Meeting minutes
Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: 1 , 2
ktk: Any remarks on last two meeting minutes?
james: Are the remarks by niklas completely accurate?
niklasl: Minutes are not completely verbatim.
james: But didn't you say the exact opposite?
<thomas> https://
ktk: easiest to correct is to edit and send new version to chairs and contact
thomas: I said something somewhat different as well, but it's not important enough for corrections.
<ktk> PROPOSAL: Approve minutes of last two meetings, pending changes from niklas
<pfps> +1
<AndyS> +1
<thomas> +1
<gtw> +1
<james> +1
<AZ> +1
<ktk> +1
<niklasl> +1
<eBremer> +1
<TallTed> +1
<Souri> +1
<doerthe> +1
RESOLUTION: Approve minutes of last two meetings, pending changes from niklas
Prioritization of next week's topics 3
ktk: topics for next week
ktk: Ora and I were happy about last week.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 141 Which parties carry what costs of text/turtle changes, and do those outweigh which benefits for whom? (by RubenVerborgh) [needs discussion]
ktk: There was a post from Ruben about taking up Issue 141.
pfps: This is something about surface syntax so I don't see the large-scale implications.
andys: we do have to address this one sometime soon.
doerthe: we reached out to see if Ruben could join but he responded that he has no time to join the meeting.
doerthe: and he said everything in his messages
james: the group does have to contend with this
pfps: I would prefer that this not be first so that other things can be discussed
andys: we do have to address this and we have to work out a way to proceed
<AndyS> w3c/
<gb> Issue 132 Turtle Grammar: Collections and blank node property lists in triple terms (by doerthe) [needs discussion]
thomas: syntax issues need to be discussed
ktk: which one?
thomas: streamline Turtle syntactic sugar #131
<gb> Issue 131 Streamline Turtle-star syntactic sugar and future-proof it for graphs (by rat10) [needs discussion]
andys: that appears to be more than a syntax issue
thomas: but it does include syntax
pfps: some issues on the list were discussed and should be removed from the list
ktk: dirlangstring items should be removed from the needs discussion list
ktk: should #150 be considered discussed
<gb> Issue 150 not found
ktk: removing discussion label from #150
ktk: any more suggestions on priorities?
doerthe: there was a straw poll on #138 but no final resolution
<gb> Issue 138 triple terms in subject position - issues with RDF/XML? (by william-vw) [bug] [needs discussion]
<TallTed> w3c/
<gb> Issue 138 Triple Terms in Subject Position (by rat10) [ms:CR] [spec:substantive]
doerthe: there are two issues #138 and #138 (rdf concepts)
<niklasl> I agree; not just yet.
ktk: #49 needs gregg who will not be here next week
<gb> CLOSED Action 49 put in the repo the "source of truth" for labels (on pchampin) due 13 Apr 2023
andys: what about unstar?
niklasl: we should talk about that
niklasl: what about Concepts? is there a clear plan on what needs to go in for CR?
andys: how about discussing Concepts in two weeks?
Review of pull requests, available at 4
pfps: I'll merge the editorial ones after the meeting, unless there are complaints now, also dirlangstring
<ktk> Souri: are you logged in?
<niklasl> Silence is approval?
<niklasl> Good.
<niklasl> w3c/
<gb> Pull Request 23 Address various errata (by niklasl) [Editorial]
niklasl: I'll merge in #23 as it has sat long enough for an editorial PR
<gb> CLOSED Action 23 work on conformance proposal (on Antoine-Zimmermann) due 23 Feb 2023
<niklasl> w3c/
<gb> Issue 15 For parts of a triple, consider using "kinds" instead of "types" in primer (by kvistgaard) [spec:editorial]
niklasl: my edits should close some issues - wait for a bit and close if no comments?
tallted: also send a message about the pending close
pfps: PR #33 might be easy to deal with - discuss next week?
<gb> Issue 33 Use Case: Concept of Graph/Dataset without quoted triples (by gkellogg) [use-case]
ktk: I'll move it reasonably high up
Issue Triage, available at 5
pfps: many issues interact with whether the WG will even work on SPARQL exists
ktk: OK, I'll move the issue up in the priority list
pfps: is anyone working on the editorial issues ?
pfps: editors should look at this list and resolve them
Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
<enrico> I am on a train, so I will say it here: semantics meeting is happening tomorrow
niklasl: semantic meeting tomorrow?
enrico: yes
<enrico> thanx