IRC log of rdf-star on 2021-10-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:04:15 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:04:15 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:04:16 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:04:17 [Zakim]
please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin
15:04:19 [pchampin]
meeting: RDF-star
15:04:24 [pchampin]
chair: pchampin
15:04:33 [AndyS]
15:04:33 [pchampin]
15:04:33 [agendabot]
clear agenda
15:04:33 [agendabot]
agenda+ Announcements and newcomers
15:04:33 [agendabot]
agenda+ Open actions
15:04:33 [agendabot]
agenda+ PR #206 Paragraph and figure in the intro
15:04:33 [agendabot]
agenda+ PR #209: New section about selective referential transparency
15:04:36 [agendabot]
agenda+ Issue #3: 'conformance' section
15:04:38 [agendabot]
agenda+ Issues we may defer to the future WG
15:04:40 [william]
15:04:41 [agendabot]
agenda+ Open-ended discussions
15:04:41 [pchampin]
Previous meeting:
15:04:41 [pchampin]
Next meeting:
15:04:53 [ora]
not me
15:05:05 [pchampin]
scribe: AndyS
15:05:18 [Fabio]
Fabio has joined #rdf-star
15:05:20 [pchampin]
zakim, next agendum
15:05:20 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- Announcements and newcomers -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:06:51 [rivettp]
rivettp has joined #rdf-star
15:06:58 [rivettp]
15:07:01 [TallTed]
New headsets for everyone!
15:07:09 [Fabio]
15:07:19 [Fabio]
Hello everybody
15:08:02 [AndyS]
use case - security labels for publishing attribute-based security of data
15:08:33 [pchampin]
15:08:40 [pchampin]
zakim, next agendum
15:08:40 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- Open actions -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:08:45 [pchampin]
15:09:01 [thomas]
thomas has joined #rdf-star
15:09:09 [pchampin]
15:09:39 [thomas]
15:10:55 [AndyS]
ora: work for 196 done; will submit a PR.
15:11:04 [gkellogg]
15:11:42 [pchampin]
15:12:15 [Fabio]
I have problems in understanding the whole concept of "quoted". Is this the right moment in time to express it or did I just loose the magic moment?
15:12:17 [pchampin]
solved by PR
15:12:21 [AndyS]
pchampin: per-property semantics -- PR in progress
15:12:46 [AndyS]
... and in the agenda today
15:12:51 [Fabio]
Ok sure no problem
15:13:16 [pchampin]
15:13:36 [pchampin]
15:14:00 [pchampin]
15:14:02 [AndyS]
pchampin: intro paragraph - in this meeting
15:14:19 [pchampin]
15:14:43 [olaf]
Fabio, in the meantime, you can find the definition at:
15:14:55 [AndyS]
pchampin: tag long-term items. Some done, more to do.
15:14:56 [pchampin]
15:15:17 [pchampin]
zakim, next agendum
15:15:17 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- PR #206 Paragraph and figure in the intro -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:15:35 [pchampin]
15:15:53 [pchampin]
15:16:31 [AndyS]
pchampin: guide for reader - doc is not necessarily linear
15:16:33 [pchampin]
15:16:51 [TallTed]
15:17:06 [Fabio]
olaf, andy, ok, I have a very clear idea of what are quoted triples and how they came into being. They used to be called "embedded" up until July. I simply fear the concept of "quoting" can be misleading and imprecise and not totally useful.
15:17:16 [pchampin]
ack TallTed
15:17:33 [AndyS]
TallTed: accessibility for the picture
15:17:40 [AndyS]
15:18:03 [AndyS]
... literal description for each box
15:18:10 [gkellogg]
15:18:21 [gatemezing]
question: a name or verb for grouping section 2 - ?
15:18:35 [pchampin]
ack AndyS
15:20:03 [AndyS]
AndyS: highlight "section 2" box in some way as the entry point section
15:20:57 [thomas]
(someone is typing a lot which makes listening to other audio quite hard)
15:21:08 [AndyS]
pchampin: may do SVG - need manual maintenance
15:22:00 [thomas]
(okay, then never mind)
15:22:45 [ora]
Pull request for Issue #196 created:
15:23:13 [pchampin]
15:23:17 [pchampin]
ack g
15:24:25 [Fabio]
I have a blind PhD, if that may help
15:24:44 [AndyS]
gkellogg: Diagram adequate - extra text can be added
15:25:11 [AndyS]
... odd that "section 2" box does not have a title
15:26:35 [gatemezing]
+1 to add a title for "section 2"
15:26:43 [AndyS]
pchampin: will merge, and continue to refine diagram.
