15:57:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
15:57:31 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-irc
15:58:32 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-star
15:58:37 <TallTed> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/e39fe026-428e-4736-8476-cb179725a892/20250904T120000/
15:58:38 <agendabot> clear agenda
15:58:38 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of last week’s minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/08/28-rdf-star-minutes.html
15:58:38 <agendabot> agenda+ Identifying issues to solve before CR -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8
15:59:04 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
15:59:10 <TallTed> meeting: RDF & SPARQL WG biweekly meeting
15:59:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:00:12 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/08/28-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:00:32 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
16:00:32 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/09/05-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:00:51 <TallTed> chair: ora
16:00:54 <lisp> lisp has joined #rdf-star
16:01:06 <lisp> present+
16:01:16 <TallTed> present+
16:01:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:01:40 <niklasl> present+
16:01:41 <AndyS> present+
16:01:48 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:01:51 <ora> present+
16:01:55 <ora> chair+
16:02:04 <pchampin> present+
16:02:09 <gtw> present+
16:02:30 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
16:02:36 <Souri> present+
16:03:24 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
16:03:34 <Enrico> Enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:03:42 <Enrico> present+
16:03:57 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #Rdf-star
16:04:05 <olaf> present+
16:04:15 <pfps> present+
16:04:18 <pfps> scribe+
16:04:24 <Dominik_T> present+
16:04:43 <TallTed> agenda?
16:04:56 <ora> zakim, next item
16:04:56 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of last week’s minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/08/28-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:04:57 <pfps> zakim, agendum 1
16:04:59 <Zakim> I don't understand 'agendum 1', pfps
16:05:09 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:05:15 <doerthe> present+
16:05:21 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
16:05:25 <pfps> ora: any concerns with minutes?
16:05:38 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve last week's minutes
16:05:40 <ora> +1
16:05:43 <olaf> +1
16:05:46 <gtw> +1
16:05:48 <lisp> +1
16:05:53 <pfps> +1
16:05:57 <AndyS> +1
16:06:00 <tl> +1
16:06:00 <TallTed> +1
16:06:02 <Enrico> +1
16:06:04 <Dominik_T> +1
16:06:14 <pchampin> +1
16:06:15 <niklasl> +1
16:06:19 <Souri> +1
16:06:23 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve last week's minutes
16:06:31 <ora> zakim, next item
16:06:31 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Identifying issues to solve before CR -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:07:28 <pfps> ora: line item 1 - what are we going to do?
16:07:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:07:37 <ora> q?
16:07:41 <tl> q+
16:07:43 <TallTed> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169
16:07:44 <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] [propose closing] [ms:CR]
16:07:52 <TallTed> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/169
16:07:56 <ora> ack tl
16:08:43 <pfps> tl: there is a PR by Enrico that I haven't seen completely read yet
16:08:47 <Enrico> q+
16:08:53 <ora> ack Enrico
16:08:59 <pchampin> Enrico's PR: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/pull/156
16:09:00 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/pull/156 -> Pull Request 156 Better text in Section 5.3 with the purpose of relating triple terms and asserted triples. (by franconi)
16:09:15 <pfps> enrico: I created a PR after a conversation with James
16:09:40 <pfps> enrico: I added some clarification in the text, but no substantive changes
16:10:02 <pchampin> q+
16:10:05 <pfps> enrico: we could add a class for reifiers
16:10:12 <pfps> q+
16:10:31 <ora> ack pchampin
16:10:38 <niklasl> q+
16:11:06 <pfps> pchampin: I'm -1 on defining a class for reifier because it is syntacti
16:11:22 <niklasl> +1 on "reifier is syntactic"
16:11:42 <pfps> pchampin: I'm not sure about providing a domain for rdf:reifies
16:11:47 <TallTed> rdf-semantics/pull/156 appears not to have connection to rdf-star-wg/issues/169, at least in github... that is, there is no mention of one in the other
16:11:59 <Enrico> I understand the argument by pchampin, and I agree with him
16:12:18 <pfps> pchampin: That would be just as vague as reificagtion
16:12:43 <ora> ack pfps
16:13:10 <lisp> q+
16:13:27 <ora> ack niklasl
16:13:34 <pfps> pfps: I think we are again in the situation of providing text for others when we are not sure what is wanted
16:13:52 <pfps> nicklasl: I agree that reifier is syntactic, and vague
16:14:37 <pfps> nicklasl: we don't have a class for the domain of rdfs:label, for example
16:14:59 <ora> s/nicklasl/niklasl
16:15:24 <ora> ack lisp
16:15:25 <pfps> niklasl: I think that the issue is mostly wording at this point
16:16:04 <pfps> james: enrico and I had a conversation about the text
16:16:28 <tl> q+
16:16:34 <ora> ack tl
16:16:58 <pfps> pfps: I just find it very frustrating to go on and on without knowing what is wanted
16:17:14 <tl> q+
16:17:28 <Enrico> q+
16:18:10 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/220 -> Pull Request 220 Annotations on assserted triples are based on operational semantics (by rat10) [ms:CR]
16:18:13 <ora> q?
