15:59:55 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:59:59 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-irc
15:59:59 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-star
16:00:12 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:00:16 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/3145be7b-99e7-49af-90b0-aee845dc7b2d/20250710T120000/
16:00:17 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:00:17 <agendabot> agenda+ definition of reifiers is non-normative and seems vague -> 1 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169
16:00:17 <agendabot> agenda+ language strings missing a language tag -> 2 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/37
16:00:17 <agendabot> agenda+ Proposed for closing, available at -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/11
16:00:19 <agendabot> agenda+ Issue Triage, available at -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/5
16:00:20 <TallTed> meeting: RDF & SPARQL WG biweekly focused meeting
16:00:28 <gkellogg_> present+
16:00:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:00:50 <tl> present+
16:00:50 <draggett> draggett has joined #rdf-star
16:00:51 <AndyS> present+
16:00:53 <draggett> present+
16:01:01 <james> james has joined #rdf-star
16:01:05 <gtw> present+
16:01:08 <draggett> scribenick: draggett
16:01:38 <ktk> Meeting: RDF-star WG biweekly focused meeting
16:01:45 <ktk> present+ enrico
16:01:50 <james> present+
16:02:01 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:02:03 <ktk> regrets+ fsasaki, olaf
16:02:06 <Souri> present+
16:02:08 <TallTed> present+
16:02:09 <ktk> present+
16:02:14 <pchampin> present+
16:02:14 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
16:02:27 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:02:32 <pfps> present+
16:02:35 <enrico> present+
16:03:34 <ora> present+
16:03:37 <ora> chair+
16:03:48 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
16:03:50 <ktk> Zakim, open item 1
16:03:50 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- definition of reifiers is non-normative and seems vague -> 1 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:03:57 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:04:09 <niklasl> present+
16:04:14 <draggett> Ora introduces the meeting.
16:04:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:04:39 <enrico> I will be listening from a bus the meeting of today.
16:04:39 <enrico> Regarding #169, I made clear my opinion in the GitHub discussion.
16:04:40 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169 -> Issue 169 definition of reifiers is non-normative and seems vague (by rat10) [needs discussion]
16:04:46 <draggett> let's give 20 minutes each for the first two agenda items, does that work for people [yes]
16:04:57 <draggett> Topic: Issue 169
16:04:59 <tl> q+
16:05:01 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/07/03-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:05:01 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/07/11-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:05:07 <ora> ack tl
16:05:20 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:05:28 <doerthe> present+
16:05:35 <draggett> tl: introduces definition of reifiers is non-normative and seems vague
16:06:06 <TallTed> s/let's give/ora: let's give/
16:06:22 <draggett> tl: a related point is that I am not sure how the new reification mechanism relates to the old one
16:06:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:07:08 <draggett> tl: the editors have different opinions on this
16:08:12 <draggett> tl: maybe I had misunderstood something, I used the issue to ask for clarification
16:08:46 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-star
16:08:57 <AZ> present+
16:08:59 <draggett> tl: is there a connection between the reifier and the triple as I thought?
16:09:04 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:09:13 <pfps> present+
16:09:19 <draggett> tl: the semantics of the reifier clear?
16:09:52 <draggett> tl: pchampin claimed the reifier refers to the triple
16:09:55 <ktk> q?
16:10:12 <draggett> tl: let's clear up the semantics for the reifier
16:10:35 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:10:39 <pchampin> q+
16:10:40 <enrico> Present+
16:10:45 <ora> ack pchampin
16:10:51 <enrico> I said literally "By convention, we call reifier the subject of a rdf:reifies triple"
16:11:06 <enrico> What more do you want to know??
16:11:21 <draggett> pchampin: I disagree that the concept of reifier is insufficiently defined in the spec
16:12:16 <draggett> pchampin: the domain is left deliberately open
16:12:16 <tl> q?
