Meeting minutes
agenda
<kaz> Mar-27
Ege: now we added a quick schedule point
… to describe the overall plan for the next calls
previous minutes
Ege: we already reviewed it
… do you have any objections?
… minutes approved
PRs
Ege: we already merge a couple of easy PRs
<kaz> PR 1970 - Prettier Formatter Version alignment and GH Action
<kaz> PR 1992 - Small Readme Improvements
Ege: the readme was updated with the correct links to the REC and main branch
… I also explained why we are using prettier
… any remarks on PR 1992 ?
Luca: tiny remark we can restrict the actions so that they apply only if something relevant changes
… we can look at it later
Ege: we have already a filter for it
Luca: but that is the ignore for priettier
… you can limit also the action activation
Ege: right, created a issue
Kaz: about previous changes we might improve the text about branch
Ege: good point, updating right away
Kaz: you might add also a link for the implementation report
Ege: right
PR #1993
<kaz> PR 1993 - Fix respec error on section id
Ege: there is a respec error shown
… it was my fault
… it is really small change I updated an id
… but there are some formatting changes too
… I'm merging it
Tool chain
Ege: we talked about two PRs last week
… the first is 1989
… I removed the requirements.md file
… the content is under README.md in the toolchain folder
… the rendered document contains the highlevel diagram
… current source of truth consists of many document the goal of this work to transition to something leaner
Ege: then in the document there is a section about requirements
… nothing changed there
… we still need to think about the requirements of the Input resources
… any questions?
Kaz: I think we should save the requirements.md file
… I mean recorded in the minutes
<Ege> https://
Ege: about the toolchain analysis file I updated the table with new entries and explanations about the each feature.
… we can work later on to add other points
<Ege> https://
Ege: there are some conflicts
… I'll merge the PR later
… probably something about enconding or line ending
Ege: once we finalize the project management up and running we can tackle the issues regarding the toolchain.
… any other points?
Kaz: we are getting closer to the final goal
… what to do next?
Ege: the next small thing to do is filling the table in the tool-analysis.md
… and at the same time we can start experimenting and publish the results
… madha already has something preliminary
… from our first study it seems that linkML it is a good candidate
… we can try it
… and get a first feeling
Cristiano: it is a good start
… but the question is who is starting
Luca: if you have oneOf you can support Type/Type[]
… the question is weather we like the output
Mahda: true good point
… it is supported also with post processing
Luca: I looked at linkML and TreeLDR
… LinkML seems better matained
… however TreeLDR is maintained by someone closer to W3C
… both tools have APIs for generations
… it means that we can extend both libraries
Ege: we can start with LinkML
… and presents the results within two weeks or so
Kaz: Maybe this is kind of overkill at the moment, but I've started to wonder about the relationship between our toolchain and ReSpec/Bikeshed.
… Technically, it would be even nicer to combine somehow the toolchain with respec
Ege: we will keep using ReSpec for sure
… we haven't looked at bikeshed
… let's keep track of this in a issue
Luca: bikeshed makes easier to write specifications, it is something we can use but we need a single point of truth
… we can have linkML files to be a SpT and then we can later configure the result with Bikeshed
Luca: I'd like to have bikeshed in the toolchain because it can digest MD files.
… however, it can not be the only tool
Refectoring
Ege: in particular it is about refactoring the binding mechanism
… moving it to the TD spec
… we have an issue
<kaz> PR 1987 - Moving Binding Mechanism Text to TD
Ege: in particular we plan to move chapter 4
… there are some overlaps
… we need a simple plan
… only the core document will be moved
… there might be other working group documents that will be impacted
… from an intial look we pinpointed some overlaps
… we can start by copy&past into the TD spec between chaper 7 and 8
… after this initial PR we can re-arrange the content to fit better
… another way is to move bit by bit
Cristiano: I like the plan A, but maybe we can put the binding section before 7
Ege: yeah it might work
Kaz: I agree with plan A too
… we can later improve it in the TD calls
… any favorite place for the new section?
Luca: I don't have it really, which ever is faster.
… just move the text
… we can re-order that later
<cris1> +1
Ege: we can even re-evaluate the current ordering of the sections in the future
… any other points?
[adjourned]