16:59:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
16:59:25 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-rdf-star-irc
16:59:25 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
16:59:25 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:59:26 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), pchampin
16:59:46 <fsasaki> present+
16:59:46 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-star
16:59:47 <pchampin> meeting: RDF-Star WG biweekly meeting
16:59:52 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
16:59:52 <fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
16:59:56 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-star
17:00:08 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
17:00:11 <gkellogg> present+
17:00:20 <gtw> present+
17:00:20 <TallTed> present+
17:00:20 <Dominik_T> present+
17:00:35 <tl> present+
17:00:39 <eBremer> eBremer has joined #rdf-star
17:00:41 <niklasl> present+
17:01:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:01:07 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/f1d5533f-ff2b-4d70-941c-db47b0b5918d/20250220T120000/
17:01:07 <agendabot> clear agenda
17:01:07 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/02/06-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2025/02/13-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:01:07 <agendabot> agenda+ Publish RDF Primer as a draft note
17:01:07 <agendabot> agenda+ Closing stale issues
17:01:07 <agendabot> agenda+ Prioritization of next week's topics -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/6
17:01:07 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
17:01:07 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
17:01:07 <ktk> present+
17:01:10 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
17:01:11 <AZ> present+
17:01:11 <agendabot> agenda+ Issue Triage, available at -> 6 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5
17:01:12 <ora> present+
17:01:12 <olaf> present+
17:01:14 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
17:01:15 <ora> chair+
17:02:02 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/02/14-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:02:02 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/02/21-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:02:07 <pchampin> present+
17:02:18 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
17:02:27 <doerthe> present+
17:02:35 <AndyS> present+
17:02:42 <eBremer> present+
17:02:52 <fsasaki> agenda?
17:02:57 <james> james has joined #rdf-star
17:03:03 <ktk> zakim, open item 1
17:03:03 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/02/06-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2025/02/13-rdf-star-minutes.html --
17:03:06 <Zakim> ... taken up [from agendabot]
17:03:18 <pfps> look fine to me :-)
17:03:21 <fsasaki> ora: minutes approval OK?
17:03:24 <fsasaki> +1
17:03:32 <olaf> +1
17:03:45 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve last two meetings' minutes
17:03:48 <ora> +1
17:03:52 <gkellogg> +0
17:03:53 <Dominik_T> +1
17:03:54 <eBremer> +1
17:03:55 <gtw> +1
17:03:55 <AndyS> +1
17:03:56 <tl> +1
17:03:56 <pchampin> +1
17:03:57 <ktk> +1
17:04:00 <niklasl> +1
17:04:03 <james> +0
17:04:12 <fsasaki> RESOLUTION: minutes from last two meetings approved
17:04:27 <niklasl> Looks fine (I also got my wording three(?) weeks ago updated by pchampin as asked for by james on 6 feb).
17:04:27 <AZ> +1
17:04:32 <TallTed> +1
17:04:36 <pfps> +1
17:04:37 <doerthe> +1
17:04:41 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve last two meetings' minutes
17:04:55 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:04:55 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Publish RDF Primer as a draft note -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:04:58 <TallTed> s/RESOLUTION: minutes from last two meetings approved//
17:04:59 <fsasaki> s/RESOLUTION: minutes from last two meetings approved//
17:05:14 <fsasaki> ora: RDF primer will be a note
17:05:23 <ktk> q?
17:05:25 <fsasaki> ... we have not published a draft version yet
17:05:28 <pchampin> q+
17:05:29 <tl> q+
17:05:35 <ora> ack pchampin
17:05:36 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
17:05:40 <AndyS> q+
17:05:41 <niklasl> q+
17:05:42 <Souri> present+
17:05:47 <fsasaki> pa: we need a group decision to publish a first draft
17:05:54 <fsasaki> ... could be bundled in one resolution
17:05:56 <AndyS> q-
17:06:16 <fsasaki> ... need a resolution to use echidna
17:06:23 <fsasaki> ... using echidna would be a good thing
17:06:38 <fsasaki> ora: so every time we merge a pull request it publishes automatically?
