16:56:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
16:56:05 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-irc
16:56:07 <fsasaki> regrets+
16:58:57 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
16:59:28 <ktk> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/11e4d020-9c58-4fff-83c5-37c9e2502295/20260108T120000/
16:59:28 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:59:28 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of last week’s minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:59:28 <agendabot> agenda+ Updates from the SPARQL TF
16:59:28 <agendabot> agenda+ Horizontal Reviews Tracking -> 2 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/254 -> 3 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/164 -> 4 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/issues/79
16:59:30 <agendabot> agenda+ Roadmap to completion in 2026
16:59:32 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of open actions, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
16:59:35 <agendabot> agenda+ Identifying issues to solve before CR -> 6 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8
16:59:38 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
16:59:40 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
16:59:47 <ktk> meeting: RDF-star WG meeting
16:59:53 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:59:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
16:59:58 <ktk> RRSAgent, make log public
17:00:44 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
17:01:14 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-star
17:01:19 <niklasl> present+
17:01:34 <Dominik_T> Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
17:01:44 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
17:01:47 <AZ> present+
17:02:00 <tl> present+
17:02:02 <olaf> present+
17:02:03 <gtw> present+
17:02:13 <Dominik_T> present+
17:02:17 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
17:02:24 <doerthe> present+
17:02:30 <ktk> Chair: ktk
17:02:34 <ktk> present+
17:02:47 <Tpt> present+
17:02:48 <Tpt> scribe+
17:03:19 <lisp> lisp has joined #rdf-star
17:03:52 <AndyS> present+
17:04:38 <ktk> Zakim, open item 1
17:04:38 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Approval of last week’s minutes: -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:05:44 <ktk>  PROPOSAL: Approve last week's minutes
17:05:49 <Tpt> ktk: Communica released a 1.2 implementation. It means we now have 3 implementations of the drafts Jena, Oxigraph and Communica
17:05:54 <ktk> +1
17:05:55 <pfps> +1
17:05:55 <tl> +0 (didn't attend)
17:05:56 <niklasl> +1
17:05:57 <Dominik_T> +1
17:06:00 <lisp> +1
17:06:01 <gtw> +1
17:06:03 <doerthe> +1
17:06:04 <AndyS> +1
17:06:11 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
17:06:15 <TallTed> +1
17:06:16 <Souri> present+
17:06:17 <AZ> +0 (wasn't present)
17:06:20 <lisp> present+
17:06:23 <Tpt> +0 (not present)
17:06:37 <olaf> +1
17:06:39 <Souri> +0 (not present)
17:06:47 <ktk> RESOLUTION: Approve last week's minutes
17:06:55 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:06:55 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Updates from the SPARQL TF -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:07:54 <pchampin> present+ TallTed
17:07:56 <pchampin> present+
17:08:22 <AndyS> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-query/issues/326
17:08:23 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-query/issues/326 -> Issue 326 Remaining erratas and errata-like issues (by Tpt)
17:08:27 <pfps> present+
17:08:42 <pchampin> Tpt: list of errata (link above), none seem significant
17:08:55 <pchampin> s|Tpt: list of errata (link above), none seem significant|
17:08:57 <pchampin> scribe+
17:09:00 <pchampin> Tpt: list of errata (link above), none seem significant
17:09:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:09:10 <Tpt> Tpt: https://github.com/w3c/sparql-query/pull/327
17:09:10 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-query/pull/327 -> Pull Request 327 Clarify that unagreggated variables in SELECT raise an error (by Tpt) [spec:bug]
17:09:23 <pchampin> ... another one (link above) is a clarification
17:09:47 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:09:47 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/01/15-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:10:06 <pchampin> ... consider  "SELECT ?s { ... } GROUP BY ?o" -- some parts of the spec consider it a syntax error
17:10:20 <pchampin> ... other parts suggest that ?s should be replaced by SAMPLE(?s)
17:10:42 <AndyS> q+
17:10:43 <pchampin> ... there seem to be agreement that it should be a syntax error; most implementations consider it like that
17:10:58 <ktk> ack AndyS
17:11:15 <pchampin> ... if we make it a syntax error, then implementations may use it as an extension point
17:11:41 <pchampin> AndyS: I think the spec considers it as a syntax error; only the algebra handles it as if it were not
17:12:13 <pchampin> ... we also have an old test for it (rejecting it as a syntax error)
17:12:26 <lisp> q#
17:12:28 <pchampin> ... it is more a matter of getting the wrong impression, depending where you look in the spec
17:12:29 <lisp> q+
17:12:33 <pchampin> s/q#/
17:12:39 <ktk> ack lisp
17:13:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:13:56 <Tpt> lisp: Is it a consensus that a syntax error allows to be an extension point?
17:14:02 <AndyS> q+
17:14:08 <ktk> ack AndyS
17:14:10 <pchampin> scribe-
17:14:59 <Tpt> AndyS: You can't change the syntax and call it SPARQL 1.2. Lots of systems have extensions in the syntax but cannot call it SPARQL in the strict sense
17:15:10 <pchampin> scribe+
17:15:41 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:15:41 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Horizontal Reviews Tracking -> 2 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/254 -> 3 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/164 -> 4
17:15:43 <Zakim> ... https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/issues/79 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:15:50 <pchampin> Tpt: I agree with AndyS. What I meant was : people wanting to extend SPARQL can not do it if we specify it as a SAMPLE.
