15:58:44 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:58:48 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/05/01-rdf-star-irc
15:58:55 <ktk> meeting:  RDF-star WG biweekly meeting
15:59:03 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/e99f9039-f9bc-4333-b7a1-dd4c5a02d8b2/20250501T120000/
15:59:03 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:59:03 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/04/17-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2025/04/24-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:59:03 <agendabot> agenda+ No meeting next week
15:59:03 <agendabot> agenda+ Proposal for next week's discussion -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/6
15:59:05 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
15:59:08 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
15:59:09 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:59:19 <agendabot> agenda+ Issue Triage, available at -> 6 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5
15:59:19 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
15:59:50 <eBremer> present+
15:59:55 <james> james has joined #rdf-star
16:00:03 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
16:00:10 <eBremer> scribe+
16:00:14 <gkellogg> present+
16:00:23 <james> present+
16:00:23 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:00:28 <Souri> present+
16:00:29 <AndyS> present+
16:00:42 <gtw> present+
16:00:50 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:00:53 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
16:00:55 <ktk> regrets+ olaf, niklasl, fsasaki
16:01:02 <pfps> present+
16:01:12 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:01:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/01-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
16:01:18 <ktk> RRSAgent, make log public
16:01:21 <tl> present+
16:02:06 <ktk> Chair: Ora
16:02:32 <ora> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/teekkarilakki
16:02:44 <ora> present+
16:03:07 <ora> chair+
16:04:03 <Tpt> present+
16:04:07 <ktk> regrets+ pchampin
16:04:15 <ktk> Zakim, open item 1
16:04:15 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/04/17-rdf-star-minutes.html , -> 2 https://www.w3.org/2025/04/24-rdf-star-minutes.html --
16:04:18 <draggett> draggett has joined #rdf-star
16:04:19 <Zakim> ... taken up [from agendabot]
16:04:26 <draggett> present+
16:05:21 <eBremer> ora: any issues with minutes? speak now
16:05:22 <pfps> minutes look acceptable
16:05:30 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve minutes from last two meetings
16:05:33 <ora> +1
16:05:35 <gkellogg> +1
16:05:36 <ktk> +1
16:05:38 <eBremer> +1
16:05:39 <gtw> +1
16:05:39 <AndyS> +1
16:05:46 <tl> +1
16:05:58 <james> +1
16:05:59 <pfps> +1
16:06:02 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:06:04 <Souri> +1
16:06:09 <eBremer> ora: any other votes?
16:06:16 <enrico> Present+
16:06:16 <enrico> +1
16:06:21 <Tpt> +1
16:06:31 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve minutes from last two meetings
16:06:33 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:06:33 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- No meeting next week -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:06:53 <eBremer> ora: moving on....next week, knowledge graph conf in NY
16:07:08 <eBremer> ora: suggest cancelling meeting for next week
16:07:15 <eBremer> ora: thoughts?
16:07:39 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #rdf-star
16:07:58 <Souri> s/too will at/too will be at/
16:08:37 <eBremer> adrian: meeting cancelled for next week
16:08:41 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:08:41 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Proposal for next week's discussion -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/6 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:09:37 <AndyS> q+
16:09:39 <eBremer> ktk: anyone oppose to remove the needs discussion for all four?
16:09:53 <ora> ack AndyS
16:10:06 <eBremer> andys: we could remove needs discussion from 187
16:10:33 <gkellogg> q+
16:10:53 <TallTed> present+
16:11:03 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:11:29 <eBremer> gkellog: there are some issues..I dont know that we need to tag them on this particular issue
16:11:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/01-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:12:01 <eBremer> ...  but in terms of what is the expected behavior of implementations faced with these explicit versions...
16:12:04 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/187 -> #187
16:12:37 <eBremer> ktk: but then we could say remove it here and follow up
16:13:19 <eBremer> gkellog: I think its probably better to do that,  move things forward and sort of stepping up a little biut higher and then we can deal with that later
16:13:19 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/04/24-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:13:21 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/05/15-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:13:29 <eBremer> ora: that sounds good
16:13:39 <AndyS> My action from last week is https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/202 -- will be a PR when 187 is merged.