15:26:44 [pchampin]
action: pchampin to make the center bubble more salient and the bold keywords less salient
15:27:11 [pchampin]
PROPOSAL: merge PR #206
15:27:17 [AndyS]
15:27:18 [TallTed]
15:27:19 [pchampin]
15:27:20 [olaf]
15:27:22 [gkellogg]
15:27:22 [thomas]
15:27:25 [gatemezing]
15:27:27 [Doerthe]
15:27:38 [Fabio]
15:27:41 [william]
15:27:48 [rivettp]
15:27:50 [ora]
15:27:59 [pchampin]
RESOLVED: merge PR #206
15:28:06 [pchampin]
15:28:22 [pchampin]
zakim, next agendum
15:28:22 [Zakim]
agendum 4 -- PR #209: New section about selective referential transparency -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:29:28 [AndyS]
olaf: context - quoted triples are referentially opaque - they are like literals.
15:30:08 [AndyS]
... vocabulary for declaring that a quoted triple can be treated as referentially transparent
15:30:49 [AndyS]
... if using an entitlement regime, can derive other nested triples
15:30:51 [pchampin]
15:32:37 [AndyS]
pchampin: another way to look at it is if a property holds, that property holds for all ref transparent nest triples from the original quoted triple
15:33:09 [pchampin]
15:33:28 [pchampin]
15:33:28 [olaf]
15:33:50 [AndyS]
... PR#209 adds a non-normative section.
15:33:59 [thomas]
15:34:02 [pchampin]
ack p
15:34:07 [pchampin]
ack thomas
15:34:21 [AndyS]
thomas: why is it not normative?
15:34:49 [olaf]
15:34:49 [AndyS]
pchampin: not sure it is mature enough yet. May be getting there.
15:35:48 [AndyS]
... now comfortable to make it normative.
15:36:00 [AndyS]
... (personal opinion)
15:36:36 [AndyS]
olaf: I am happy to make it normative.
15:36:47 [olaf]
15:37:01 [pchampin]
s/not sure it is mature enough yet/not sure when starting that it would be mature enough/
15:37:30 [olaf]
15:37:35 [pchampin]
ack olaf
15:37:39 [AndyS]
pchampin: to go between 6.3 and 6.4
15:37:54 [AndyS]
olaf: can go in section 7
15:38:45 [AndyS]
pchampin: so sec 7 introduces an entailment regime
15:39:01 [pchampin]
15:39:35 [AndyS]
olaf: 6.4.6 can continue to exist for example then refer to sec 7.
15:39:44 [AndyS]
pchampin: makes sense
15:41:00 [AndyS]
... needs some work for this semantic extension
15:42:21 [thomas_]
thomas_ has joined #rdf-star
15:42:22 [AndyS]
... does not need all vocab in this section, only certain items of the proposed vocabulary
15:43:12 [AndyS]
... easier to merge as is and keep working in new PR
15:43:41 [pchampin]
15:43:43 [pchampin]
PROPOSAL: merge #209, then make a new PR to move the format parts in §7
15:43:51 [pchampin]
15:43:51 [thomas_]
15:43:52 [olaf]
15:43:56 [AndyS]
15:44:02 [rivettp]
15:44:06 [Doerthe]
15:44:07 [gkellogg]
15:44:09 [gatemezing]
15:44:15 [ora]
15:44:31 [TallTed]
15:44:49 [william]
15:44:53 [william]
15:45:01 [Fabio]
15:45:10 [pchampin]
RESOLVED: merge #209, then make a new PR to move the format parts in §7
15:46:07 [pchampin]
action: pchampin to move the TEP entailment regime to §7 and extend it to the rest of the vocabulary
15:46:14 [pchampin]
15:46:38 [pchampin]
zakim, next agendum
15:46:38 [Zakim]
agendum 5 -- Issue #3: 'conformance' section -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:46:43 [pchampin]
15:47:14 [AndyS]
pchampin: some standard boilerplate
15:47:28 [AndyS]
... test suite
15:47:37 [AndyS]
15:47:45 [pchampin]
ack AndyS
15:47:53 [pchampin]
15:48:18 [pchampin]
AndyS: the Conformance section is the place that says "this is RDF-star"
15:48:29 [pchampin]
... if anyone claims to support RDF-star, this is where they should look
15:49:00 [pchampin]
... currently, system claiming to support RDF-star have very different notions of RDF-star
15:49:33 [pchampin]
... following the normative text may still lead to different implementations
15:50:52 [gkellogg]
15:51:16 [pchampin]
... This is not to say that all implementations must pass the whole test suite.
