16:56:06 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
16:56:11 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-rdf-star-irc
16:56:11 <ktk> meeting: RDF-star WG meeting
16:56:37 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/e5234c80-4c06-4c6b-af43-c78a1dbd390a/20251218T120000/
16:56:37 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:56:37 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of last week’s minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/12/11-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:56:37 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
16:56:37 <agendabot> agenda+ Identifying issues to solve before CR -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8
16:56:39 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
16:57:28 <ktk> regrets+ tl, AZ
16:57:35 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:57:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
16:57:43 <ktk> RRSAgent, make log public
16:59:16 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-star
16:59:21 <lisp> lisp has joined #rdf-star
16:59:33 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
16:59:38 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
17:00:05 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
17:00:30 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
17:00:30 <j22> present+
17:00:37 <fsasaki> fsasaki has joined #rdf-star
17:00:42 <ktk> present+
17:00:42 <AndyS> present+
17:00:46 <Dominik_T> present+
17:00:49 <olaf> present+
17:00:58 <niklasl> present+
17:01:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-rdf-star-minutes.html AndyS
17:01:16 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
17:01:39 <enrico> Present+
17:01:49 <gtw> present+
17:02:09 <fsasaki> present+
17:02:23 <pchampin> present+
17:02:50 <olaf> scribe+
17:02:58 <ora> present+
17:03:01 <ora> chair+
17:03:26 <ktk> Zakim, open item 1
17:03:26 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of last week’s minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/12/11-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:03:49 <olaf> ora: comments about last week's minutes?
17:03:54 <ora> PROPOSAL: Approve last week's minutes
17:04:07 <ora> +1
17:04:07 <ktk> +0
17:04:10 <fsasaki> +1
17:04:11 <olaf> +1
17:04:12 <niklasl> +1
17:04:14 <AndyS> +1
17:04:15 <lisp> +1
17:04:18 <Dominik_T> +1
17:04:18 <j22> +1
17:04:22 <gtw> +1
17:04:25 <enrico> +0
17:04:27 <pfps> +1
17:04:34 <pchampin> +1
17:04:56 <ora> RESOLVED: Approve last week's minutes
17:05:01 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:05:01 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:05:19 <olaf> ora: I haven't completed my actions
17:05:27 <pchampin> q+
17:05:38 <olaf> ... but promise that I will work on them over the (upcoming) holidays
17:06:14 <ora> ack pchampin
17:06:17 <olaf> pchampin: RDF-INTEROP is published
17:06:25 <olaf> ... Echidna is set up for it
17:06:50 <olaf> ora: Can we close this action?
17:07:25 <olaf> pchampin: Let's keep it open until we know that Echidna runs correctly once we merge a PR
17:08:02 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #rdf-star
17:08:15 <olaf> niklasl: I have updated the text to use the term for INTEROP
17:09:05 <ora> Zakim, next item
17:09:05 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Identifying issues to solve before CR -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:09:06 <olaf> ora: okay, let people comment on the action
17:09:35 <olaf> ora: What did we hear from the TAG?
17:09:59 <olaf> pchampin: I got a message from Sarven a minute before this call.
17:10:11 <olaf> ... there are responses on the horizontal review issues
17:10:12 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1161#issuecomment-3671223503
17:10:13 <gb> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1161 -> Issue 1161 WG New Spec: RDF 1.2 N-Triples (by pchampin) [Review type: horizontal review] [Resolution: ambivalent]
17:10:31 <olaf> ... I haven't looked at the issues in detail yet
17:10:46 <olaf> ... but I know that the TAG is concerned with the version announcement
17:10:59 <olaf> ... they don't intent to block anything
17:11:07 <pchampin> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1159#issuecomment-3671161845
17:11:08 <gb> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1159 -> Issue 1159 WG New Spec: RDF 1.2 Concepts and Abstract Data Model (by pchampin) [Review type: horizontal review] [Resolution: satisfied with concerns]
17:11:24 <olaf> ... Sarven's message contains some advice on what the TAG thinks we should do.
17:11:42 <olaf> ... The expectation is that we clarify how the version announcement should be used.
