15:58:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #json-ld
15:58:52 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/04/08-json-ld-irc
15:58:52 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:58:53 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), bigbluehat
15:58:56 <bigbluehat> meeting: JSON-LD WG
15:59:00 <bigbluehat> chair: bigbluehat
15:59:10 <bigbluehat> present+
16:00:11 <anatoly-scherbakov> present+
16:00:30 <TallTed> present+
16:01:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/08-json-ld-minutes.html TallTed
16:02:05 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/04/01-json-ld-minutes.html
16:02:05 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/04/15-json-ld-minutes.html
16:02:22 <bigbluehat> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/de31b974-ca9c-4325-bcea-60b91a1b78d9/20260408T120000/
16:02:22 <TallTed> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/de31b974-ca9c-4325-bcea-60b91a1b78d9/20260408T120000/
16:02:23 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:02:23 <agendabot> agenda+ Announcements and Introductions
16:02:23 <agendabot> agenda+ YAML-LD check-in
16:02:23 <agendabot> agenda+ CBOR-LD PRs & Issues
16:02:23 <agendabot> agenda+ Open Discussion
16:02:25 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:02:28 <agendabot> agenda+ Announcements and Introductions
16:02:30 <agendabot> agenda+ YAML-LD check-in
16:02:32 <agendabot> agenda+ CBOR-LD PRs & Issues
16:02:35 <agendabot> agenda+ Open Discussion
16:03:08 <ivan> present+
16:03:28 <wes-smith> wes-smith has joined #json-ld
16:03:38 <VictorLu> VictorLu has joined #json-ld
16:03:43 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #json-ld
16:07:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/08-json-ld-minutes.html TallTed
16:11:29 <bigbluehat> scribe+
16:11:38 <dlehn> present+
16:11:46 <wes-smith> scribe+
16:11:58 <bigbluehat> Zakim, next item
16:11:58 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements and Introductions -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:12:12 <wes-smith> bigbluehat: Anyone have anything to share re: announcements and intros?
16:12:32 <wes-smith> ... I have reached out to a couple implementers of JSON-LD and/or CBOR-LD libraries about them joining as invited experts.
16:12:48 <wes-smith> ... I'm hoping that we can get through the formalities of that prior to the JSON-LD spec work that is on the horizon.
16:13:03 <wes-smith> ... If anyone knows of other people that would be a good fit for talking about these specs, let us know.
16:13:17 <wes-smith> ... ivan and PA can help with the invited expert process.
16:13:40 <wes-smith> ... they are not from companies large enough to join W3C and mostly work on these implementations as side projects.
16:13:47 <bigbluehat> Zakim, next item
16:13:47 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- YAML-LD check-in -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:14:10 <anatoly-scherbakov> https://github.com/w3c/yaml-ld/pull/190
16:14:10 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/yaml-ld/issues/190 -> https://github.com/w3c/yaml-ld/pull/190
16:14:20 <wes-smith> anatoly-scherbakov: I have found a bug in the tests, there is a PR to fix it.
16:14:29 <wes-smith> ... There is a property being lost during an expansion process.
16:14:34 <niklasl> present+
16:15:49 <bigbluehat> https://w3c.github.io/yaml-ld/#extended-profile
16:15:51 <ivan> q+
16:16:00 <wes-smith> ... The current version of YAML-LD, in addition to the basic YAML-LD profile normatively specified, describes an extended profile that leverages tags as semantic information. This is now a substantial part of the document, but is still informative - I want to keep that for potential use in the next version of YAML-LD, but want to know what the
16:16:00 <wes-smith> group thinks about moving that section into a separate document to keep the current YAML-LD spec minimal.
16:16:01 <ajs6f> ajs6f has joined #json-ld
16:17:01 <bigbluehat> q+
16:17:02 <wes-smith> ... This section in the current document could cause confusion, especially with the normative/informative breakdown of the spec currently.
16:17:10 <niklasl> +1 to move this (it's not JSON-LD-isomorphic)
16:17:19 <wes-smith> ivan: +1
16:17:46 <bigbluehat> q?
16:17:49 <bigbluehat> ack ivan
16:17:51 <wes-smith> bigbluehat: +1
16:18:03 <TallTed> NOTE is fine. Appendix on main doc might also be sufficient separation.
