Meeting minutes
Overview document
<nicholascar> Link to doc: https://
Nick: First draft of the overview document introducing SHACL and versions, what's new in 1.2 (work in progress), governance, is ready
… let's think about what else we would like to add, PRs/issues welcome
… This will likely just be a note, not a normative rec.
… New and possibly controversial: At the end of the SHACL-SHACL annex, we are pointing to a newly created SHACL-resources repo. Need to check if this is alright.
Alex: It may be better at some point to move parts of SHACL-SHACL out of the general overview and into a separate document to keep this balanced.
Nick: SHACL-SHACL validate each part of the spec separately. This might connect to SHACL profiling.
Subgroups and statuses
Nick: Time to start with SHACL Profiling, this week or next week, will contact people.
… A Node Expressions call has been scheduled for August 11th by Robert.
… Other people involved in other subgroups:
… Edmond and Thomas working on SHACL UI. Deliverables to be written as a note to get feedback from the rest of the group, reach out if you want to be involved. Kickoff meetings in ~2 weeks.
… Rules subgroup: [Andy] no updates this week, waiting for comments on draft PR.
Ted: Would be nice to have the subgroup calls added to the group calendar.
Validation reports and conformance values
Thomas: Ticket has been created, including conformance levels affecting output, order of levels, informative results separate from non-info results.
… Have to separate sh:conforms and sh:results. Should take different parties into account (engine implementers, engine users).
… Different engine implementers may choose different approaches.
Nick: People should check the Github issue. Add points there.
<HolgerK> w3c/
Auto-publishing node expressions doc
Holger: Can we start the process of publishing this?
Nick: Need Call for Consensus, to be done after this meeting.
Andy: Perhaps we can do the same for the Rules doc.
Holger: Maybe Compact Syntax as well, as we are also including examples of it in the Core spec.
Ted: We should think about whether the Compact examples belong in the Core spec.
<AndyS> w3c/
Thomas: Jesse was maybe driving CS, not in call
<AndyS> (proposed editors issue)
Nick: Will check status of the Compact Syntax document with people driving it.
Andy: Suggestion for the process: We could agree to publish Note documents when the editors are happy with them.
<YoucTagh> w3c/
<YoucTagh> w3c/