17:12:02 <olaf> ... because it has the potential to break some uses of RDF
17:12:03 <AndyS> q+
17:12:26 <olaf> ora: Should we add some language to the spec or just let this go?
17:12:43 <olaf> pchampin: Additional language won't hurt?
17:12:48 <olaf> ora: Will it help?
17:12:54 <gtw> N-Triples could never be "just concatenated". :\
17:13:00 <olaf> pchampin: It will help the TAG ;-)
17:13:07 <ora> ack AndyS
17:13:37 <olaf> AndyS: Where is the comment about the media type not changing?
17:14:03 <olaf> pchampin: I had some conversations with Sarven and (?)
17:14:13 <olaf> ... they see hat we consider both options
17:14:19 <olaf> s/hat/that
17:14:33 <olaf> AndyS: You can ask them about CSS versioning.
17:15:04 <olaf> ... Regarding declaring version, we could note in Concepts that, at the moment,
17:15:23 <olaf> ... things are stacked. You should choose the highest version.
17:15:32 <olaf> ora: Good idea.
17:15:33 <ktk> q+
17:15:38 <ora> ack ktk
17:15:52 <olaf> ktk: The bnode argument should be used.
17:16:43 <olaf> ora: Regarding the bnode issue, I have many people made the case that you can just split and concatenate. They don't think about the bnodes!
17:16:56 <olaf> ora: Volunteers to add some language to Concepts?
17:17:12 <olaf> AndyS: Yes, me. It should be only one sentence.
17:17:48 <olaf> ora: What about implementation reports?
17:17:52 <csarven> pchampin:  We had two calls on this topic, minutes: 1) https://github.com/w3ctag/meetings/blob/gh-pages/2025/telcons/12-08-minutes.md#design-reviews1159-wg-new-spec-rdf-12-concepts-and-abstract-data-model-github---csarven-1 . 2) will go up sometime this week (placed in the same directory)
17:18:18 <csarven> ^ Some background on other formats.. and why they are not exactly comparable to this situation.
17:18:23 <pchampin> q+
17:18:30 <csarven> (Sorry to drive-by share text.. can't join.. :)
17:18:35 <olaf> ora: What's the rule? We need two implementations, right?
17:18:45 <ora> ack pchampin
17:18:53 <olaf> pchampin: We need two independent implementations for every feature.
17:19:19 <olaf> ... So, in theory, we may have only incomplete implementation.
17:19:28 <olaf> ora: For each *new* feature?
17:20:02 <olaf> pchampin: The way it is measured is that the tests pass.
17:20:15 <olaf> ktk: What does "feature" mean?
17:20:46 <olaf> TallTed: The purpose is to show that every feature, as defined in the spec, can indeed be implemented.
17:21:27 <olaf> pchampin: In terms of tests, we can reuse from the RDF-star CG
17:21:46 <olaf> ... We also discussed the EARL reports.
17:22:00 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
17:22:06 <doerthe> present+
17:22:23 <olaf> AndyS: Do we know two people who can cover the semantics tests?
17:22:37 <olaf> ... They seem to have been broken since 6 months.
17:22:49 <olaf> ... Apparently, none is running them.
17:23:02 <olaf> ... Who has implementations for semantics tests?
17:23:18 <doerthe> q+
17:23:35 <olaf> ora: Are you saying these are not serious things?
17:24:00 <ora> ack doerthe
17:24:01 <olaf> AndyS: The fix is trivial. It just shows that none is running the tests.
17:24:15 <pchampin> q+
17:24:26 <ora> ack pchampin
17:24:38 <olaf> doerthe: I could try to implement something (in January) to be able to run these test.
17:25:01 <olaf> pchampin: Corese implements the specs and they are currently considering the tests.
17:25:21 <olaf> ... They may not have come to the semantics test, but we can count on them to get to it.
17:25:33 <ktk> q+
17:25:41 <olaf> ora: Anything else to discuss regarding getting to CR?