17:06:40 <fsasaki> pa: yes
17:06:51 <fsasaki> ora: so we decide on publishing and then on echidna
17:07:11 <pchampin> https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/
17:07:24 <fsasaki> pa: this URI points to version 1.0 of primer
17:07:37 <fsasaki> ... version 1.1 is at RDF
17:07:46 <fsasaki> ... we want a version less short name
17:08:36 <ora> ack tl
17:09:05 <fsasaki> tl: would like to wait a week, but would not block publishing now
17:09:18 <ora> ack niklasl
17:09:31 <fsasaki> niklas: agree
17:10:01 <fsasaki> ....  and good to have echidna on place
17:10:01 <gkellogg> q+
17:10:02 <james0> james0 has joined #rdf-star
17:10:09 <james0> present+
17:10:09 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:10:23 <fsasaki> greg: support of dark mode work and style changes, should be propagated to other specs
17:10:27 <fsasaki> niklas: agree
17:10:43 <fsasaki> ... would like to discuss some details on this, after this call or tomorrow
17:10:46 <ora> PROPOSAL: Publish RDF Primer as a Draft Note
17:10:49 <fsasaki> ora: I can stay after the call
17:10:57 <gkellogg> +1
17:10:58 <fsasaki> +1
17:10:59 <niklasl> +1
17:10:59 <AndyS> +1
17:11:00 <ora> +1
17:11:03 <ktk> +1
17:11:04 <pchampin> +1
17:11:05 <doerthe> +1
17:11:05 <olaf> +1
17:11:07 <tl> +0
17:11:11 <gtw> +1
17:11:12 <james0> +1
17:11:15 <Dominik_T> +1
17:11:15 <Souri> +1
17:11:20 <TallTed> +1
17:11:29 <eBremer> +1
17:11:31 <AZ> +1
17:11:58 <ora> RESOLVED: Publish RDF Primer as a Draft Note
17:12:21 <ktk> q?
17:12:41 <fsasaki> ora: now about echidna
17:13:36 <ora> PROPOSAL: Adopt echidna for the RDF Primer
17:13:40 <TallTed> +1
17:13:40 <pchampin> +1
17:13:41 <gkellogg> +1
17:13:41 <fsasaki> +1
17:13:42 <ora> +1
17:13:44 <ktk> +1
17:13:44 <gtw> +1
17:13:45 <tl> +1
17:13:45 <james0> +1
17:13:46 <niklasl> +1
17:13:46 <doerthe> +1
17:13:46 <eBremer> +1
17:13:47 <olaf> +1
17:13:48 <Dominik_T> +1
17:13:53 <AndyS> +1
17:14:02 <Souri> +0
17:14:09 <AZ> +1
17:14:22 <ora> RESOLVED: Adopt echidna for the RDF Primer
17:14:44 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:14:44 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Closing stale issues -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:14:49 <fsasaki> pa: will make this happen
17:15:14 <fsasaki> s/happen/happen, the echidna setup and primer publication/
17:15:41 <fsasaki> pa: started to review stale issues systematically
17:16:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:16:16 <fsasaki> ... proposal to have the chairs and I to review the old actions and add comment if we think issues can be closed to assure that person receive notifications
17:16:41 <fsasaki> ... after two weeks if there is no notification we will close the issue
17:16:55 <AndyS> q+
17:17:02 <ora> ack AndyS
17:17:08 <fsasaki> ... any objection to this approach?
17:17:19 <fsasaki> andyS: is this for all repos?
17:17:29 <fsasaki> ... started with rdf-star, but plan to do that with all repos
17:17:40 <fsasaki> andyS: some issues are out of scope
17:17:57 <fsasaki> ... we can save us some time on these
17:18:03 <AndyS> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/87
17:18:04 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/87 -> Issue 87 forbid redefining the same PREFIX; consider forbidding relative BASE (by VladimirAlexiev)
17:18:13 <pchampin> q+
17:18:19 <ora> ack pchampin
17:18:29 <fsasaki> pa: priority is to focus on issues that are outdated
17:18:33 <fsasaki> ... there are many like these
17:18:47 <fsasaki> ... this should help to manage other issues more efficiently
17:19:46 <fsasaki> ora: pa will not close the issues but mark them as candidates to be closed after two weeks
17:19:57 <fsasaki> ... so there is time to engage on them
17:20:10 <ora> PROPOSAL: Close stale/outdated/superseded issues as per pchampin's proposal
17:20:15 <TallTed> +1
17:20:16 <ora> +1
17:20:17 <pchampin> +1
17:20:17 <Dominik_T> +1
17:20:17 <fsasaki> +1
17:20:19 <AndyS> +1
17:20:19 <olaf> +1
17:20:20 <gtw> +1
17:20:21 <pfps> +1
17:20:21 <eBremer> +1
17:20:21 <doerthe> +1
17:20:22 <Souri> +1
17:20:22 <gkellogg> +1
17:20:25 <james0> +1
17:20:26 <ktk> +1
17:20:27 <niklasl> +1
17:20:33 <AZ> +1
17:20:35 <tl> +1
17:20:36 <ktk> q+
17:20:47 <ora> ack ktk
17:20:57 <ora> RESOLVED: Close stale/outdated/superseded issues as per pchampin's proposal
17:21:22 <fsasaki> pa: we were reaching limits of number of items in the project
17:22:14 <fsasaki> ora: what does it mean to remove them?
