15:56:06 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:56:10 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-irc
15:56:10 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:56:41 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin
15:56:43 <pchampin> meeting: RDF-star WG weekly meeting
15:57:32 <pchampin> pchampin has changed the topic to: RDF-Star WG — 2023-04-27 Agenda: https://beta.w3.org/events/meetings/f2add3af-6743-4f52-8fcc-4f62c6cdd8af/20230427T120000/#agenda
15:57:46 <pchampin> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:57:58 <pchampin> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/05/04-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:58:14 <pchampin> agenda: https://beta.w3.org/events/meetings/f2add3af-6743-4f52-8fcc-4f62c6cdd8af/20230427T120000/#agenda
15:58:14 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:58:14 <agendabot> agenda+ Scribe: Haudebourg, Timothée (alternate: Alexiev, Vladimir)
15:58:14 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of last week's minutes:  -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:58:14 <agendabot> agenda+ TPAC 2023 attendance
15:58:15 <agendabot> agenda+ Status of "First Public Working Draft" (FPWD)
15:58:17 <agendabot> agenda+ Use case proposal by Peter:  -> 2 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0100.html
15:58:23 <pchampin> ghurlbot, status
15:58:23 <ghurlbot> pchampin, the delay is 15, issues are on, names are on, commands are ignored from RRSAgent and Zakim; and the repository is https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg
15:58:25 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of open actions, available at  -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
15:58:26 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at  -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
15:58:29 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
15:58:31 <agendabot> agenda+ Next week's scribe: Alexiev, Vladimir
15:58:37 <pchampin> agenda?
15:59:16 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
15:59:41 <pfps> present+
16:00:25 <Timothe> present+
16:00:28 <ktk> present+
16:01:07 <gtw> present+
16:01:45 <pchampin> present+
16:01:46 <ora> present+
16:01:52 <Doerthe> Doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:02:01 <Doerthe> present+
16:02:10 <ktk> regrets: ohartig, azimmermann, gkellog
16:02:19 <afs> present+
16:02:49 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
16:03:02 <Dominik_T> present+
16:03:28 <ktk> regrets: ttanon
16:04:04 <Timothe> scribe: Timothe
16:04:12 <ktk> ah didn't notice
16:04:12 <ora> chair: ora
16:04:47 <pchampin> agenda
16:04:50 <pchampin> agenda?
16:05:04 <pchampin> zakim, open item 2
16:05:04 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Approval of last week's minutes:  -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:05:26 <pfps> minutes look fine to me
16:05:35 <Timothe> ora: any comments on last weeks minutes?
16:05:42 <TallTed> present+
16:05:56 <Timothe> ... hearing none
16:06:03 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve last week's minutes
16:06:06 <ora> +1
16:06:07 <pchampin> +1
16:06:07 <Dominik_T> +1
16:06:08 <ktk> +1
16:06:11 <Timothe> +1
16:06:15 <pfps> +1
16:06:17 <TallTed> Zakim, close item 1
16:06:17 <Zakim> agendum 1, Scribe: Haudebourg, Timothée (alternate: Alexiev, Vladimir), closed
16:06:19 <TallTed> +1
16:06:20 <Zakim> I see 8 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:06:20 <Zakim> 2. Approval of last week's minutes:  -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-rdf-star-minutes.html [from agendabot]
16:06:26 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve last week's minutes
16:06:33 <pchampin> zakim, open item 3
16:06:33 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- TPAC 2023 attendance -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:06:53 <pchampin> https://www.w3.org/2023/09/TPAC/
16:07:21 <Timothe> pchampin: TPAC is the big yearly meeting for W3C
16:07:32 <ktk> :-D
16:07:35 <Timothe> ... good opportunity to meet in the flesh
16:08:04 <Timothe> ... in Sevilla, in Spain this year
16:09:00 <afs> 11–15 September
16:09:01 <Timothe> ... if enough people want to come we can let the organization know we want to come
16:09:01 <Timothe> ... it will take place September 11-15
16:09:33 <Timothe> ... people can come for a limited period of time
16:10:01 <Timothe> ... it should be possible to have a hybrid meeting, if we decide to have a session during TPAC
16:10:14 <pfps> It is unlikely that I would go (as no one is paying for my trips), but I could connect (even European time).
16:10:15 <TallTed> I am unlikely to be able to travel. I should be able to attend by screen.
16:10:33 <ora> Strawpoll: Anyone thinking of attending TPAC?