17:25:49 <ktk> https://github.com/ad-freiburg/sparql-conformance
17:25:50 <ora> ack ktk
17:26:22 <olaf> ktk: QLever team build this. It is not specific to QLever.
17:26:38 <olaf> ... It is a test *suite* to run the tests.
17:26:47 <olaf> AndyS: Good to see that.
17:26:53 <pchampin> I also have one for Sophia, but I need to publish the code, though
17:27:10 <olaf> ... We (with Thomas and Ruben) are working on the SPARQL tests.
17:27:39 <olaf> ora: Other business then?
17:27:48 <olaf> AndyS: Back to TAG response
17:28:10 <olaf> ... (reading comment from the GitHub issue)
17:28:23 <olaf> ... "accidentally"
17:28:44 <olaf> pchampin: Looks like a misunderstanding.
17:29:20 <olaf> ora: Any "RDF-star" feature would mean new details in the synatx, which would break old stuff.
17:29:26 <olaf> AndyS: Text direction as well.
17:29:42 <olaf> pchampin: Arguably, text direction could be ambiguous.
17:29:55 <olaf> ... Turtle grammar allows for something.
17:30:44 <AndyS> Turtle 1.1: [144s]	LANGTAG	::=	'@' [a-zA-Z]+ ('-' [a-zA-Z0-9]+)*
17:30:45 <olaf> ... RDF 1.1 Turtle parser can be expected to still parse it and assume it is a language tag. The grammar allows that.
17:30:57 <olaf> AndyS: That's not true.
17:31:21 <olaf> ... We are save.
17:31:31 <olaf> pchampin: Right, I was wrong.
17:31:47 <olaf> ora: Should we tell TAG this?
17:31:53 <olaf> ... I think we should.
17:32:17 <olaf> ... In addition, should we have some language in the spec, because it may not be obvious to the readers.
17:32:33 <olaf> AndyS: There is a sentence hat kinda covers that.
17:32:37 <pchampin> q+
17:32:38 <olaf> s/hat/that
17:32:58 <ora> ack pchampin
17:33:10 <olaf> pchampin: Two things:
17:33:45 <olaf> ... 1) the abstract syntax extends the 1.1 syntax and 2) every concrete syntax extends its 1.1 version
17:33:54 <AndyS> q+
17:34:09 <olaf> ... We can prep some boilerplate that we can use in all syntax-related specs.
17:34:28 <olaf> ... Maybe we should add something in the Changes section.
17:34:33 <ora> ack AndyS
17:34:42 <olaf> ... I can prepare something.
17:35:02 <olaf> AndyS: That's an argument for Trig, Turtle, etc, but RDF/XML is different.
17:35:26 <olaf> ... I am not sure what the spec says.
17:35:41 <olaf> ... The processing algorithm might not catch it.
17:35:56 <olaf> ora: We should check.
17:36:23 <olaf> ... And put some additional language about it in the RDF/XML spec.
17:36:25 <j22> I can open an issue on the rdf/xml to make sure that this is ok
17:36:33 <olaf> ... We didn't change the syntax of XML.
17:36:47 <olaf> ... yes, j22, please open an issue
17:36:59 <olaf> ora: Anyhting else?
17:37:08 <ora> zakim, next item
17:37:08 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:39:00 <AndyS> q+
17:40:22 <ora> ack AndyS
17:40:50 <j22> I opened https://github.com/w3c/rdf-xml/issues/77
17:40:51 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-xml/issues/77 -> Issue 77 Ensure that the attributes and elements do not cause issues for rdf/xml 1.0/1.1 (by JervenBolleman)
17:41:11 <ktk> q+
17:45:29 <j22> q+
17:46:34 <ora> ack ktk
17:50:11 <ora> ack j
17:51:47 <j22> if you want to trust a good bunchmark have a validated LDBC one
17:53:44 <j22> Want to note that due to high compliance to standards in rdf/sparql world that it is easy to actually benchmark your own workload on many endpoints.
17:56:22 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:56:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:58:34 <olaf> olaf has left #rdf-star
<pchampin> present+ TallTed
<pchampin> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/12/11-rdf-star-minutes.html
<pchampin> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html