14:49:12 RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star 14:49:12 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/05/06-rdf-star-irc 14:49:14 RRSAgent, make logs Public 14:49:15 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Pierre-Antoine 14:49:31 meeting: RDF-star 14:49:35 agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star/2022May/0000.html 14:49:35 clear agenda 14:49:35 agenda+ Announcements and newcomers 14:49:35 agenda+ Open actions 14:49:35 agenda+ WG chartering 14:49:35 agenda+ Schedule next call 14:49:37 agenda+ Open-ended discussions 14:50:10 Previous meeting: https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/Minutes/2022-04-08.html 14:50:15 chair: Pierre-Antoine 14:50:36 regrets: AndyS 14:50:46 present+ 14:57:32 TallTed has joined #rdf-star 14:59:05 Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star 15:01:26 gkellogg has joined #rdf-star 15:02:40 olaf has joined #rdf-star 15:03:54 Doerthe has joined #rdf-star 15:04:12 present+ 15:04:16 present+ 15:04:16 present+ 15:04:24 present+ 15:04:46 present+ 15:07:13 scribe: olaf 15:07:19 zakim, next item 15:07:19 agendum 1 -- Announcements and newcomers -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:07:33 q? 15:07:56 pchampin: new bot on the IRC 15:08:18 ... ghurlbot 15:08:37 ... should write of title github issues that are mentioned 15:09:07 ... Different topic: tried "Matrix" (?) as an alternative to IRC 15:09:20 fabio has joined #rdf-star 15:09:23 s/ (?)// 15:09:28 hello 15:09:29 q? 15:09:35 zakim, open next item 15:09:35 agendum 2 -- Open actions -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:09:44 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aaction 15:10:03 q+ 15:10:08 pchampin: still archived open items 15:10:21 ack pchampin 15:10:29 #247 15:10:30 -> Issue 247 [not found] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/247 15:10:47 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/247 15:10:59 w3c/rdf-star#247 15:10:59 -> Issue 247 [not found] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/247 15:11:02 ... about publishing the final report 15:11:31 ... still on it 15:11:37 still not finding... 15:12:00 ... but not working to have danbri push the publish button 15:12:17 q+ 15:12:30 @fabio: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/247 15:12:30 -> @fabio https://github.com/fabio 15:12:34 ack Pierre-Antoine 15:12:37 ack olaf 15:13:28 ghurlbot, discussing w3c/rdf-star 15:13:28 TallTed, OK 15:13:34 #247 15:13:34 -> Issue 247 ping DanBri about publishing the final report on the CG page (pchampin), action https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/247 15:13:38 :-) 15:14:09 gkellogg: danbri may still wait for opposition against the chartering 15:14:49 q? 15:14:55 pchampin: suprised that there was no discussion on the SemWeb mailing list in response to the email there, about one month ago 15:15:32 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aaction 15:15:39 ghurlbot, status? 15:15:39 TallTed, the delay is 15, issues are on, names are on and the repositories are https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter 15:15:49 ghurlbot, discussing w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter 15:15:49 Pierre-Antoine, OK 15:16:12 #29 15:16:12 -> Issue 29 Add Ora Lassila as one of the expected chair (pchampin), action https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/29 15:16:42 pchampin: PR to explicitly add Ora as a possible chair 15:17:00 q? 15:17:06 #27 15:17:06 -> Issue 27 Add text to clearly state that existing RDF 1.1 data will remain valid in syntax and semantics. (pchampin), action https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/27 15:17:09 ... while Ora agreed during the last call, the PR is still pending, waiting for Ora's approval 15:17:45 pchampin: next PR, for issue 27 15:18:05 ... no, oops, the PR still needs to be created 15:18:41 > The group should ensure that any RDF 1.1 data remains valid in this new version. Furthermore, any RDF or RDFS entailment drawn under RDF 1.1 semantics should also remain valid in this new version. 15:18:42 ... it is actually merged 15:19:18 that was PR #31 15:19:18 -> Pull Request 31 [closed] make it explicit that the group will aim for backward compatibility (pchampin) https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/31 15:19:50 #25 15:19:51 -> Issue 25 WG timeline ? (pchampin), action https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/25 15:20:10 addressed by #33 15:20:10 -> Pull Request 33 set timeline to 24 months, as resolved for #25 (pchampin) https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/33 15:20:20 ... PR about proposing timeline 15:20:37 ... editors have approved this PR already 15:20:44 #28 15:20:44 -> Issue 28 add an explicit rationale about the choice of documents to include (pchampin), action https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/28 15:21:00 ... but it will be left open until begin of next week, in case someone else still wants