16:18:58 <wes-smith> TallTed: It's sometimes better to minimize number of documents
16:19:11 <wes-smith> BigBlueHat: In this case it's too large w.r.t the main document, it's confusing
16:20:14 <wes-smith> ... PR 190 is confusing - what was broken and what is now working?
16:20:27 <wes-smith> anatoly-scherbakov: It is an expansion test. I should have mentioned the inputs.
16:20:33 <anatoly-scherbakov> https://github.com/w3c/yaml-ld/issues/191 issue created
16:20:33 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/yaml-ld/issues/191 -> Issue 191 Move Extended Profile into a separate NOTE document (by anatoly-scherbakov)
16:22:41 <wes-smith> bigbluehat: What is the switch that is determining whether you are getting one or more "documents", or list items?
16:23:03 <wes-smith> anatoly-scherbakov: These are two documents separated by the three dashes, this is YAML terminology for a stream that consists of 1 or more YAML documents.
16:23:18 <wes-smith> ... In order to control how we parse this, we are reusing an API flag - extract all scripts.
16:23:36 <wes-smith> ... This is mimicking the behavior of the JSON-LD API when processing an HTML page.
16:24:00 <wes-smith> ... This will return only the first document, and alternatively if extract-all-scripts is true we will return an array with documents as items in the array.
16:24:23 <ivan> q+
16:24:28 <bigbluehat> ack bigbluehat
16:24:31 <bigbluehat> ack ivan
16:25:56 <niklasl> q+
16:26:06 <wes-smith> anatoly-scherbakov: The name property was missing due to an oversight, and I noticed it while running the tests.
16:26:17 <wes-smith> ... The input file has the context, we should resolve the name property.
16:26:30 <bigbluehat> q+ ...I see it...
16:26:33 <wes-smith> ivan: in JSON-LD when I use the array tool, AFAIK I have to repeat the context in every element of the array.
16:26:37 <bigbluehat> q+
16:26:40 <wes-smith> anatoly-scherbakov: It is done here as well.
16:26:49 <wes-smith> ivan: but in the result it doesn't do that.
16:27:25 <niklasl> There is no context in an expanded result.
16:27:45 <niklasl> There is another problem here though.
16:27:53 <wes-smith> The group discusses the details of the input/output of the test in question.
16:28:06 <niklasl> Look at the context - there is no vocab.
16:28:33 <wes-smith> BigBlueHat: the bug is that some lines were missing, is it due to the @base value that should be @vocab?
16:29:11 <wes-smith> anatoly-scherbakov: the test worked after this change, perhaps I noticed after I upgraded pyld
16:29:17 <wes-smith> ... I will try again and the group can discuss further.
16:29:29 <niklasl> Same behaviour on the playground with: {"@context": {"@base": "https://schema.org/"},  "@id": "https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/",  "@type": "WebContent",  "name": "JSON-LD"}
16:32:01 <wes-smith> niklasl: I think this is unrelated to YAML-LD, if you try the example I shared on the playground.
16:32:19 <wes-smith> ... There is unintuitive @type behavior in the expansion.
16:33:34 <wes-smith> BigBlueHat: I think this is a series of accidents
16:34:25 <wes-smith> ... the test data is overly confusing.
16:34:34 <wes-smith> niklasl: It's not wrong, just very confusing.
16:34:57 <wes-smith> BigBlueHat: I suggest not merging this and instead cleaning up the JSON.
16:36:08 <wes-smith> niklasl: I'm not sure if the test suite caches external contexts.
16:38:23 <bigbluehat> q?
16:38:29 <bigbluehat> ack niklasl
16:38:30 <bigbluehat> ack bigbluehat
16:38:50 <bigbluehat> Zakim, next item
16:38:50 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- CBOR-LD PRs & Issues -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:39:34 <bigbluehat> wes-smith: we have one item of business first
16:39:41 <bigbluehat> ... we want to publish and FPWD
16:39:55 <bigbluehat> ... but haven't because of PR 63
16:40:03 <bigbluehat> ... and we wanted that in first
16:40:42 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/w3c/cbor-ld/pulls/63
16:40:57 <bigbluehat> ... this PR improved the prose around the algorithms
16:41:07 <bigbluehat> ... and I think we're now ready to move to FPWD
16:41:13 <ivan> q+
16:41:17 <bigbluehat> ack ivan
16:41:33 <bigbluehat> ivan: PA was on vacation and I have a backlog of other documents
16:41:40 <bigbluehat> ... so we'll have to wait on PA
16:41:53 <bigbluehat> ... the additional practical problem is an upcoming AC meeting
16:42:00 <bigbluehat> ... which will block FPWD
16:42:06 <bigbluehat> .... at least the formal publication
16:42:17 <bigbluehat> ... but that means we also don't have to be in a rush
16:42:22 <TallTed> s|pulls/63|pull/63|
16:42:29 <bigbluehat> ... there's a bunch of transition requests, though
16:42:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/08-json-ld-minutes.html TallTed
16:42:52 <bigbluehat> ... there are boring admin steps, basically, best done by PA
16:43:06 <bigbluehat> ... if I didn't have VCWG work to do, I would do it...