16:10:37 <pchampin> +1
16:10:40 <ktk> +1
16:10:47 <TallTed> -0.9
16:10:49 <ora> +0.75
16:11:10 <Dominik_T> +0.25
16:11:13 <pfps> -0.9 for in person, I would probably connect (and connect for the plenary if that is possible)
16:11:17 <afs> 50/50 attending in person
16:11:20 <afs> q+
16:11:23 <Doerthe> +0 (need to ask financial support first)
16:11:28 <ora> ack afs
16:12:17 <Timothe> andy: it gonna be a good idea to have longer session to get through the backlog
16:12:39 <Timothe> ora: I agree, long meetings can be incredibly productive
16:13:56 <Timothe> ora: there are a lots of "regrets" so we should put that on the mailing list and decide next week
16:13:58 <Timothe> ... any other thoughts?
16:15:17 <ktk> s/andy/afs/
16:15:20 <Timothe> s/andy:/afs:/
16:16:01 <pchampin> ghurlbot, help
16:16:01 <ghurlbot> pchampin, I am a bot to look up and create GitHub issues and
16:16:01 <ghurlbot> … action items. I am an instance of GHURLBot 0.3.
16:16:01 <ghurlbot> … Try "ghurlbot, help commands" or
16:16:01 <ghurlbot> … see https://w3c.github.io/GHURLBot/manual.html
16:16:08 <pchampin> zakim, open item 4
16:16:08 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Status of "First Public Working Draft" (FPWD) -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:16:15 <pchampin> q+
16:16:23 <ora> ack pchampin
16:16:28 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:16:31 <enrico> present+
16:17:24 <afs> ghurlbot, AndyS is afs
16:17:24 <ghurlbot> afs, OK.
16:17:26 <Timothe> pchampin: trying to make progress on my actions, and I realized that I could not do the ??? request, but I'll do that after the meeting.
16:17:56 <pfps> q+ to comment on working with ReSpec
16:18:02 <ora> ack pfps
16:18:02 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to comment on working with ReSpec
16:18:08 <Timothe> ... we are in pretty good shape. I tested all the RDF- tests and they passed
16:18:14 <afs> q+
16:18:33 <Timothe> pfps: I get bot messages because of broken links
16:18:52 <Timothe> ... and I'm still having pains about how respec works, I need some help
16:18:55 <afs> q-
16:19:11 <Timothe> ... emails are not really productive
16:19:18 <Timothe> pchampin: I understand, that's an issue.
16:19:36 <ora> q?
16:19:45 <Timothe> pfps: I find it difficult to ask for help before we are doing deprecated things
16:20:12 <pfps> the deprecated things I see are data-cite, which I believe was added in the conversion to ReSpec
16:20:14 <Timothe> pchampin: we can get rid of them progressively. That's inherited from the old docs and old habits.
16:20:34 <Timothe> ... one way to get faster response is to try on IRC
16:20:46 <Timothe> ... if you mention me by name I should be notified and react
16:20:52 <pfps> q+ to ask about blocking changes
16:21:01 <ora> ack pfps
16:21:01 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to ask about blocking changes
16:21:05 <Timothe> ora: Peter are you problem blockers?
16:21:23 <Timothe> pfps: I don't know. I think to remember broken links are a blocker
16:21:56 <Timothe> ... and one issue is that people request changes on PR and become not responsive. Is there a way of overriding this unresponsiveness?
16:22:47 <Timothe> afs: you can ping them
16:23:09 <Timothe> ... pfps: and its hard to know what PR needs attention
16:23:29 <Timothe> ... in that case pchampin is blocking
16:23:57 <TallTed> q+
16:24:02 <Timothe> pchampin: I'm sorry I have a large backlog. In that kind of cases IRC might also be a solution to contact me
16:24:21 <ktk> ack TallTed
16:24:59 <Timothe> TallTed: if you can highlight issues are hanging around that would help
16:25:10 <pchampin> zakim, open item 5
16:25:10 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Use case proposal by Peter:  -> 2 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0100.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:25:36 <pfps> The basic idea is to generate use cases that have sufficient information to determine whether the results of the working group support the use case.  All else is just details.
16:26:12 <ghurlbot> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/57 -> Issue 57 [not found]
16:26:23 <pfps> At this point what is needed is two approvals by the working group - one to  proceed in upgrading existing use cases and soliciting new ones and one to actually make use of the use cases.
16:26:29 <Timothe> pfps: the basic idea, it is really helpful to have use case to figure out if we are doing the right thing. The rest is details.