17:16:26 <pchampin> scribe-
17:17:08 <ktk> q?
17:17:10 <Tpt> pchampin: Now would be good time to ping the horizontal review groups
17:17:23 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:17:23 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Roadmap to completion in 2026 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:19:20 <pchampin> q+
17:19:45 <ktk> ack pchampin
17:19:51 <Tpt> ktk: What do we want to send next to horizontal review?
17:20:09 <Tpt> pchampin: We might split the Turtle family of syntaxes from the there (RDF/XML and schema)
17:20:28 <Tpt> pchampin: We need to reflect the changes in Turtle to the other format (the profile would make sense to RDF/XML)
17:20:45 <Tpt> pchampin: We are slightly to completion on Turtle/TriG/NQuads than the other two
17:20:59 <Tpt> pchampin: It might make sense to try make those 3 out there first
17:21:13 <Tpt> AndyS: What we can start now is doing group reviews of the documents
17:21:24 <Tpt> AndyS: To see if there issues in the spec
17:21:30 <pchampin> +1 AndyS
17:21:35 <ktk> q?
17:22:04 <Tpt> ktk: Is there something with a big list of TODO?
17:22:18 <Tpt> q+
17:22:24 <pchampin> q+
17:23:07 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-star
17:23:31 <ktk> ack Tpt
17:23:33 <ktk> ack pchampin
17:23:48 <Tpt> Tpt: When RDF terms and EXISTS support is done I feel we can push SPARQL 1.2
17:23:57 <Tpt> Tpt: we can fix the remaining issues later
17:24:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html AndyS
17:24:26 <Tpt> q+
17:25:00 <Tpt> pchampin: I feel there are still big issues on property paths for example
17:25:01 <olaf> q+
17:25:15 <Tpt> pchampin: Notes have a much lighter live cycle
17:25:53 <ktk> ack Tpt
17:27:06 <Tpt> pchampin: But it's not that they are just not that we should loose track of them
17:27:08 <ktk> ack olaf
17:27:35 <Tpt> olaf: There two aspects to it: the spec on property paths still have a bunch of smaller issues
17:27:43 <ktk> q+
17:27:56 <Tpt> olaf: indeed there are no formalization of triple terms on subject/object position of triple path. We have a PR in progress
17:27:59 <ktk> ack ktk
17:28:44 <olaf> q+
17:28:48 <pchampin> scribe+
17:28:58 <ktk> ack olaf
17:29:10 <Tpt> ktk: Is there any big issue remaining in property path?
17:29:17 <pchampin> scribe-
17:29:40 <ktk> q?
17:29:46 <Tpt> Tpt: I am not aware of any issue affecting implementation, it's only formalization issues at my knowledge
17:30:15 <Tpt> olaf: We are not planning to add any new feature on property paths at the moment like p{n,m}
17:30:37 <Tpt> ktk: We are pushing for NQuads/Turtle/TriG as the next batch
17:30:54 <Tpt> ktk: We are not pushing new features to SPARQL but focusing on stabilization
17:30:58 <Tpt> ktk: Does anyone agree?
17:31:05 <Tpt> AndyS: What about RDF/XML?
17:31:15 <Tpt> ktk: We should catch up with RDF/XML editors
17:31:25 <pchampin> q+
17:31:34 <ktk> ack pchampin
17:32:20 <niklasl> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-xml/issues/80
17:32:21 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-xml/issues/80 -> Issue 80 rdf:annotation and rdf:annotationNodeID maybe confused by pre rdf/xml 1.2 parsers (by JervenBolleman)
17:32:40 <Tpt> pchampin: I agree RDF/XML is properly in good shape. I realized only recently that new features in RDF/XML 1.2 won't be rejected by 1.1 parsers
17:32:54 <Tpt> pchampin: I did not realized that RDF/XML did not shared this nice feature
17:33:39 <Tpt> AndyS: One of the feature that is its:dir that we inherit from the its sepc is enough to change the parsing
17:34:01 <pchampin> q+
17:34:13 <Tpt> AndyS: The rdf: namespace is effectively reserved. It is on the group control. We can hid behind "you should not mess with it"
17:34:29 <ktk> q?
17:34:32 <ktk> ack pchampin
17:34:35 <Tpt> AndyS: We can't easily change the syntax to make sure the parser will break, opposite to Turtle
17:35:16 <Tpt> pchampin: I agree regarding its:dir. Reserving the rdf: namespace post hoc is strange
17:35:25 <Tpt> AndyS: There is already some note on it
17:35:35 <Tpt> AndyS: There is an issue/PR on RDF/XML discussing it
17:35:47 <Tpt> pchampin: I just wanted to make sure we make informed decision about it
17:35:53 <ktk> q?
17:36:24 <Tpt> ktk: What is the best case scenario for the publication process? How many month?