16:13:40 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/202 -> Issue 202 Version labels for RDF profiles. (by afs) [spec:enhancement]
16:14:19 <eBremer> gkellog: I see in the minutes and please oppose if you disagree that the map the annotation syntax conclusion is close this issue and create a new one
16:14:53 <eBremer> andys: overtaken by the issue an idea of concepts about what labels we have
16:15:10 <tl> s/gkellog: I see /ktk: I see
16:15:22 <eBremer> ktk: and it could be closed.  its a correct interpretation 135
16:15:51 <eBremer> gkellog: ..confusion still about if the basic profile is officially called the basic profile
16:16:04 <tl> s/nnotation syntax/nnotation syntax (issue #128)
16:16:31 <eBremer> ktk: we leave them on top and we would do a reosolution as a first task in two weeks
16:16:47 <TallTed> s/ nnotation/ annotation/
16:16:49 <eBremer> ktk: leave 135 and 70 open the first two
16:17:09 <gkellogg> q+
16:17:12 <eBremer> ... i see next one wasd also discussed what properties can or should link to triple terms
16:17:32 <ktk> q?
16:17:36 <eBremer> ora: cant remember exactly what we did decide..
16:17:50 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:17:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/01-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:18:07 <eBremer> gkellog: my understanding now is that there are no normative requirements on properties linking to triple terms
16:18:16 <eBremer> ... it all comes out of the semantics..
16:18:43 <eBremer> ora: we can do an action. we can close this.
16:19:31 <gb> Cannot create action. Validation failed. Maybe <person> is not a valid user for w3c/rdf-star-wg?
16:20:08 <ora> ACTION: ora to write a non-normative description (in "what's new") about what properties can or should link to triple terms
16:20:16 <gb> Created -> action #159 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/159
16:20:28 <enrico8> enrico8 has joined #rdf-star
16:20:43 <enrico8> present+
16:20:49 <gkellogg> q+
16:21:06 <eBremer> ora: what else do we want to discuss next time?
16:21:11 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:21:19 <AndyS> q+
16:21:38 <eBremer> gkellogg: turtle 89 which is absolute IRI without a base IRI
16:22:01 <eBremer> ... theres been some confusion going back to at least RDF 1.1.
16:22:22 <eBremer> ... what it means to use a full form of an IRI...
16:22:33 <eBremer> ... we use to call it an absolute IRI
16:22:34 <AndyS> q+
16:22:59 <ora> ack AndyS
16:23:13 <eBremer> ... i think we need to discuss this issue sooner rather than later since it affects tests that have been open for some time...
16:23:37 <eBremer> andys: i think we can remove the need discussion label on sparql update 42
16:23:57 <eBremer> ... it might turn into a needs discussion...
16:24:12 <eBremer> ktk: ok, but not right now. good. done.
16:24:21 <eBremer> ora: rdf concepts 170
16:24:38 <ktk> q?
16:24:51 <eBremer> ... and rdf*  wg group 130.  are those really the same issue?
16:25:03 <eBremer> ... should we discuss together?
16:25:12 <eBremer> ... i think they should be discussed together
16:25:24 <eBremer> ktk: so 170 and 130
16:25:37 <eBremer> andys: the probably do go together but they are not the same
16:25:38 <tl> q+
16:25:58 <ora> ack tl
16:26:02 <TallTed> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/170
16:26:02 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/170 -> Issue 170 Decide names and namespace for constituent properties of classic triple terms (by niklasl) [needs discussion]
16:26:07 <TallTed> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/130
16:26:08 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/130 -> Issue 130 vocabulary to refer to the individual nodes in a triple term (by rat10) [needs discussion]
16:26:20 <eBremer> tl: your talking about vocabulary to refer to individual notes in a triple term
16:26:29 <eBremer> ora: that the 130
16:26:37 <eBremer> s/that/thats
16:27:14 <eBremer> ktk: we have roughly four topics
16:27:28 <eBremer> ora: hopefully first two dispatch quickly
16:27:47 <eBremer> ktk: if we really still have time can go back to the list
16:27:58 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:27:58 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:27:59 <eBremer> ora: moving on
16:28:37 <eBremer> enrico8: no update on my action
16:28:40 <eBremer> ... sorry
16:28:43 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:28:43 <Zakim> agendum 4 was just opened, ktk
16:28:51 <ktk> Zakim, open item 5
16:28:51 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Review of pull requests, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:29:04 <eBremer> ora: pull requests....
16:29:49 <eBremer> ... anybody want to discuss these editorial
16:29:57 <pfps> q+
16:30:05 <AndyS> q+
16:30:32 <eBremer> gkellogg: the first one that shows up...i think we decided to close
16:30:46 <eBremer> ktk: i was confused to why this is still open
16:31:11 <eBremer> gkellogg: i think theres been pushback...might require chair response
16:31:43 <eBremer> ora: ....the one where we dont want to use uppercase on those specific things if its a non-normative section?
16:32:18 <ktk> q?
16:32:32 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
16:32:35 <ora> ack pfps
16:33:03 <eBremer> pfps: theres a slew of these...have concept changes...
16:33:21 <eBremer> ... it would be nice to have changes marked correctly...
