Meeting minutes
<pfps> both minutes look fine
Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: 1 , 2
<ktk> PROPOSAL: Accept last week's and two week's ago minutes https://
<gkellogg> +1
<pfps> +1
+1
<TallTed> +1
<pchampin> +1
<enrico> +1
<niklasl> +1
<ktk> +1
RESOLUTION: Accept last week's and two week's ago minutes https://
Proposal for next week's discussion 3
ktk: discussion continues from last week
… "can an id reify more than one triple?"
… (link not yet ready)
<TallTed> +1 continue last week's, next week (and perhaps tomorrow as well?)
ktk: will send up an invite like last time
enrico: we can have the SemTF meeting
… tomorrow
<TallTed> ack
Review of open actions, available at 4
w3c/rdf-star-wg#113
<gb> Action 113 Mark specs are being updatable (on gkellogg)
gkellogg: resolution needed for w3c/
… adds text to allow spec updates as per W3C process
pchampin: resolution needed
gkellogg: it reserves the right to become a maintenance/living spec.
pchampin: means we can do more than editorial fixes
… new features can be added (in a controlled way)
<TallTed> +1 do the things to make the specs fully maintainable (bugfixes, new features, etc.)
gkellogg: this is a necessary step - one less thing to do later
… other steps needed such a list of WG members
niklasl: Q - does this there is mean the specs are still still RDF 1.2?
… can it be RDF 1.3?
gkellogg: we should seek advice from other groups
… minor errata unlikely to be a bump of version
andys: want to be sure the limits of changes that we can make to the spec; presumably, only compatible changes.
pchampin: add new features, no incompatible changes
<AndyS> s/chanage/changes/
<ktk> PROPOSAL: We want to allow class 4 changes in all REC track deliverables
<gkellogg> +1
<TallTed> +1
<ktk> +1
<pfps> +1
<Souri> +1
+1
<pchampin> +1
<niklasl> +0.5 (it sounds dangerous, but I guess the alternative is worse...)
fsasaki: what about class 5 updates? (registries)
<fsasaki> +1
tallted: W3C registries not IETF etc
<gkellogg> https://
<TallTed> https://
<niklasl> "Changes that add new functionality, such as new elements, new APIs, new rules, etc."
ktk: e.g. SPARQL spec
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Action 113 Mark specs as being updatable (on gkellogg)
RESOLUTION: We want to allow class 4 changes in all REC track deliverables
tallted: this is a preliminary change.
Review of pull requests, available at 5
ktk: Grammar updates --
gkellogg: these are for Turtle and TriG
… leave open - maybe turn into drafts to take them off the list
Issue Triage, available at 6
ktk: "where are triple terms allowed?"
… (pfps)
<gb> Issue 80 where are triple terms allowed (by pfps) [needs discussion] [spec:substantive]
gkellogg: may be confusion with our changes in progress
… we expect reifiers to be subject or object
<pfps> Agreed
gkellogg: and triple terms as objects (behind "agreed syntax")
souri: In NT: we have :e rdf:reifies <<( :s :p :o )>> ?
… object position
<niklasl> +1
gkellogg: yes - object position and maybe restricted to some predicates
<Souri> agreed
gkellogg: can close issue when minutes published
niklasl: canonicalization issue
… will need discussion at some point.
pchampin: probably the chairs should triage the triage.
gkellogg: canonicalization depends a mapping to RDF 1.1 -- if round trippable least impact
… algorithms have a formal grounding
<niklasl> +1
gkellogg: this WG should consider a round-trip mapping
<gb> Issue 115 not found
TallTed: last entry has a title of TH. What is it?
<Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to ask about line 89, issue "#115", "TH" (doesn't exist in rdf-star-wg)
<TallTed> next item
<pchampin> w3c/
ktk: PR in-progess for the charter extension
<gb> Pull Request 57 Charter extension 2024-03 (by pchampin)
enrico: there is a SemanticsTF meeting tomorrow
pchampin: regrets for that meeting.