is a key requirement for this project and I'm honored to be able to listen in and provide value anywhere I can
15:30:48 <R__Michael> I also champion semantic concepts and developer conferences around the world
15:31:10 <R__Michael> We're likely using Stardog
15:31:20 <R__Michael> Actually just wrapped a call with them
15:31:33 <AndyS> https://ihsmarkit.com/
15:31:42 <R__Michael> I have a zoom pro account, happy to host at any time
15:31:45 <TallTed> "key requirement" suggests there's a Use Case and/or some Requirements that might be added to relevant doc(s)!
15:31:56 <olaf> pchampin: maybe we can/should move to Zoom
15:32:29 <olaf> ... we could use the Zoom of Olaf's university
15:32:31 <R__Michael> wonderful :)
15:32:50 <olaf> ... Michael, please contribute a use case description
15:33:03 <R__Michael> Absolutely!
15:33:06 <olaf> ... more on open actions ...
15:33:15 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/166
15:33:25 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/pull/173
15:33:36 <olaf> ... #166 about a discussion on ref.opacity
15:33:53 <olaf> ... PR #173 includes such a discussion
15:34:09 <olaf> ... in this discussion, left the semantics as is
15:34:16 <olaf> ... i.e., ref.opaque
15:34:33 <olaf> ... because that's the least complex option to describe
15:35:09 <olaf> ... another thing that was added ...
15:35:28 <olaf> ... the other alternatives can be seen as smenatic extensions of the current solution
15:35:59 <pchampin> q?
15:36:19 <olaf> ... TallTed proposed some corrections already
15:36:50 <olaf> ... will leave this PR open for some working days
15:36:56 <pchampin> q?
15:37:05 <AndyS> q+
15:37:09 <olaf> ... everyone, yell if you want things to be changed in that PR
15:37:13 <pchampin> ack AndyS
15:37:18 <olaf> AndyS: forgot to mention ...
15:37:52 <olaf> ... in section about SPARQL-star there were some issues about nesting
15:38:08 <olaf> ... changed the indentation in the sections
15:38:25 <olaf> pchampin: seems to be a convention when using respec
15:38:41 <olaf> AndyS: didn't seem to damage anything
15:38:57 <TallTed> respec ignores <h#> in place, makes it all work out *if* all the <section> are embedded/closed properly
15:39:03 <olaf> ... but the styling has changed
15:40:03 <olaf> gkellogg: respec takes care of the rendering and of what ends up in the TOC
15:40:04 <pchampin> q?
15:40:31 <olaf> pchampin: another quick one ...
15:40:32 <pchampin> topic: move to zoom?
15:41:01 <olaf> ... any opinions about moving to Zoom instead?
15:41:12 <olaf> ... it may work more smoothly
15:41:12 <pchampin> PROPOSAL: move away from BBC to Zoom?
15:41:14 <ora> I am also happy to host the group on Amazon Chime.
15:41:17 <gkellogg> +1
15:41:18 <pchampin> +0
15:41:22 <thomas> +0
15:41:23 <ora> +1
15:41:26 <AndyS> Zoom or Google Meet or Chime.
15:41:27 <AndyS> +1
15:41:27 <rivettp> +0
15:41:29 <william> +0
15:41:31 <james> +0
15:41:33 <olaf> +0
15:41:36 <TallTed> fewer steps to join zoom call than BBB ... and standalone app lowers burden on web browsers
15:41:47 <TallTed> +0.5
15:42:11 <olaf> pchampin: so, generally a positive opinion
15:42:18 <R__Michael> +0 I've managed to make BBB work over LTE (will also work from home office, but not "office" office)
15:42:26 <olaf> ... I can set up something via the W3C account
15:42:52 <pchampin> zakim, next agendum
15:42:52 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Media types -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:43:06 <olaf> pchampin: next item on the agenda is about media types
15:43:18 <olaf> ... we had discussions about this earlier
15:43:27 <olaf> ... but james wanted to add something
15:43:46 <olaf> james: concern is that the spec should a more informed stance on the topic
15:44:11 <olaf> ... there is a lot of discussion in some github issue
15:44:45 <olaf> ... requirements for media types put constraints
15:45:31 <olaf> ... idea to do something more like what was done for the memento protocol
15:45:41 <pchampin> https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof-conneg/
15:45:47 <olaf> ... profile header?
15:46:22 <olaf> ... in any case, as a reader of the report (not as implementer), a better founded discussion should be there
15:47:03 <olaf> ... the work would benefit from implementers taking a stance on the issue
15:47:49 <olaf> ... for example, the table suggested by ericp should be revisited
15:47:58 <pchampin> q?
15:48:33 <pchampin> q?
15:48:58 <olaf> pchampin: I also would like the report to take a clearer stance on this issue
15:49:19 <olaf> ... but there was not one stance that felt like consensus by the group
15:50:02 <olaf> james: okay, but the group has sufficient experience to include the discussion in the report
15:50:29 <olaf> AndyS: a specific item in the discussion resulted in the inclusion of profiles
15:51:19 <olaf> james: headers would be sufficient to address the cases
15:51:38 <olaf> ... as a reader, I would like to see the report mentioning it
15:52:10 <gkellogg> q+
15:52:38 <olaf> pchampin: maybe that new document provide new info for the group to make progress on the issue
15:52:58 <pchampin> ack gkellogg
15:53:05 <olaf> james: what it introduces is the notion that info should be included in out of band headers
15:53:16 <olaf> gkellogg: it's broader
15:53:35 <TallTed> Profiles aren't a viable media type solution, because the media type to which such profiles would be applied must be a superset of those profiles (including no profile) -- which isn't so with any RDF-star serialization media type.
15:54:12 <olaf> ... there is some consideration for when groups update their media types
15:54:13 <TallTed> It is fine to include things in the report on which we didn't achieve consensus, basically as "open questions", optimally including as much info as we have.
15:54:43 <olaf> ... it is worth highlighting that a future WG should consider this issue
15:55:02 <olaf> ... we should not pre-decide for a potential WG
15:55:37 <olaf> james: the report should not make an assessment
15:55:59 <olaf> ... but it should mention the alternative
15:56:14 <olaf> pchampin: yes, agree that it should be mentioned
15:56:36 <olaf> ... also reluctant to write how it should be done
15:56:44 <AndyS> q+
15:57:06 <pchampin> ack AndyS
15:57:39 <olaf> AndyS: if we are going to mention it, we need to mention that it changes the SPARQL protocol
15:58:11 <olaf> pchampin: yes
15:58:18 <pchampin> PROPOSAL: add a ref to https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof-conneg/ in the section on media-types
15:58:22 <pchampin> +1
15:58:24 <gkellogg> +1
15:58:29 <AndyS> +0
15:58:37 <thomas> +1
15:58:41 <james> +1
15:58:44 <olaf> +0
15:58:51 <R__Michael> +1
15:58:59 <TallTed> +0 haven't read that one yet
15:59:14 <william> +0
15:59:15 <ora> +1
15:59:38 <rivettp> +1
15:59:41 <pchampin> RESOLVED: add a ref to https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof-conneg/ in the section on media-types
15:59:59 <pchampin> action: pchampin to add ref to https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof-conneg/ (with warning about SPARQL protocol)
16:02:48 <pchampin> q?
16:03:09 <olaf> bye!
16:03:10 <ora> bye
16:03:10 <R__Michael> thank you!
16:03:12 <R__Michael> bye
16:03:21 <olaf> olaf has left #rdf-star
17:05:21 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #rdf-star
17:38:07 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #rdf-star
18:06:01 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:30:16 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star