17:22:21 <fsasaki> pa: they are not visible via the project
17:22:43 <fsasaki> ... the issues are present but are no longer associated with the project
17:22:51 <fsasaki> ... we still keep the history
17:22:57 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:22:57 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Prioritization of next week's topics -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/6 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:23:07 <tl> q+
17:23:42 <fsasaki> ora: everybody saw the poll on the triple terms I assume
17:23:50 <fsasaki> ... the poll closes before the meeting
17:23:57 <ora> ack tl
17:24:01 <tl> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/131
17:24:01 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/131 -> Issue 131 Streamline Turtle-star syntactic sugar and future-proof it for graphs (by rat10) [needs discussion]
17:24:19 <AndyS> q+
17:24:21 <fsasaki> tl: syntax issue we could discuss, no. 131
17:24:26 <ora> ack AndyS
17:24:32 <pfps> q+
17:24:54 <fsasaki> andyS: can we cover the other turtle syntax issue first, 132 on rdf star WG list
17:24:55 <AndyS> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/132
17:24:55 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/132 -> Issue 132 Turtle Grammar: Collections and blank node property lists in triple terms (by doerthe) [needs discussion]
17:25:04 <ora> ack pfps
17:25:18 <pchampin> q+
17:25:29 <fsasaki> pfps: propose to discuss if we will address sparql errata
17:25:59 <fsasaki> adrian: propose 132 first, then 131
17:26:07 <ora> ack pchampin
17:26:07 <fsasaki> (no objections)
17:26:30 <fsasaki> pa: about the poll and triple terms in subject position
17:26:37 <fsasaki> ... we want to see if we will have consensus
17:26:57 <fsasaki> ... if we do not have consensus, the chairs will move forward and say: there was dissent.
17:27:14 <fsasaki> q+
17:27:28 <fsasaki> pa: think we then do not need to add this to agenda
17:28:02 <ora> ack fsasaki
17:28:14 <pchampin> scribe+
17:28:47 <pchampin> fsasaki: so far, we have a lot of I don't care options; is another poll planned with only two options before a decision is made?
17:28:58 <fsasaki> felix: the poll has three options: agree, disagree, I do not care. if there is no clear picture, will you do a vote with 2 options?
17:29:15 <fsasaki> ora: if there is no clear picture we may vote again, if one or the other is clear, we can decide
17:29:15 <pchampin> scribe-
17:29:50 <fsasaki> ora: we want to see if there is large for or against this
17:30:30 <fsasaki> ora: we will have a chairs meeting and then see if there is need for another poll in two weeks
17:30:54 <fsasaki> ora: peter, are you ok with the current order of topics?
17:30:57 <fsasaki> pfps: yes
17:31:00 <tl> s/large for /large support for
17:31:09 <gkellogg> q+
17:31:10 <pfps> q+
17:31:14 <fsasaki> ora: if we time box topics we may do 3 topics next week
17:31:15 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:31:22 <AndyS> q+
17:31:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:31:36 <fsasaki> gregg: named graphs in rdf xml, is that in scope?
17:31:49 <fsasaki> ... and then named graphs RDFa ...
17:32:16 <fsasaki> ora: I would say: out of scope
17:32:20 <fsasaki> ... but we can discuss this
17:32:36 <fsasaki> gregg: it is among the topics we can take up after REC publication
17:32:37 <ora> ack pfps
17:32:56 <fsasaki> pfps: issue on xyz literal
17:33:00 <fsasaki> ... should this go away?