16:18:16 <ora> ack tl
16:18:40 <TallTed> and ... https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/220
16:18:58 <ora> ack Enrico
16:19:05 <pfps> tl: I posted a comment in https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/220 with my feelings
16:19:53 <pfps> enrico: I see agreement on PR 156
16:19:57 <AndyS> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/220#issuecomment-3249916970
16:20:57 <pfps> enrico: as far as Semantics is concerned rdf:reifies is not special
16:21:26 <pfps> enrico: all that is there is that its range is rdfs:Proposition
16:21:27 <niklasl> +1 to explain purpose
16:21:35 <tl> pfps: and my comment https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/220#issuecomment-3249916970, which tries to concisely describe what Ithink is needed, was added after your last comment (as of now)
16:22:19 <Souri> s/Ithink/I think/
16:22:23 <pfps> ora: let's try to finish of these issues
16:22:47 <lisp> q+
16:23:05 <ora> ack lisp
16:23:06 <pfps> ora: what about other issues?
16:23:07 <Souri> s/finish of /finish off /
16:23:32 <TallTed> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/129
16:23:33 <gb> s|https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/129|-> Issue 129 Distinguish the RDF Data Model from the Abstract Syntax (by gkellogg) [ms:CR] [needs discussion] [spec:substantive] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/129
16:23:54 <AndyS> and https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/232
16:23:55 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/232 -> Pull Request 232 revise to use "abstract data model" to unify "abstract syntax" and "data model" (by lisp)
16:23:56 <pfps> james: What about https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/129
16:24:05 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
16:24:14 <pfps> james: I adopted some changes
16:24:25 <AndyS> q+
16:25:17 <pfps> james: Peter has already approved the PR
16:25:19 <ora> ack AndyS
16:26:15 <pfps> AndyS: james, if this PR is merged can the issue be closed
16:26:35 <pfps> TallTed:  I had an editorial comment
16:26:50 <pfps> james: I accepted that comment
16:27:04 <pfps> AndyS:  I'll merge the PR
16:27:59 <pfps> ora:  How about moving the datatype definitions?
16:28:16 <pfps> pchampin:  We can close issue
16:28:35 <pfps> ora: OK
16:29:08 <pfps> AndyS:  The PR needs some work before it can be merged
16:29:51 <pfps> james:  I'll accept the suggested change
16:30:26 <TallTed> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169
16:30:26 <gb> s|https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169|-> Issue 169 Relative IRI Reference should bind to the irelative-ref production (by gkellogg) [ms:CR] [spec:editorial] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169
16:30:35 <pfps> ora: what about https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169
16:31:02 <TallTed> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/89
16:31:03 <pfps> AndyS: That one is editorial, so I don't see why that is marked as for CR
16:31:03 <gb> s|https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/89|-> Issue 89 Different parsing of the same absolute IRI with or without base IRI (by Tpt) [ErratumRaised] [ms:CR] [needs discussion] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/89
16:31:53 <pfps> AndyS: RFC 3986 has some vagueness - there are legal IRIs that don't make much sense for RDF
16:32:33 <pfps> AndyS: Some of these are treated differently in N-Triples and Turtle because of base issues
16:33:30 <Souri> typo in title of https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169: irelative-ref -> relative-ref
16:33:37 <pfps> AndyS: I suggest that we add wording about treating IRI schemas correctly if possible
16:33:44 <pchampin> q+
16:33:53 <pchampin> q-
16:34:31 <pfps> AndyS: So IRIs that are good will be treated the same, but iffy/unwise/ugly IRIs may be treated differently by different systems
16:34:54 <pfps> ora: There are parts of the IRI spec that allow divergence
16:35:32 <pfps> AndyS:  This requires definining good IRIs
16:35:52 <pfps> AndyS:  There are also issues related to . and .. path components
16:35:52 <TallTed> Souri -- typo now noted on the issue.