16:12:19 <tl> q+
16:13:15 <niklasl> q+
16:13:43 <draggett> pchampin: the new definition is clearer
16:13:45 <ora> ack tl
16:14:28 <draggett> tl: the old definition is clearer in my opinion. The new definition is vague, intentionally so
16:15:59 <draggett> pchampin: I disagree with what you claim I said
16:16:56 <ora> ack niklasl
16:17:10 <draggett> tl: there are 2 very different opinions and I have no idea how to reconcile them
16:17:36 <draggett> niklasl: pchampin's account is clear
16:18:07 <draggett> tl: I am interested in what the reifier means as that is the only things we allow people to use
16:18:24 <enrico> Q+
16:18:57 <draggett> tl wants to better understand the model theory perspective for reifiers
16:18:58 <ora> ack enrico
16:19:22 <ora> q+
16:19:38 <ora> ack ora
16:19:40 <draggett> enrico: the reifier refers to the triple term, a precise connection, end of story
16:19:40 <niklasl> +1 to enrico
16:20:15 <niklasl> Re. @pchampin 's comment of <some-reifer> a rdf:Statement . There's an example of that already in https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf12-primer/#section-turtle-reifier-representation  :)
16:21:10 <niklasl> Also, the discussion in issue 169 seems to veer into https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/152
16:21:10 <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)
16:21:19 <ktk> q+
16:21:21 <draggett> ora: my worry is that this group should represent the best understanding of RDF, so what should we do about this, I trust the group to sort it out
16:21:24 <ora> ack ktk
16:21:53 <pchampin> q+
16:21:59 <draggett> Adrian: is this clear for the rest of the group?
16:22:01 <tl> q+
16:22:09 <gkellogg_> q+
16:22:16 <pfps> my part of the currently-silent majority feels that this has all been hashed out over and over again with no progress
16:22:59 <ora> ack pchampin
16:23:11 <draggett> ora: we can always use external validation, but I get the sense that the majority of the group doesn't agree with Thomas
16:23:24 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/214
16:23:25 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/214 -> Pull Request 214 Clarify section about triple terms and reification (by niklasl)
16:23:45 <draggett> pchampin: niklasl has a PR to improve the wording
16:24:21 <draggett> pchampin: the discussion threads can be hard to follow.
16:24:54 <draggett> pchampin: I would rather Thomas propose a PR for us to discuss
16:25:21 <ora> ack gkellogg_
16:25:24 <draggett> ora: we have run out of time on this agendum
16:25:46 <draggett> gkellogg_:  specs should be minimal in our spec wording.
16:26:17 <pchampin> +1
16:26:19 <james> q+
16:26:28 <draggett> gkellogg_: reifiers are used across multiple syntaxes, so it makes sense to have a single definition for them to refer to
16:26:41 <ora> ack tl
16:27:01 <draggett> ora asks tl if he would be willing to create a PR as pchampin suggests?
16:27:06 <draggett> tl: not really
16:27:22 <pfps> My view is that the request has been unclear.
16:27:38 <draggett> tl: I haven't heard a clear answer in respect to the semantics
16:27:54 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:27:54 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, ktk
16:27:55 <draggett> Topic: language strings missing a language tag 2
16:28:15 <gkellogg_> zakim, close item
16:28:15 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close item', gkellogg_
16:28:33 <ora> ack james
16:29:04 <draggett> james: let's look at AndyS
16:29:34 <draggett> s/james: let's look at AndyS//
16:29:36 <pchampin> tl, as I think you pointed out, I did provide an answer to your question about the connection : https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169#issuecomment-3057364057
16:29:36 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169 -> Issue 169 definition of reifiers is non-normative and seems vague (by rat10) [needs discussion]
16:30:05 <pchampin> unless an editor of Concepts or Semantics  steps out and disagrees with me, I think you have your answer
16:30:12 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:30:12 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- language strings missing a language tag -> 2 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/37 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:30:25 <draggett> ora: in respect to the previous topic, let's wait for external feedback
16:30:27 <enrico> I volunteer to create the core of a best practices note which should provide examples answering Thomas' questions
16:30:34 <TallTed> Conclusion of a timebox does not imply conclusion of the issue discussed therein... Timebox has expired. Further discussion on this issue should be later.