16:26:42 <Timothe> ... there is a repo, if we are using wiki or issues is details
16:26:49 <ghurlbot> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/18 -> Action 18 coordinate on proposed resolution on FPWD (on pchampin) due 16 Feb 2023
16:27:26 <pfps> Upgrading use cases will take significant effort so a resolution to do something with them is desirable.
16:27:26 <pfps> 
16:27:30 <Timothe> ... its pointless to do this is the WG is not planning to do something with the use cases.
16:27:48 <pfps> PROPOSED:  Use cases will be used to help direct the technical actions of the working group.
16:27:48 <pfps> 
16:28:03 <pfps> 
16:28:03 <pfps> PROPOSED:  The use case task force will upgrade existing use cases in conjunction with use case proposers and solicit new use cases.
16:28:03 <pfps> 
16:28:14 <Timothe> ... here is one proposal: the WG commits to doing something with the use cases
16:28:42 <TallTed> "UCR" == "Use Cases and Requirements".  In theory, the former drive the latter, which then drive the specs.
16:28:47 <Timothe> ... another proposal: the use case task force commit to upgrading those use cases so the WG can do something with them
16:29:08 <Timothe> ora: the second is a bit vague, its not telling me what I have to do
16:30:06 <pfps> 
16:30:06 <pfps> 
16:30:06 <pfps> PROPOSED:  The working group will select use cases and ensure that quoted triples will solve these selected use cases.
16:30:10 <ora> s/second/first
16:31:06 <Timothe> pfps: its a little bit hard to be more specific, because who knows what shape the use case will have. I don't want to require uses cases to have the exact same information
16:31:45 <Timothe> ... I don't want the use case to be too unspecific either
16:31:52 <TallTed> q+
16:31:58 <ora> ack TallTed
16:32:09 <ora> q+
16:32:42 <Timothe> TallTed: should be a fairly detailed description of what needs to be done that can not be acheive easily with current RDF
16:32:47 <ora> ack ora
16:33:33 <Timothe> ora: so far it sounds fine, I could agree. Should we have a standing item in the agenda about that?
16:33:47 <ktk> q+
16:33:53 <pchampin> q+
16:34:03 <Timothe> pfps: its not like every week we are going to discuss a use case
16:34:07 <ora> ack ktk
16:34:17 <Timothe> pfps: we could have issues that are given tags that show up in the dashboard
16:35:01 <afs> q+
16:35:10 <Timothe> adrian: we should have a common understanding of what is a good use case
16:35:16 <enrico> q+
16:35:16 <pchampin> q-
16:35:23 <ora> ack afs
16:35:27 <ktk> s/adrian:/ktk:/
16:35:52 <Timothe> afs: there is a task force for the use cases
16:36:06 <Timothe> pfps: we didn't meet yet because we don't have any use case to discuss
16:36:21 <ora> ack enrico
16:36:31 <Timothe> ... getting help from the other TF would be nice
16:37:05 <ktk> q+
16:37:09 <Timothe> enrico: what is the problem here? We are unable to use one use case. Why is that?
16:37:13 <TallTed> q+
16:37:13 <ora> ack ktk
16:37:20 <Timothe> s/use one/find one/
16:37:38 <ora> q+
16:37:56 <Timothe> ktk: I could not find one use case that I could not do another way.
16:38:05 <Timothe> pfps: that the purpose of the use case TF
16:38:07 <ora> ack TallTed
16:39:00 <Timothe> TallTed: anyone who claims to have implemented RDF-star is wrong. Because there is no RDF-star yet. They have implemented a thing that we are not going to standardize.
16:39:22 <Timothe> ...then we should not have any fear of implementing something different from the paper
16:39:22 <pchampin> several people have implemented the CG version, and passed the test suite, though
16:39:45 <Timothe> ... the paper from Olaf
16:40:27 <ora> ack ora
16:40:32 <Timothe> ... those people should have joined the group. They still can and be welcome.
16:40:57 <afs> q+
16:41:01 <Timothe> ora: I agree. That's what I've been telling. If you have implemented RDF-star you are on shaky grounds.
16:41:07 <pchampin> q+
16:41:15 <Timothe> ... we should implement this the way we see fit
16:41:17 <pfps> q+ to say that reaching out for use cases will include a suggestion to join the WG
16:41:53 <ktk> q+
16:41:59 <ora> ack afs
16:42:07 <Timothe> ... I've collecting use cases for one graph(?) Next week I will submit the one relative to RDF-star
16:42:51 <ora> ack pchampin
16:43:18 <gtw> s/one graph(?)/(AWS) OneGraph/
16:43:24 <ora> q+
16:44:09 <afs> https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/reports/
16:44:33 <ora> ack pfps
16:44:33 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to say that reaching out for use cases will include a suggestion to join the WG
16:44:53 <ora> ack ktk
16:44:57 <Timothe> pchampin: agree that many implementation rely on the old paper, they have sometime different interpretation of the paper. Some other people have been looking looking at the CG report and are willing to evolve their implementation. I've said before that we should not break all the current implementations. Its not all black or white.