16:36:17 <pfps> pchampin: We already have some wording related to this
16:36:45 <pfps> pchampin: Better definitions in this area seem indicated
16:36:58 <pfps> ora: What is required?
16:37:29 <pfps> AndyS: I haven't checked the state of the PRs so I'm not sure exactly what is still needed.
16:37:36 <Dominik_T> rrsagent, generate the minutes
16:37:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-minutes.html Dominik_T
16:38:12 <pchampin> "RDF safe IRIs" ?
16:38:38 <pfps> ora: can we resolve this with some small amount of effort
16:39:03 <pchampin> +1
16:39:14 <pfps> AndyS: Can we remove the CR label on https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169
16:39:15 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169 -> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/169
16:39:54 <AndyS> q+
16:39:54 <pfps> ora:  We are relying on other standards and we can't fix all their problems
16:40:29 <pfps> ora: What do we need to say in our spec ti insulate us from their problems
16:41:10 <pfps> AndyS:  In some sense we are using the RFC for something that it wasn't quite intended to be used for
16:42:04 <TallTed> Souri -- `irelative-ref` is actually correct, there.
16:42:26 <pfps> ora: An explanation on how we use the RFC would be useful
16:42:32 <niklasl> Relying on formal precision (science) based on a technical environment (engineering) is ... challenging.
16:42:37 <ora> ack AndyS
16:42:53 <pfps> AndyS:  Pierre-Antoine and I will work on this
16:43:13 <pfps> ora: Please report back next time
16:43:25 <Dominik_T> rrsagent, generate the minutes
16:43:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-minutes.html Dominik_T
16:43:49 <pfps> AndyS: What about https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/143
16:43:50 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/143 -> Issue 143 "3.7 Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs" very misleading (by franconi) [ms:CR] [spec:bug]
16:44:25 <TallTed> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/143
16:44:34 <doerthe> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/236
16:44:35 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/236 -> Pull Request 236 Issue #143 (Skolemization) (by doerthe)
16:45:19 <pfps> doerthe: I have something to do on this, and I would like Enrico's comments
16:45:34 <pchampin> s|AndyS: What about https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/143|
16:45:49 <pchampin> s|https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/143 -> Issue 143 "3.7 Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs" very misleading (by franconi) [ms:CR] [spec:bug]|
16:47:07 <pfps> ora:  What else?
16:47:56 <tl> q+
16:48:02 <pchampin> q+
16:48:21 <ora> ack tl
16:49:08 <pfps> tl: five lines all relate to one issue
16:49:24 <ora> ack pchampin
16:49:51 <pfps> pchampin: I looked at RDF Concepts.  I didn't find anything about vagueness of rdf:reifies
16:50:20 <pfps> pchampin: there was progress on requesting horizontal review
16:51:06 <pfps> pchampin: we are OK with some because nothing involves their area
16:51:29 <pfps> ora: Pat Hayes said it is OK to forward his email to the mailing list
16:51:37 <pfps> ora: I will do this after our meeting
16:51:53 <Enrico> q+
16:52:12 <ora> ack Enrico
16:52:40 <pfps> enrico: I committed a change to the semantics PR
16:53:19 <pfps> ora: is there a SPARQL meeting tomorrow
16:53:26 <pfps> AndyS: yes
16:53:29 <Dominik_T> rrsagent, generate the minutes
16:53:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-minutes.html Dominik_T
16:53:47 <pfps> ora: adjourn
16:54:18 <olaf> olaf has left #rdf-star
16:54:21 <pchampin> s/ora: What else?/Topic: AOB
16:54:29 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:54:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/04-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
18:58:32 <pfps> pfps has left #rdf-star
<pchampin> regrets+ fsasaki, gkellogg, ktk