16:30:44 <ora> q?
16:30:47 <pfps> +1
16:31:10 <draggett> pchampin introduces the language tag issue
16:31:17 <ora> +1 to enrico
16:32:00 <draggett> pchampin: I described 3 possible behaviours, and I would be happy to let parsers implement more than one of them
16:32:36 <draggett> pchampin: gkellogg_ has a PR for n-triples that relates to option 2'
16:32:55 <gkellogg_> q+
16:32:56 <AndyS> q+
16:33:09 <TallTed> q+
16:33:15 <ora> ack gkellogg_
16:33:22 <draggett> ora: I find it undesirable for parsers to quit on the first error
16:33:42 <pchampin> my summary: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2025Jul/0005.html
16:33:43 <draggett> gkellogg_: I was trying to layout some choices for discussion
16:34:12 <draggett> gkellogg_: parsers vary in their behaviour
16:34:14 <pchampin> gkellogg_'s PR on N-Triples: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/pull/68
16:34:15 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/pull/68 -> Pull Request 68 Add language to require that only valid IRIs ... (by gkellogg) [needs discussion] [spec:substantive] [test:needs tests]
16:34:42 <draggett> gkellogg_:  I am not seeing consensus on what we should agree to
16:35:07 <ora> ack AndyS
16:35:54 <ora> ack TallTed
16:35:58 <draggett> AndyS: quite concerned about specifying error behavior, my suggestion is that parsers should raise the error, but leave it there
16:36:16 <draggett> s/but/but the spec should/
16:36:17 <pchampin> q+
16:37:08 <draggett> AndyS cites the Wikimedia graph as an example that has lots of errors
16:37:28 <james> q+
16:37:50 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:37:52 <pfps> q+
16:37:59 <draggett> TallTed: we should not make RDF 1.2 parsers more strict
16:38:08 <enrico> Present+
16:38:13 <draggett> TallTed: it would make RDF less attractive to necomers
16:38:28 <draggett> TallTed: let errors come up and allow people to deal with them
16:39:07 <pchampin> <%> <x:p> "foo"@abcdefghi, "bar"^^ rdf:langString .
16:39:10 <draggett> TallTed: RDF graphs evolve and may have errors during that proces
16:39:32 <draggett> TallTed: let it be lax until we decide otherwise
16:39:50 <pfps> q-
16:40:03 <ora> ack pchampin
16:40:06 <draggett> ora: sounds akin to XHTML, which was very strict, whilst the world wild web was not
16:40:29 <draggett> pchampin: I don't think we are facing that problem here
16:41:04 <draggett> pchampin talks through some examples
16:41:17 <TallTed> q+
16:41:45 <draggett> pchampin: we could have the spec be more relaxed
16:42:31 <draggett> pchampin: the spec should avoid overly strict requirements on implementations
16:42:58 <ora> ack james
16:43:00 <AndyS> q+
16:43:05 <draggett> pchampin: there is a discrepancy  between the syntax the concept
16:43:17 <draggett> s/syntax/syntax and/
16:43:58 <ora> ack TallTed
16:44:19 <pchampin> james, the decision about ill-typed literals was "accept whetever is valid in the abstract syntax, even if semantically inconsistent"
16:44:34 <draggett> TallTed: this is a question of where and how the error is raised
16:44:46 <pchampin> the problem raised her is about things that are not valid in the abstract syntax
16:45:36 <pfps> one point with ill-typed literals is that determining whether they are ill-typed depends on whether the datatype is recognized.
