Meeting minutes
Approval of last week’s minutes: 1
<pfps> minutes look acceptable to me
<ktk> PROPOSAL: Approve last week's minutes
<pfps> +1
<niklasl> +1
<TallTed> +1
<Dominik_T> +0 (absent)
<ktk> +1
<lisp> +1
<j22> +0 (absent)
<olaf> +0 (absent)
<AndyS> +1
<tl> +0 (i wrote them)
<gtw> +1
<Tpt> +1
<Souri> +1
RESOLUTION: Approve last week's minutes
Updates from the SPARQL TF
Anyone able to report on that?
AndyS: not much to report
james: I volunteered to work on SPARQL Protocol tests and will bring this up next Friday
adrian: what's under consideration for the SPARQL TF?
AndyS: the backlog is quite long
Review of open actions, available at 2
Pierre-Antoine is away this week.
Identifying issues to solve before CR 3
Adrian: are we close to being able to request horizontal review?
Jerven: we still need to fix on the syntax
should I push this forward, some guidance would be handy
niklasl: we need to work though the pros and cons ...
<j22> The issue is w3c/
<gb> Issue 80 rdf:annotation and rdf:annotationNodeID maybe confused by pre rdf/xml 1.2 parsers (by JervenBolleman)
<j22> Yes rdf/xml needs a bit more time
Adrian: I have a much more complete list ...
<j22> Yes, even if 5 minutes chat on rdf/xml would be appreciated
It is a long list of people!
<lisp> why does enrico appear with presence count=2
Adrian: I will clean up and remove duplicates
pfps: I am happy to help, but am unsure what to do
<pfps> so I would appreciate some help
AndyS: there's an issue on RDF semantics
<AndyS> w3c/
<gb> Issue 183 Semantics tests : open issues (by afs) [ms:CR]
pfps: so there's 5 issues, but I am not sure where these should go
I asked for advice
AndyS: Greg replied
pfps: I will scream for help if I get stuck
Andy: main challenge is whether tests were correctly remove as being incorrect
pfps: so you're suggesting someone checks the semantic tests
AndyS: we only need to worryabout the RDF 1.2 tests
<niklasl> This one is new w3c/
<gb> Issue 288 Reification triple appears unexpectedly in results for SPARQL 1.2 reification queries: eval-triple-terms basic-2, basic-3 tests (by desislava-hristova-ontotext)
<AndyS> w3c/
<gb> Issue 124 Proposal: Support trailing commas, not just trailing semicolons (by trwnh)
AndyS: an issue on Turtle
It is very difficult to change syntax on the Web as people will start using whatever is proposed
<Dominik_T> +1
TallTed: it would make mine and many other people's lives easier if Turtle allowed trailing commas
niklasl: when would it be possible to every do this? A new syntax?
… dependent on people updating their libraries quickly
TallTed: can we force a switch from 1.1. to 2.0?
niklasl: small changes may be acceptable as part of a major new version
AndyS: should people put the version on the first line?
… better to add backward compatible changes
AndyS: another issue is adding underscores and numbers, but where do you draw the line?
<niklasl> Commonly used for 1_000_0000 etc.
<niklasl> Supported even in *modern* C, IIRC
James: breaking changes should have major benefits, so I would not be inclined to support this
Souri: I agree with that
<niklasl> Fair point.
<niklasl> +1 to souri; I'm actually -0.9 on adding ^ (inverse)
<niklasl> Though _at times_ I really miss it.
<Dominik_T> +1 to souri too
TallTed: this change would make it easier for human authoring, but I can see the arguments against it, and consider them to be stronger
<niklasl> ( I've even used SPARQL constructs as "data with macros" :P (cf. TARQL) )
AndyS: it may be a modern convention, but it would be very difficult to adopt on the web
<lisp> +1
<niklasl> +1
AndyS: we would need to bundle a lot of changes with a major version number increment
Adrian: anyone know who submitted the issue?
AndyS: no
Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
any other business? [no]
end of meeting
<niklasl> Here's that old Grit design I mentioned: https://