15:02:28 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:02:28 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/04/08-rdf-star-irc
15:02:30 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:02:31 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin
15:02:34 <pchampin> meeting: RDF-star
15:02:39 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
15:02:40 <pchampin> chair: pchampin
15:03:04 <pchampin> Previous meeting: https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/Minutes/2022-03-25.html
15:03:12 <olaf> present+
15:03:12 <pchampin> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star/2022Apr/0000.html
15:03:12 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:03:12 <agendabot> agenda+ Announcements and newcomers
15:03:12 <agendabot> agenda+ Open actions
15:03:12 <agendabot> agenda+ WG chartering
15:03:12 <agendabot> agenda+ Schedule next call
15:03:14 <agendabot> agenda+ Open-ended discussions
15:03:23 <pchampin> present+
15:04:16 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
15:04:20 <ora> present+
15:04:22 <Dominik_T> present+
15:04:30 <pchampin> present+
15:06:20 <pchampin> regrets: Fabio Vitali
15:07:07 <pchampin> scribe: olaf
15:07:16 <pchampin> zakim, open next item
15:07:16 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements and newcomers -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:07:49 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-star
15:08:05 <olaf> pchampin: hello
15:08:12 <olaf> ... hello again
15:08:25 <AndyS> present+
15:08:50 <pchampin> q?
15:09:02 <pchampin> zakim, open next item
15:09:02 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Open actions -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:09:12 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aaction
15:09:44 <pchampin> -> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/255 RDF-dev calendar
15:10:06 <pchampin> https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/677cd671-7ce4-41eb-b839-ce605793e943
15:10:10 <olaf> ... W3C calendar infrastructure used for the agenda now
15:10:39 <olaf> ... advantage is that it allows us to subscribe to the ICS stream
15:11:00 <olaf> ... future meetings will be added in that calendar
15:11:17 <olaf> ... No answer from danbri about publishing the CG report
15:12:03 <olaf> ... might resort to Twitter
15:13:02 <pchampin> q?
15:13:11 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aaction
15:13:52 <olaf> ... adding an explicit rationale for the (types of) docs included in the charter
15:13:55 <pchampin> q?
15:14:01 <olaf> ... will be addressed soon
15:14:04 <pchampin> zakim, open next item
15:14:04 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- WG chartering -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:14:31 <olaf> ... two things about the charter ...
15:14:59 <olaf> ... first, advanced notice was emailed to the AC and, then, also to the SemWeb mailing lists
15:15:04 <ora> q+
15:15:11 <pchampin> ack ora
15:15:13 <olaf> ... so far no discussion on the list :-/
15:15:25 <AndyS> q+
15:15:28 <olaf> ora: informed the Amazon AC rep
15:15:35 <pchampin> ack AndyS
15:15:38 <olaf> ... who will vote in favor
15:16:21 <olaf> AndyS: sentiment on the mailing list is full of CFP
15:17:03 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #rdf-star
15:17:07 <olaf> pchampin: as an aside, the CFP-related issue was discussed
15:17:24 <olaf> ... there was an earlier discussion that CFPs are accepted on that mailing list
15:17:59 <olaf> ... the list was kept mainly ofr historical reasons
15:18:06 <olaf> s/ofr/for
15:18:35 <olaf> ... logical would have been that the traffic would have moved to the RDF-DEV list
15:18:47 <AndyS> RDF-dev maling list -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dev/
15:19:11 <pchampin> q?
15:19:51 <olaf> ... one more proposal to gather expressions of interest or disinterest
15:20:05 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues
15:20:23 <olaf> ... for which an issue will be created
15:20:29 <pchampin> -> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/26 "expression of support" tag
15:21:05 <olaf> ... such a tag was created in the repo for another charter
15:21:36 <olaf> ... with the purpose to enable organizations to create issues that represent their expressions of support
15:22:02 <olaf> ... that was a good instrument when bringing the charter in front of the AC
15:22:26 <ora> q+
15:22:29 <pchampin> ack ora
15:22:43 <olaf> ... question would be where we ask people for creating their issue
15:22:56 <olaf> ora: there is a SemWeb group on LinkedIn
15:23:16 <olaf> pchampin: right, there have been some lively discussions there
15:23:18 <pchampin> q?
15:23:48 <pchampin> STRAWPOLL: create an "expression of interest" label on the charter repo, and ask people to create "issues" with that label
15:23:54 <pchampin> +1
15:23:55 <AndyS> +1
15:23:58 <TallTed> +1
15:24:02 <Dominik_T> +1
15:24:03 <olaf> +1 good idea!
15:24:05 <ora> +1
15:24:11 <pchampin> RESOLVED: create an "expression of interest" label on the charter repo, and ask people to create "issues" with that label
15:24:50 <olaf> AndyS: expressions of interest happened within six weeks
15:25:16 <pchampin> ACTION pchampin to create the issue template for "expression of support"
15:26:26 <TallTed> s/support/interest/
15:27:01 <pchampin> -> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/27 add text for backward compatibility
15:27:30 <olaf> pchampin: Andy suggested to mention backwards compatibility explicitly in the charter
15:28:06 <olaf> TallTed: Is it expression of interest or ... support?
15:28:12 <olaf> pchampin: support
15:28:52 <olaf> AndyS: It is only about support for the WG, not for the currently proposed solution
15:29:40 <olaf> pchampin: There was a question of versioning
15:29:40 <TallTed> "expression of support for WG" a/k/a "expression of interest in potential of RDF-star" a/k/a ...