to chime in 15:21:18 PR #32 15:21:18 -> Pull Request 32 explain the rationale behing the list of specifications (pchampin) https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/32 15:21:53 PR about issue 28, editors have approved that one as well; will be left open until next Monday 15:21:54 q? 15:22:04 #26 15:22:04 -> Issue 26 Request expressions of support (pchampin), action https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/26 15:22:08 ... and merged then (unless discussion emerges) 15:22:54 ... To address issue 26, email was sent to the SemWeb mailing list. 15:23:14 ... some expressions of support have come in already 15:23:18 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/labels/expression_of_support 15:23:31 ... currently five 15:24:20 q+ 15:24:32 ack olaf 15:24:37 scribe+ 15:25:02 olaf: KRBD works on the Ontop system. I found out that they published something about R2RML-star 15:26:05 zakim, open next item 15:26:05 agendum 3 -- WG chartering -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:26:46 TallTed: suggestion to create labels for expressions of discent 15:27:02 ... and neutrality 15:28:01 gkellogg: yes some more neutral naming of the tag / type of issue 15:28:04 s/discent/dissent/ 15:28:23 pchampin: we decided on "expression of support" because that's what had been done 15:28:30 ... for the ??? WG 15:28:36 s/???/RCH/ 15:30:00 "opinion about WG ratification" { "neutral about WG ratification", "supports WG ratification", "opposes WG ratification"} 15:30:27 q+ 15:30:39 ack olaf 15:30:45 scribe+ 15:31:02 olaf: I would propose to add another template 15:31:08 ... makes it easier to filter 15:31:14 ... "expression_of_opposition" ? 15:31:23 or { expression_of_support, expression_of_opposition, expression_of_neutrality } 15:32:05 TallTed: no strong opinion, just to address danbri's objection 15:32:19 s/objection/concern/ 15:33:13 PROPOSED: add symetric label + issue template with 'expression_of_opposition' 15:33:23 +0.5 15:33:30 +0.5 15:33:38 +0.75 15:33:43 +1 15:33:44 +0.5 15:33:58 +1 15:34:02 +1 15:34:16 RESOLVED: add symetric label + issue template with 'expression_of_opposition' 15:34:23 s/symetric/symmetric/ 15:34:27 s/symetric/symmetric/ 15:34:37 scribe- 15:35:03 pchampin: charter in good shape (modulo the pending PRs) 15:35:11 ... want to push it one step further 15:35:27 ...the advisory committee has been informed one month ago 15:35:41 ... next, ask opion from W3C management (?) 15:35:54 s/opion/opinion 15:36:07 ... W3C meets every Wednesday 15:36:27 ... could put that one their next agenda 15:36:46 ... what is blocking still is the lack of chairs 15:37:25 ... it is generally possible to have only one chair, but not advisable 15:37:42 ... so, it is urgent to find someone else 15:38:19 Roles have different concerns: chair shepherds group process; editors shepherd/edit the documents. 15:38:29 ... is anyone here interested? 15:38:51 you do not want me, but I am available for low-level menial jobs, if I may be useful somehow 15:39:04 ... Olaf? 15:39:08 q+ 15:40:29 scribe+ 15:41:22 olaf: I have already too little time, and this would be very time consuming 15:41:36 q+ 15:41:57 ack gkellogg 15:42:21 ... also, I (partily) affiliated with Amazon, like Ora, which might not look good 15:43:01 gkellogg: Is it necessary for us to have identified chairs now? 15:43:29 ... maybe the second chair may be identified later 15:44:02 pchampin: for the vote by the advisory committee there needs to be a well-defined team 15:44:28 ...not having identified all chairs may send a bad signal to the AC 15:44:57 ... have chairs from industry is better for the AC 15:45:47 ... on the other hand, having no chair from academy may be problematic because academics may not want to join 15:46:30 ... there may also be more than two chairs 15:47:23 ... with Ora more on the RDF side, it would be good to have someone who is more on the SPARQL 15:47:39 ... someone from the triple store vendors? 15:47:46 OpenLink? 15:48:02 TallTed: no, my plate is more than full 15:48:16 pchampin: Vladimir from Ontotext? 15:48:39 q+ 15:48:46 ack olaf 15:49:03 scribe+ 15:49:17 olaf: I don't know him that well, but it does not hurt to ask 15:55:15 zazuko.com 15:55:27 Adrian Gschwend 16:00:41 q? 16:01:22 ciao! 16:03:04 PROPOSED: le's have our next call 2 weeks from now: 2022-05-20 16:03:08 +1 16:03:09 +1 16:03:09 +1 16:03:12 +1 16:03:13 s/le's/let's/ 16:03:14 +1 16:03:16 +1 16:03:30 +0 16:03:37 RESOLVED: let's have our next call 2 weeks from now: 2022-05-20 16:03:47 ciao again! 16:04:07 olaf has left #rdf-star 16:27:30 ghurlbot, status 16:27:30 pchampin, the delay is 15, issues are on, names are on and the repositories are https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star 16:27:34 #1 16:27:34 -> Issue 1 [closed] Should RDF-star and SPARQL-star be 2 separate WGs (pchampin) https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/1 17:57:15 ghurlbot has joined #rdf-star 18:18:18 ghurlbot has joined #rdf-star 18:38:31 ghurlbot has joined #rdf-star