15:51:33 [pchampin]
ack gkellogg
15:52:15 [AndyS]
gkellogg: specification makes normative statement and test suite tests the normative statements.
15:52:24 [gkellogg]
"Implementers can partially check their level of conformance to this specification by successfully passing the test cases of the JSON-LD test suite. Note, however, that passing all the tests in the test suite does not imply complete conformance to this specification. It only implies that the implementation conforms to aspects tested by the test suite."
15:52:26 [AndyS]
... some normative statements are hard to test
15:52:32 [AndyS]
.. JSON-LD example
15:52:34 [pchampin]
15:52:42 [AndyS]
... JSON-LD example
15:53:34 [AndyS]
... conformance to a CG note and a proper WG will provide conformance to changes it makes e.g. to Turtle
15:54:05 [AndyS]
... we have tests for TTL, NT (etc), SPARQL (syntax and eval) and semantics
15:54:12 [thomas_]
+1 to gkellogg
15:54:31 [AndyS]
... may be highlight semantics in the conformance section.
15:55:40 [AndyS]
15:56:01 [AndyS]
pchampin: semantics is the entailment
15:56:06 [pchampin]
ack AndyS
15:56:09 [pchampin]
15:56:42 [pchampin]
AndyS: if you implemented the syntax for Turtle,
15:56:48 [pchampin]
... would there be any more work to be compliant?
15:57:25 [pchampin]
... that would be the practical approach of many implementers
15:58:16 [AndyS]
pchampin: have a python script to test implementation using SPARQL-star to test
15:58:44 [AndyS]
... approximation to investigate what system did
15:59:08 [olaf]
15:59:25 [olaf]
15:59:33 [AndyS]
... support inference in a consistent way
15:59:56 [olaf]
16:00:00 [pchampin]
ack olaf
16:00:07 [AndyS]
... e.g. don't some "leak" triples not others
16:00:10 [rivettp]
gotta drop
16:00:13 [rivettp]
16:01:24 [AndyS]
olaf: what consequences of semantics does this have?
16:02:02 [AndyS]
pchampin: e.g. rdflib - has D-entailment on literals. Triple stores != exactly the triple retrieved
16:02:19 [AndyS]
(rdflib is not the only system to do that)
16:03:00 [pchampin]
16:03:09 [AndyS]
... tests are tagged with an entailment regime. Some are OWL (uses owl:sameAs), some D-entailment.
16:03:52 [AndyS]
... conclusion: we need something though still unclear what.
16:03:59 [pchampin]
16:04:17 [Fabio]
no no go ahead.
16:04:19 [Fabio]
you can close now,.
16:04:40 [william]
gotta go
16:04:41 [william]
16:05:48 [AndyS]
bye all!
16:05:50 [ora]
16:05:50 [gatemezing]
thanks all!
16:05:50 [Fabio]
thx bye
16:05:51 [gatemezing]
16:05:52 [ora]
16:05:54 [olaf]
Thanks for today! Bye
16:05:56 [Doerthe]
16:05:57 [AndyS]
zakim, end meeting
16:05:57 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been ora, rivettp, olaf, gatemezing, pchampin, thomas, present, Fabio_Vitali, AndyS, TallTed, gkellogg, Doerthe, william, Fabio, /-0
16:06:00 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:06:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Zakim
16:06:02 [Zakim]
I am happy to have been of service, AndyS; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
16:06:06 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rdf-star
16:06:11 [olaf]
16:06:12 [thomas_]
16:06:13 [AndyS]
rrsagent, please excuse us
16:06:13 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in :
16:06:13 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: pchampin to make the center bubble more salient and the bold keywords less salient [1]
16:06:13 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:06:13 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: pchampin to move the TEP entailment regime to §7 and extend it to the rest of the vocabulary [2]
16:06:13 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:06:13 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:06:14 [olaf]
olaf has left #rdf-star