15:29:44 <pchampin> -> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/24 Versioning
15:30:01 <AndyS> q+
15:30:20 <pchampin> ack AndyS
15:30:28 <olaf> ... the deliverables in the charter are called "... v.1.2"
15:30:57 <olaf> AndyS: Another option would be to call it "RDF-star, an extension to RDF 1.1"
15:31:07 <pchampin> q
15:32:14 <olaf> ... downside of this idea is that it might exclude taking care of the errata within the WG
15:33:06 <olaf> pchampin: another downside is that it would allow implementations to stick to RDF 1.1 and still be "up to date"
15:33:30 <olaf> AndyS: it would be nice if there was more RDF work
15:34:30 <pchampin> q?
15:35:21 <olaf> pchampin: saying that this is an optional extension may be less controversial, but it may also contribute to the fragmentation of the ecosystem
15:35:34 <pchampin> q?
15:35:42 <olaf> q+
15:35:47 <pchampin> ack olaf
15:35:50 <pchampin> scribe+
15:36:04 <pchampin> olaf: I don't see any reason at the moment why it shouldn't be called RDF 1.2
15:36:18 <pchampin> ... if a long discussion started, then we may reconsider
15:37:14 <olaf> scribe+
15:37:18 <pchampin> scribe-
15:37:25 <olaf> pchampin: question about chairs
15:38:11 <olaf> ora: yes, it is okay to put my (Ora's) name as a potential chair
15:38:48 <pchampin> action: pchampin to add Ora Lassila as one of the expected chairs
15:39:31 <olaf> pchampin: last open issue is about the timeline
15:39:38 <pchampin> -> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/24 Timeline
15:39:59 <olaf> ... typical timeline for WGs is 2-4 years
15:40:33 <olaf> ... for this one, it would make sense to go for the higher end
15:40:46 <olaf> ... because there are a lot of docs to be updated by this WG
15:41:48 <olaf> ... also not sure how the deadlines for the individual deliverables should be set
15:41:56 <ora> q+
15:42:01 <pchampin> ack ora
15:42:05 <olaf> ... all at the end? ...or scattered within the overall timeline?
15:42:20 <olaf> ora: getting nightmares thinking of 4 years
15:42:43 <olaf> ... if properly scoped, it may be possible in 2 years
15:43:20 <olaf> pchampin: nowadays start with more mature input than in the early days
15:44:10 <ora> q+
15:44:13 <olaf> ... so, yes, maybe it's reasonable to schedule it in 2 years
15:44:21 <pchampin> ack ora
15:44:22 <olaf> ... but also required a lot of man power
15:44:27 <TallTed> Durations below 2 years may make sense when associated CG or similar is able to produce something the broader community accepts as near to CR.  I don't think our planned scope will be fully achievable in less than 2 years.  We might target 2 years and state up front that we see potential need for recharter/extension because of fairly broad scope.
15:44:42 <olaf> ora: establish an optimistic expectation
15:44:56 <olaf> ... if we say "4 years", then it will take 4 years
15:46:38 <olaf> pchampin: okay, there seems to be some agreement or sentiment that 2 years should be the goal
15:46:43 <pchampin> STRAWPOLL: plan for a 2 years charter, planing of rechartering if necessary
15:46:45 <pchampin> +1
15:46:56 <olaf> +1
15:47:15 <Dominik_T> +1
15:47:21 <ora> +1
15:47:23 <TallTed> +1
15:47:33 <TallTed> s/planing/planning/
15:47:44 <pchampin> RESOLVED: plan for a 2 years charter, planing of rechartering if necessary
15:48:20 <olaf> pchampin: next question is about setting a deadline for every doc
15:48:49 <ora> q+
15:48:59 <olaf> ... no point in having a granularity smaller than 6 months
15:49:04 <pchampin> ack ora
15:49:34 <olaf> ora: uncomfortable with the charter specifying such deadlines
15:49:53 <olaf> ... because the WG may realize that something comes up
15:50:18 <olaf> ... preferrable to have the charter mention such dates more as suggestions rather than mandatory
15:50:47 <olaf> pchampin: yes, agree
15:51:28 <TallTed> "Target timeline" is common in charters, tho rarely satisfied in my experience
15:52:18 <TallTed> ("Target timeline" might not be the label that's been used, but it's the meaning.)
15:53:29 <pchampin> zakim, open next topic
15:53:29 <Zakim> I don't understand 'open next topic', pchampin
15:53:30 <olaf> pchampin: when will the next call be?
15:53:33 <pchampin> zakim, open next item
15:53:33 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Schedule next call -- taken up [from agendabot]
15:54:08 <olaf> ... not possible in 3 weeks because of the Web Conf.
15:54:31 <olaf> ... weeks before hard as well
15:54:47 <olaf> ... so, proposal is to have the next call in 4 weeks from now
15:55:28 <pchampin> q?
15:55:51 <pchampin> PROPOSAL: have our next call on the 6th of May
15:55:56 <pchampin> +1
15:56:08 <TallTed> +1
15:56:09 <olaf> +1
15:56:11 <Dominik_T> +0 (I have a scheduled visit to the doctor, I don't know if I will make it)
15:56:36 <ora> +0
15:57:31 <pchampin> RESOLVED: have our next call on the 6th of May (unless something unexpected happens in between)
15:58:16 <pchampin> q?
15:59:32 <pchampin> HAPPY 10 YEARS RDF* :)
16:02:11 <olaf> olaf has left #rdf-star