17:33:07 <fsasaki> adrian: issue 84
17:33:19 <fsasaki> ... propose to put this to the list of topics
17:33:23 <ora> ack AndyS
17:33:40 <fsasaki> andyS: issue about versioning could be advanced
17:33:51 <pchampin> +1 to continue the discussion on versioning
17:33:52 <james0> q+
17:34:04 <fsasaki> andyS: number 141 on rdf-star WG
17:34:21 <gkellogg> w3c/rdf-star-wg#141
17:34:22 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/141 -> Issue 141 Which parties carry what costs of text/turtle changes, and do those outweigh which benefits for whom? (by RubenVerborgh) [needs discussion]
17:34:25 <fsasaki> ora: we need PAs experiment results for that.
17:34:39 <fsasaki> pa: will summarize next week
17:34:58 <pchampin> q+
17:35:15 <fsasaki> ora: two turtle issues, then versioning, then plain literal issue for next week
17:35:20 <fsasaki> adrian: agree
17:35:45 <fsasaki> ... is rdf/xml and named graphs for later, do we agree on that?
17:35:54 <fsasaki> ora: could go after REC publication
17:36:01 <ora> ack james
17:36:27 <niklasl> q+
17:36:37 <fsasaki> james: wondering about why some topics are more important than 84
17:37:09 <fsasaki> discussion on how the topics are being set for next week
17:37:29 <ora> ack pchampin
17:37:34 <ktk> q?
17:37:53 <tl> s/about why /if not
17:38:03 <fsasaki> pa: 84 is "plain literal", this is a low hanging fruit
17:38:04 <ktk> q+
17:38:09 <fsasaki> ... can be earlier in the agenda
17:38:17 <ora> ack niklasl
17:38:27 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/84
17:38:28 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/84 -> Issue 84 remove rdf:plainLiteral from Semantics? (by pfps) [needs discussion] [spec:substantive]
17:38:30 <niklasl> I think https://github.com/w3c/rdf-primer/issues/14 can be closed now.
17:38:30 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-primer/issues/14 -> Issue 14 Quoted triples not mentioned in primer (by kvistgaard) [needs discussion] [propose closing]
17:38:52 <fsasaki> niklas: issue 14 can be closed now, see above
17:39:13 <fsasaki> ... what are triple terms is now in primer
17:39:15 <ora> ack ktk
17:39:19 <fsasaki> ora: agree
17:40:14 <fsasaki> adrian: current topic list is a combination of both types of topics
17:40:25 <fsasaki> ora: enough material for next week, suggest to move on
17:40:39 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:40:39 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:40:39 <fsasaki> ... let us get 84 more up (on top)
17:41:04 <pchampin> q+
17:41:30 <fsasaki> pa: will work on rdf primer and echidna
17:41:36 <fsasaki> ... 145 can be closed
17:41:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:41:54 <fsasaki> ... pending PR on RDF concepts about unification of terminology, can be closed
17:41:54 <fsasaki> ... have merged PR
17:42:01 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/158
17:42:02 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/158 -> Pull Request 158 unify terminology for triples (by pchampin) [needs discussion] [spec:enhancement]
17:43:15 <fsasaki> pa: we define one concept "rdf triple", then distinguish asserted triple and triple term
17:43:18 <tl> q+
17:43:27 <ora> ack pchampin
17:43:28 <gkellogg> q+
17:43:28 <fsasaki> ... it removes some redundancy in the text
17:43:32 <fsasaki> ... suggest to merge PR
17:43:36 <ora> ack tl
17:43:43 <pfps> q+
17:43:50 <fsasaki> tl: is the term "statement" in?