17:37:00 <Tpt> pchampin: The more variable step is the horizontal review. We might be very clear that we give the same answers for every RDF spec
17:37:11 <Tpt> pchampin: The AC review is at least 28 days
17:37:44 <ktk> q?
17:38:35 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:38:35 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Review of open actions, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:38:51 <Dominik_T> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:38:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html Dominik_T
17:39:04 <pchampin> nothing to report
17:39:11 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:39:11 <Zakim> agendum 5 was just opened, ktk
17:39:18 <ktk> Zakim, close item 5
17:39:18 <Zakim> agendum 5, Review of open actions, available at -> 5 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3, closed
17:39:20 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:39:20 <Zakim> 6. Identifying issues to solve before CR -> 6 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8 [from agendabot]
17:39:26 <ktk> Zakim, open item 6
17:39:26 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- Identifying issues to solve before CR -> 6 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:39:53 <ktk> q?
17:39:59 <pchampin> q+
17:41:09 <AndyS> q+
17:41:30 <ktk> ack pchampin
17:41:33 <Tpt> pchampin: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/118 on how to handle the VERSION directive
17:41:34 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/118 -> Issue 118 explain how to interpret multiple `VERSION` directives (by pchampin) [ms:CR]
17:42:55 <Tpt> pchampin: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/pull/90 explains how NTriples 1.2 is backward compatible
17:42:55 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/pull/90 -> Pull Request 90 add paragraph stating that N-Triples 1.2 is not ambiguous for 1.1 implems (by pchampin) [ms:CR]
17:44:06 <ktk> ack AndyS
17:45:00 <Tpt> AndyS: I have an MR to centralize the version wording in concepts: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/261
17:45:00 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/261 -> Pull Request 261 Upwards compatibility of versions (by afs)
17:46:33 <ktk> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1161
17:46:33 <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]
17:46:53 <ktk> q?
17:46:58 <Tpt> ktk: ^ comments on horizontal reviews
17:47:55 <Tpt> AndyS: I made a PR to remove closed issues from a document. Do we keep or remove the issues appendix if it's empty?
17:48:38 <ktk> q?
17:48:42 <Tpt> AndyS: I think we should remove it because it's for the WG internal work
17:48:59 <Tpt> AndyS: I will update the PR
17:49:11 <pchampin> I think it would make sense to leave it in WDs, and remove it in the CR snapshot
17:49:24 <ktk> Zakim, next item
17:49:24 <Zakim> agendum 7 -- Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:49:48 <ktk> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/11
17:50:40 <Tpt> ktk: I will close these ^ two issues later
17:51:09 <Tpt> AndyS: We have a SPARQL meeting tomorrow
17:51:30 <Tpt> ktk: Have a good day/evening!
17:51:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html AndyS
17:51:49 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:51:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
17:53:57 <ktk> s/Communica released a 1.2 implementation/Comunica released a 1.2 implementation/
17:54:37 <ktk> s/unagreggated variables/unaggregated variables/
17:54:38 <ktk> s/there seem to be agreement/there seems to be agreement/
17:54:38 <ktk> s/can not do it/cannot do it/
17:54:38 <ktk> s/Now would be good time/Now would be a good time/
17:54:38 <ktk> s/from the there/from there/
17:54:40 <ktk> s/other format/other formats/
17:54:43 <ktk> s/slightly to completion/slightly closer to completion/
17:54:45 <ktk> s/To see if there issues/To see if there are issues/
17:54:48 <ktk> s/live cycle/life cycle/
17:54:51 <ktk> s/loose track/lose track/
17:55:12 <ktk> s/unagreggated variables/unaggregated variables/
17:55:12 <ktk> s/there seem to be agreement/there seems to be agreement/
17:55:12 <ktk> s/can not do it/cannot do it/
17:55:12 <ktk> s/Now would be good time/Now would be a good time/
17:55:12 <ktk> s/from the there/from there/
17:55:14 <ktk> s/other format/other formats/
17:55:16 <ktk> s/slightly to completion/slightly closer to completion/
17:55:19 <ktk> s/To see if there issues/To see if there are issues/
17:55:22 <ktk> s/live cycle/life cycle/
17:55:24 <ktk> s/loose track/lose track/
17:55:54 <ktk> s/maybe confused/may be confused/
17:56:12 <ktk> s/did not realized/did not realise/
17:56:12 <ktk> s/did not shared/did not share/
17:56:12 <ktk> s/One of the feature/One of the features/
17:56:12 <ktk> s/its sepc/its spec/
17:56:14 <ktk> s/We can hid behind/We can hide behind/
17:56:39 <ktk> s/make informed decision/make an informed decision/
17:56:39 <ktk> s/How many month/How many months/
17:56:40 <ktk> s/implems/implementations/
17:56:46 <ktk> s/add paragraph stating/adds a paragraph stating/
17:56:52 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:56:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
17:57:40 <ktk> regrets+ ora
17:57:42 <ktk> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:57:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/08-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk
17:58:57 <ktk> RRSAgent, end meeting
17:58:57 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'end meeting', ktk.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:59:03 <ktk> RRSAgent, leave
17:59:03 <RRSAgent> I see no action items