16:45:50 <ora> ack ora
16:45:55 <Timothe> ktk: I've found some implementors, even if they are not in the WG we could contact them to see if they have some concrete use cases
16:46:04 <Timothe> ora: wanted to suggest the same thing
16:46:25 <Timothe> ora: let's reach out to as many such vendors as we can
16:46:50 <Timothe> ... If you are not participating but implementing I feel like you are undermining the W3C process
16:46:55 <ora> q?
16:48:10 <Timothe> TallTed: ourselves tend not to implement until the end of the W3C process
16:49:03 <pfps> can we get to a resolution before time runs out?
16:49:05 <pfps> q+
16:49:14 <ora> ack pfps
16:49:26 <Timothe> pfps: I need a resolution before we can do anything here
16:49:31 <pfps> 
16:49:31 <pfps> PROPOSED:  The working group will select use cases and ensure that quoted triples will solve these selected use cases.
16:49:31 <pfps> 
16:49:40 <ora> +1
16:49:40 <pchampin> +1
16:49:41 <pfps> +1
16:49:41 <afs> +1
16:49:43 <ktk> +1
16:49:46 <gtw> +1
16:49:47 <Timothe> +1
16:49:48 <Doerthe> +1
16:49:51 <Dominik_T> +1
16:49:55 <TallTed> +1
16:49:58 <pfps> RESOLVED:  The working group will select use cases and ensure that quoted triples will solve these selected use cases.
16:49:59 <pfps> 
16:50:00 <enrico> +1
16:50:09 <pfps> PROPOSED:  The use case task force will upgrade existing use cases in conjunction with use case proposers and solicit new use cases.
16:50:09 <pfps> 
16:50:19 <pfps> +1
16:50:19 <ora> +1
16:50:20 <pchampin> +1
16:50:21 <TallTed> +1
16:50:21 <ktk> +1
16:50:22 <Dominik_T> +1
16:50:26 <Doerthe> +1
16:50:26 <Timothe> +1
16:50:26 <enrico> +1
16:50:31 <afs> +0.9
16:52:11 <pfps> RESOLVED:  The use case task force will upgrade existing use cases in conjunction with use case proposers and solicit new use cases.
16:52:11 <pfps> 
16:52:12 <Timothe> pfps: the TF could be able to accept so "proto-use cases"
16:52:20 <afs> +1
16:52:32 <pchampin> zakim, open item 6
16:52:32 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- Review of open actions, available at  -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:53:01 <Timothe> afs: there is one issue I want to highlight
16:53:10 <afs> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/9#issuecomment-1525674611
16:54:10 <Timothe> ... I would like to get a design together. It is going to affect many documents.
16:54:14 <TallTed> q+
16:54:29 <Timothe> ora: would you like us to put it on the agenda for next week?
16:55:12 <Timothe> afs: this is clearly a change to RDF. So yes I think we need to discuss it and formally agree.
16:55:59 <Timothe> TallTed: you said it is internationalization but the issue title is text direction. It should be renamed then.
16:56:58 <Timothe> afs: it's not my issue so I can't change the title. The issue is labeled so that will grab the attention of the internationalization group.
16:57:48 <afs> ack TallTed
16:57:52 <TallTed> s/can't change/won't change/
16:58:05 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:58:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:58:14 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:58:45 <TallTed> scribe: Timothe
16:58:50 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:58:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:59:16 <pchampin> regrets+ ohartig, azimmermann, gkellog
16:59:26 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:59:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:59:57 <pchampin> s|agendum 6 -- Review of open actions, available at  -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]|AOB
16:59:59 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:00:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:00:20 <TallTed> i/please title/scribe: Timothe/
17:00:29 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:00:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:01:09 <pchampin> i|afs: there is one issue I want to highlight|Topic: AOB
17:01:25 <pchampin> scribe+ Timothe
17:01:28 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:01:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:02:45 <pchampin> scribe: Timothe
17:03:00 <pchampin> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:03:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/27-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:04:22 <pchampin> RRSAgent, bye
17:04:22 <RRSAgent> I see no action items