17:44:07 <fsasaki> pa: have not touched occurrences of this term yet
17:44:14 <fsasaki> ... some said that triple terms are statements
17:44:42 <fsasaki> ... "statement" is used in the introduction
17:44:52 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:44:58 <niklasl> q+
17:45:00 <ora> ack pfps
17:45:03 <fsasaki> ... there has not been further changes to this term besides the ones mentioned
17:45:06 <gkellogg> q+
17:45:37 <TallTed> q+
17:45:46 <niklasl> q-
17:45:47 <niklasl> q+
17:45:53 <fsasaki> pfps: suggest that editors can reject certain changes
17:46:02 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:46:14 <fsasaki> gregg: ambiguity in notion of asserted triples
17:46:26 <fsasaki> ... was not clear from the text
17:46:39 <fsasaki> andyS: suggest to merge the PR
17:46:49 <fsasaki> ... pa said that other things need work
17:46:53 <fsasaki> gregg: fine by me
17:46:54 <ora> ack TallTed
17:47:13 <fsasaki> TallTed: open items after the merge should become issues
17:47:59 <fsasaki> ... I think these should not be only editor's disgression
17:48:09 <gkellogg> q+
17:48:17 <niklasl> q-
17:48:17 <AndyS> q+
17:48:17 <niklasl> q+
17:48:28 <ora> ack gkellogg
17:48:43 <fsasaki> gregg: editors should control what goes into the doc
17:48:59 <ora> ack AndyS
17:48:59 <fsasaki> ... the editors are bound by the decision of the WG
17:49:09 <fsasaki> andyS: clarity is important
17:49:16 <TallTed> q+
17:49:16 <fsasaki> ... many decisions come down to value judgment
17:49:21 <fsasaki> ... they are not factual matters
17:49:51 <fsasaki> ora: want to see some of the items not go up to the WG
17:50:11 <fsasaki> ... if there are some discussions between two people, they should try to resolve it
17:50:18 <fsasaki> andyS: it is too easy to reject
17:50:28 <fsasaki> ... there is no compromise at the moment
17:50:35 <fsasaki> ... people say the same thing again and again
17:50:42 <TallTed> q?
17:50:45 <fsasaki> ora: I would like to see editos to be able to exercise judgment
17:50:47 <pchampin> q+
17:51:20 <fsasaki> ... but do not disagree with andy
17:51:23 <ora> ack niklasl
17:51:52 <fsasaki> niklas: there are activities making sure that spec text says certain propositions
17:52:03 <fsasaki> ... did not make a PR for that but work on wording
17:52:19 <ora> ack TallTed
17:52:23 <fsasaki> ... but agree with what andy says, hard if we have to resolve all value judgment in complete consensus for every wording
17:52:53 <fsasaki> TallTed: I feel that this is addressed at me
17:53:01 <fsasaki> ... my suggestions are for new readers outside of our group
17:53:27 <pfps> q+
17:53:28 <fsasaki> ... please clarify what does not work with my suggestions
17:53:48 <fsasaki> ... interjection etc. matters
17:53:58 <fsasaki> ora: agree, my comments were not targeted on you
17:54:23 <fsasaki> TallTed: transferring things into an issue will not create a WG discussion automatically
17:54:36 <fsasaki> ... it just starts a discussion about (dis)agreement
17:54:45 <pfps> https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/494930-i-have-spent-most-of-the-day-putting-in-a
17:54:52 <fsasaki> ... if editor feels strongly about it, it may be something for the WG
17:55:36 <ora> ack pchampin
17:56:16 <fsasaki> pa: what ora said
17:57:10 <fsasaki> .... I am in favor of discussing issues async if possible
17:57:21 <fsasaki> .... do you expect the editors to create the issues?
17:57:27 <fsasaki> TallTed: yes
17:57:51 <fsasaki> q+
17:57:56 <fsasaki> q-
17:58:14 <fsasaki> pa: think merging PRs is a reasonable course of action
17:58:31 <fsasaki> q?
17:58:50 <ora> ack pfps
17:59:02 <gkellogg> IMO, the person form whom this issue is important should raise the issue
17:59:23 <fsasaki> pfps: disagree with pa, editors need to respond to WG comments
17:59:39 <fsasaki> ... should be able to say: my judgment is not best way to say this
17:59:51 <TallTed> q+
18:00:05 <fsasaki> ... person who brought this up can go along, if they care enough they should address the issuue?
18:00:23 <ora> ack TallTed
18:01:44 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
18:01:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
18:01:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-rdf-star-minutes.html fsasaki
18:02:39 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/115 -> Pull Request 115 add section about 'unstar' mapping (by pchampin) [spec:enhancement]
18:14:24 <olaf> olaf has left #rdf-star
18:38:07 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:57:16 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:11:53 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:37:11 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:56:20 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:56:43 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:16:56 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
22:29:27 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:24:32 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:26:08 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star