16:33:40 <eBremer> ...im going through and changing them some of myself and putting questions ...
16:34:06 <eBremer> gkellogg: 191 uses both editorial and enhancement.  so its really should be one or the other
16:34:23 <eBremer> pfps: im looking at 195 which essentially changes..
16:35:10 <ora> ack AndyS
16:35:31 <eBremer> andys: 194 and 198 have unresolved discussion so they are not ready to merge
16:36:37 <eBremer> gkellogg: this related to whether a prefix is an IRI
16:36:40 <eBremer> andys: yeah
16:37:09 <eBremer> gkellogg: better for Pierre to take charge of these things..
16:37:32 <ktk> 1?
16:37:35 <ktk> q?
16:37:44 <eBremer> ora: what about 187?
16:38:25 <eBremer> andys: proceed as a normal PR.
16:40:18 <eBremer> ktk: 173....no feed back
16:40:54 <eBremer> ora: what about #42?
16:40:55 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/pull/42 -> MERGED Pull Request 42 Systems and Acronyms originally in the wiki. (by gkellogg)
16:41:33 <eBremer> ora: 47? seems like a usability related...
16:41:51 <eBremer> andys: ...something has to be done for them.  I dont think it works...
16:42:34 <pfps> have to go now
16:42:42 <pfps> pfps has left #rdf-star
16:43:16 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #rdf-star
16:45:17 <eBremer> ora: i feel like we should merge these and if someone complains....open an issue for that
16:45:26 <eBremer> ktk: who would merge them?
16:45:50 <eBremer> andys: i dont think merging actually helps us much in this case...
16:46:30 <TallTed> for contrast checking: https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/
16:47:34 <eBremer> ktk: i see one more issue.  the one in sparql federated query
16:47:43 <eBremer> ... ted requested some changes...
16:48:03 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:48:03 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:48:17 <eBremer> tallted: have not reviewed this specifically....  i will have to look and see.
16:48:20 <ktk> Zakim, open item 6
16:48:20 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- Issue Triage, available at -> 6 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:48:30 <TallTed> Zakim, close item 4
16:48:30 <Zakim> agendum 4, Review of open actions, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3, closed
16:48:32 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:48:32 <Zakim> 6. Issue Triage, available at -> 6 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5 [from agendabot]
16:49:05 <eBremer> gkellogg: proposed for closing tab with eith issues in it
16:49:16 <eBremer> ktk: okay thats great lets do that
16:49:22 <TallTed> proposed for closing -> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/11
16:49:31 <eBremer> ktk: any objects on the rdfs class one?
16:49:40 <eBremer> ktk: 34 is closed
16:50:39 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/78
16:50:40 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/78 -> Issue 78 Update document for RDF 1.2 publication (by afs) [propose closing] [spec:editorial]
16:51:32 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/83
16:51:33 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/83 -> Issue 83 Escape sequences that encode a supplemental code point using a Unicode surrogate pair (by peteroupc) [propose closing]
16:52:24 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/85
16:52:25 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/85 -> Issue 85 Supporting embedding of named objects not just blank nodes. (by canwaf) [propose closing] [spec:wontfix]
16:52:56 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-update/issues/54
16:52:56 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-update/issues/54 -> Issue 54 Are prefixes carried from one section to another? Can they repeat? (by VladimirAlexiev) [propose closing]
16:53:54 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/87
16:53:55 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/87 -> Issue 87 forbid redefining the same PREFIX; consider forbidding relative BASE (by VladimirAlexiev) [propose closing] [spec:substantive]
16:55:02 <eBremer> andys: this is part of an issue bomb...they would affect implementations...
16:55:37 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/37
16:55:37 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/37 -> Issue 37 Duplicated or similar terms (by gkellogg) [propose closing]
16:55:55 <eBremer> ktk: we have this one 37
16:56:03 <ktk> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/152
16:56:03 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/152 -> Issue 152 Explain how classic RDF reification relates to triple terms and rdf:reifies  (by niklasl) [propose closing]
16:56:05 <eBremer> gkellogg: this is an old one...
16:56:17 <eBremer> ktk: 152....
16:56:32 <eBremer> gkellogg: maybe the action is to remove the label
16:56:49 <AndyS> q+
16:57:01 <ora> ack AndyS
16:57:22 <eBremer> andys: there is sparql task force meeting tomorrow....
16:57:40 <eBremer> ...same as sematics slot
16:57:49 <eBremer> s/sematics/semantics
16:58:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/01-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:59:25 <TallTed> s|agendum 4 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]||
16:59:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/01-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:20:42 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
17:28:07 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
17:42:52 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:04:48 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:17:39 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:06:27 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:28:49 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:40:24 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:51:05 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star