– DRAFT –
RDF-star WG meeting

ktk: congrats Andy to release of new Jena 6 version

Approval of last week’s minutes: 1

<ktk> PROPOSAL: Approve last week's minutes

<Souri> +1

<niklasl> +1

<tl> +1

<gtw> +1

<lisp> +1

<TallTed> +1

<AndyS> +1

<ktk> +1

<enrico> +1

<doerthe> +1

RESOLUTION: Approve last week's minutes

Horizontal Reviews Tracking 2 3 4

pchampin: feedback from internationalization on RDF concepts and base direction
… made PR which wasn't considered satisfactory, joint meeting proposed, maybe not necessary, will propose further changes to PR

<ktk> 1?

ktk: didn't get back to security group, so that's still on the queue
… any other updates?

<pchampin> my PR for i18n: w3c/rdf-concepts#265

<gb> Pull Request 265 improve discussion on text direction - fix #262 (by pchampin) [needs discussion]

Review of open actions, available at 5

ktk: without Ora we probably have to skip that

niklas: no progress to report from my side

Identifying issues to solve before CR 6

ktk: update on editor notes. extracted all participants from WG meeting logs, but not complete yet

(shows list in screen sharing)

tl: some people are missing although they always present+

ktk: ok, needs more work
… expect about 20 people. we don't want to list people that never participated in WG meetings

pchampin: scribe bot sometimes lists "maybe present" for people that said something but didn't "present+"

tallted: may also try "active on IRC"

w3c/rdf-star-wg#186

ktk: any news on implementation reports?
… where will they be added?

AndyS: we haven't got to the stage where we can ask for them formally

ktk: right, that would be after CR is published

<gb> Issue 186 Tracking implementation reports (by afs) [ms:CR]

AndyS: no progress on semantics tests. waiting for PR on semantics to come back. previous commit had some problems. not sure what's going on there

ktk: who could push this forward?

<enrico> I can try - I have no clue but will try

<gb> Pull Request 279 RDF 1.2: Restore missing semantics test files (by erdemonal)

ktk: if anybody else has an idea, please contribute

<pchampin> I will try to include the semantics test suite in the tests of my library

ktk: any further documents that we can submit?

<enrico> I started writing the Group Note “RDF 1.2 Triple Terms and Reification explained”. The intro is already available here for comments: https://franconi.github.io/ttr-note/

<AndyS> s/Mote/Note/

pchampin: n-triples media type parameters, versions
… apart from that we're pretty close

ktk: will ask jerven about RDF/XML

enrico: took a couple of weeks to try writing an introduction to reification
… will now tackle the parts connected to RDF

<tl> s/introduction to reification /independent of RDF

Review of open actions, available at 5

<tl> s/independent of RDF/introduction to reification independent of RDF

Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting

ktk: maybe anything we can close?

<enrico> Link to the Linkedin discussion: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/martynasjusevicius_rdf-star-feels-like-a-red-herring-it-feels-activity-7419342188393730048-ae-A?rcm=ACoAAAApL1sBd715Qu0amToMfeKW41K2Ge5abBM

ktk: dominique proposed closing this a week ago, we'll wait another week

AndyS: about HTML PRs, there are problems but not my area of expertise

niklasl: in RDF Concepts we "hot-link" RDF commons to avoid [some linking]
… there are issues with dark mode in ReSpec which haven't been addressed in ReSpec.
… fixes are available, and could be integrated with "hot linking" fixes into all our repositories
… and feedback on if should we do that?
… if not i interpret that as approval
… would just add absolute links to RDF commons
… intricate stuff that I don't want to get into in detail here
… documents are still free to offer dark mode or not, but would prevent documents switching to dark mode although not selected by the reader

pchampin: this is an editorial change that we can make post-PR
… plus 1 to move everything to hard links, but let's not make this a blocker

niklasl: but make it soon
… have to think about what happens when ReSpec tackles the issue

ktk: which documents have dark mode?

niklasl: concepts
… activated button down on the left corner

ktk: not bad

pchampin: seems like RDF 1.2 semantics test suite doesn't import tests from RDF 1.1.
… just looking at the manifest (unlike Turtle, etc Semantics doesn't include older tests)
… we should double check

ktk: editors please check

enrico: will do

<pchampin> looking at it very quickly, it seems that the rdf12/rdf-semantics manifest contains mostly tests about triple terms, so it probably *should* import the old manifest

<pchampin> and the json datatype

<ktk> s/Mote/Note/

<ktk> s/althought/although/