16:45:59 <draggett> TallTed describes some clarifications
16:46:35 <draggett> TallTed: we will have a better reception if the collision occurs at a later point when parsing a file
16:46:57 <ora> q+
16:47:51 <draggett> TallTed: when I do a SPARQL query on dirty data I won't get trustworthy results
16:48:16 <AndyS> q-
16:49:02 <ora> ack ora
16:49:42 <draggett> ora: for practical reasons I want parsers to report when they detect breaches
16:49:54 <TallTed> q+ to mention "strict" vs "lax" flagging options
16:49:58 <AndyS> q+
16:50:04 <ora> ack TallTed
16:50:04 <Zakim> TallTed, you wanted to mention "strict" vs "lax" flagging options
16:50:20 <draggett> ora: should we endorse certain behaviors in that respect
16:50:42 <draggett> TallTed: some parsers offer the means to set strict parsing
16:51:02 <ora> ack AndyS
16:51:40 <draggett> AndyS: the community has a general agreement on when to abort parsing
16:52:12 <gkellogg_> q+
16:52:20 <draggett> AndyS: I want to match community expectations
16:52:23 <ora> ack gkellogg_
16:52:51 <draggett> gkellogg_: we should use words such as MAY, as in implementations may ...
16:53:31 <draggett> gkellogg_: let's not require any specific behavior, but at least call out the corner cases
16:53:40 <pfps> RDF 1.2 Triples defines a conformant N-Triples parser as one that creates an RDF graph.  Changing this would be a spec change.
16:53:41 <TallTed> I fully support tests *and* tools that have strict/lax flags.
16:54:11 <draggett> pchampin: gkellogg_'s PR is reasonable
16:54:46 <TallTed> (Virtuoso has ways to be more and less strict about what gets loaded, and about what happens when data is more and less compliant.)
16:54:50 <draggett> ora: please take a look at gkellogg_'s PR
16:54:53 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/pull/68 -> Pull Request 68 Add language to require that only valid IRIs ... (by gkellogg) [needs discussion] [spec:substantive] [test:needs tests]
16:54:56 <ktk> Zakim, next item
16:54:56 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Proposed for closing, available at -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/11 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:55:00 <pfps> Similarly for Turtle - conformance requires producing an RDF graph.
16:55:08 <draggett> Topic: Proposed for closing, available at 3
16:55:45 <draggett> ora: why is 83 still open?  Can we close it now?
16:55:55 <draggett> AndyS: yes, as the editors agreed
16:56:12 <draggett> TallTed: has my latest suggestion been applied?
16:56:19 <pfps> q+
16:56:22 <draggett> AndyS: that was on semantics
16:56:34 <ora> ack pfps
16:56:39 <draggett> TallTed: I see general acceptance of my PR
16:56:53 <pchampin> q+
16:56:56 <draggett> TallTed: don't close this just yet
16:57:12 <pchampin> q-
16:57:26 <draggett> gkellogg_: the language strings can be closed once we have sorted n-triples
16:58:33 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:58:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
16:58:40 <draggett> ora: we are at the end of the call
16:58:48 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:58:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:01:19 <pchampin> s|agendum 2 -- language strings missing a language tag -> 2 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/37 -- taken up [from agendabot]|
17:01:27 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:01:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:02:04 <pchampin> s|Topic: Proposed for closing, available at 3|
17:02:19 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:02:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:27:59 <pchampin> s|Topic: Issue 169|Topic: w3c/rdf-star-wg#169
17:28:02 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:28:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:28:28 <pchampin> s|Topic: w3c/rdf-star-wg#169|
17:28:33 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:28:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:29:03 <pchampin> m2gbot, link issues with transcript
17:29:04 <m2gbot> comment created: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169#issuecomment-3058324446
17:30:09 <pchampin> s|https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html|
17:30:20 <pchampin> s|m2gbot, link issues with transcript|
17:31:49 <pchampin> s|Topic: language strings missing a language tag 2|Topic: language strings missing a language tag -> 2 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/37
17:31:53 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:31:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/07/10-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:32:27 <pchampin> RRSAgent, bye
17:32:27 <RRSAgent> I see no action items