W3C

– DRAFT –
RDF-star

12 November 2021

Attendees

Present
AndyS, Doerthe, fabio, gkellogg, ora, pchampin
Regrets
olaf
Chair
-
Scribe
AndyS

Meeting minutes

Announcements and newcomers

Open actions

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aaction

Conformance section

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/3

ACTION: AndyS to make a PR to address issue #3

Debunking RDF-star myths in the intro

<fabio> hello

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/64

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/219

<<>> are unique terms in a graph -- so not a straight replacement for LPG (or all refication usages) - <<>> are a building block.

PFPS wants earlier mention of opaquacity..

phcampin: don't want intro to be too long.
… but should have longer than we currently have.

<TallTed> Might it be worth encouraging authors of those now- (possibly always-) erroneous papers to add some sort of note to that effect to (or at least nearby) those papers?

<gkellogg> +1 to adding such material to the intro.

<TallTed> +1 for adding to the RDF-star intro, for sure

pchampin: can suggest to the authors.
… some triplestore vendor examples are also misleading.

<TallTed> Yes, I'm not suggesting a wall-of-shame, but rather reaching out to the authors directly.

ACTION: ora to suggest to Olaf and Bryan to amend their paper on arXiv

ACTION: pchampin to make a PR to address issues #69 and #219

<fabio> "Common misunderstandings about RDF*"

<fabio> It looks more material for a FAQ than a section in the document

<TallTed> Common misperceptions about...

<TallTed> *heh* as IRC hiccups and reveals fabio's "Common misunderstandings" :-)

pchampin: material is already in the report - we are trying to help readers from jumping to a wrong conclusion basd on old material

<fabio> Excusatio non petita accusation manifesta

fabio: may be risky to put too early

<fabio> accusatio

<fabio> I have it in Latin, sorry

gkellogg: support adding clarification text.

<fabio> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excusatio_non_petita,_accusatio_manifesta

gkellogg: balance to be struck regarding negatives and positives.

<TallTed> "Common troublesome misconceptions..." or "Common misperceptions that can lead to failure of interop" or ...

<TallTed> At least flagging that such exist should be in the intro. Full details may be better placed elsewhere and linked from intro.

pchampin: will propose text

Publishing a final report

pchampin: these are the only open actions needing work - rest are discussion-ish or "later"

pchampin: on the path to chartering the WG.
… publish at a dated URL

+1 to final report

<pchampin> PROPOSED: after the remaining PRs are merged, defer any new issue to the future WG, and publish a final report

<pchampin> +1

<TallTed> +1

<gkellogg> +1

+1

<Doerthe> +1

<fabio> +1

<ora> +1

<ora> sorry

RESOLUTION: after the remaining PRs are merged, defer any new issue to the future WG, and publish a final report

pchampin: can still update editors draft is necessary.
… ideally not updating the final report

<TallTed> CG Final Report is similar to a NOTE. Can be updated/replaced whenever a group that has control over it wants.

<fabio> So this is the final meeting of this group?

pchampin: we need to accept the PRs and vote on the final report.
… also charter discussion

WG chartering

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/1

pchampin: one or two WGs? touchs on RDF and SPARQL , then maybe split work streams. Closely related anyway so 2 has little advantage.

ora: multiple WG -- unless there is a clear separation, then one is better.
… RDF , RDFS were two WG and was a bit confusing.
… bigger WG can have task forces - coordination is the key.

pchampin: one WG.

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/2

<TallTed> should note the current understanding of the group, in at least a few words, when closing these issues

pchampin: RDF/XML - mixed feelings about whether to include or not.

<gkellogg> RDFa can technically work on XML, not just HTML.

pchampin: may be "any XML serialization" so TriX-star would be better approach - includes datasets.
… addresses the "XML toolchain" even if not update RDF/XML.

ora: RDF/XML ... pass it's sell-by date. (scribe: +1)
… happy to leave it alone

gkellogg: compatibility issues if reusing existing reification hook.
… make RDF/XML "archaic"
… trix -- tighten up -- claim is use in stylesheet

pchampin: some perception that RDF-star "is" reification -- it's not.

<pchampin> PROPOSAL: mark the updating of RDF/XML as optional in the draft charter

<pchampin> +1

<fabio> +1

<gkellogg> +1

+1

<Doerthe> +1

<TallTed> +1

<ora> +1

RESOLUTION: mark the updating of RDF/XML as optional in the draft charter

ACTION: pchampin to mark RDF/XML as optional in the charter

<pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/6

qkellogg: note CSV, TSV formats
… and CSVW
… some uptick in interest in CSVW
… need a way to give option to update

AndyS: can we enumerate the "documents in scope" so if the WG has the energy, then they can be done.
… (R2RML, SHACL, RDFa, JSON-LD)
… and OWL

pchampin: many possible documents

AndyS: RIF

pchampin: will ask team for advice

ACTION: pchampin to ask in W3C about how broad the charter could be

<fabio> thank you!

<AndyS> Next meeting: December 3rd due to US Thanksgiving.

Summary of action items

  1. AndyS to make a PR to address issue #3
  2. ora to suggest to Olaf and Bryan to amend their paper on arXiv
  3. pchampin to make a PR to address issues #69 and #219
  4. pchampin to mark RDF/XML as optional in the charter
  5. pchampin to ask in W3C about how broad the charter could be

Summary of resolutions

  1. after the remaining PRs are merged, defer any new issue to the future WG, and publish a final report
  2. mark the updating of RDF/XML as optional in the draft charter
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 159 (Fri Nov 5 17:37:14 2021 UTC).

Diagnostics

Found 'Next meeting:' not followed by a URL: 'December 3rd due to US Thanksgiving.'.

Maybe present: phcampin, qkellogg