16:43:19 <bigbluehat> wes-smith: all good. later this month it is!
16:43:24 <bigbluehat> ... now on to open PRs
16:43:34 <bigbluehat> ... is this a bot?
16:43:39 <bigbluehat> ivan: this is a person who uses a bot
16:43:50 <TallTed> s|https://github.com/w3c/cbor-ld/pulls/63|... https://github.com/w3c/cbor-ld/pulls/63|
16:43:51 <bigbluehat> wes-smith: not sure what the discussion became
16:43:58 <bigbluehat> ivan: it should not be merged at this point
16:44:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/08-json-ld-minutes.html TallTed
16:44:13 <bigbluehat> ... he was fixing the JSON-LD refs
16:44:21 <bigbluehat> ... but he did it mechanically probably via a bot
16:44:33 <bigbluehat> ... but however it was done, it was done incorrectly
16:44:54 <TallTed> q+
16:45:05 <bigbluehat> ... so, for example, the first one is in a non-normative section, so the reference to JSON-LD is marked as non-normative...which is incorrect
16:45:11 <bigbluehat> ... that was one problem
16:45:15 <bigbluehat> ... but there are others
16:45:50 <bigbluehat> ... a more general thing: if I do a reference to `json-ld` as a short name, then I get `1.0`...but that should not be the case
16:45:59 <bigbluehat> ... PA or bigbluehat should fix that to go to the latest
16:46:02 <bigbluehat> ... which is 1.1
16:46:21 <bigbluehat> ... this surfaced here because he had to make an explicit `1.1` reference
16:46:42 <bigbluehat> ... but then CBOR-LD will not "upgrade" to `1.2` when we get that done--which might be prior to publishing CBOR-LD
16:46:54 <bigbluehat> ... in the meantime, we could do it this way, but it would be better to fix the ref
16:46:56 <bigbluehat> q+
16:47:21 <bigbluehat> ivan: not sure if you want to take this over
16:47:31 <TallTed> q?
16:47:32 <bigbluehat> ... but we should close this and do the work elsewhere
16:48:17 <bigbluehat> ack TallTed
16:49:01 <bigbluehat> ack TallTed
16:49:11 <bigbluehat> TallTed: I think we should leave this open
16:49:16 <bigbluehat> ... yes, the redirect should be fixed
16:49:23 <bigbluehat> ... but it often takes years to get this stuff fixed
16:49:30 <bigbluehat> ... and it's nearly ever setup correctly
16:49:50 <bigbluehat> ... each of these things should become issues
16:50:08 <bigbluehat> ... I don't think we should throw that  work out just because it was with a bot
16:50:16 <bigbluehat> ... it's not completely out of bounds to do this
16:50:27 <bigbluehat> wes-smith: I can certainly appreciate this perspective
16:50:46 <bigbluehat> ... but in this case, rescuing this PR would essentially reverse this work anyhow
16:51:09 <bigbluehat> ivan: ish. however it's done it should mainly fix the informative vs. non-normative
16:51:53 <bigbluehat> TallTed: we should file issues that explain the problem
16:52:11 <bigbluehat> wes-smith: there is an issue about this
16:52:34 <bigbluehat> ack bigbluehat
16:56:31 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat: I don't think it's worth the lift to protect this PR. It's wrong. We can redo it quickly. But we should fix the issue details.
16:56:47 <bigbluehat> ... if they come back, they can do it better based on new content on the issue.
16:56:56 <bigbluehat> wes-smith: who can add those details?
16:56:59 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat: I will.
16:57:22 <bigbluehat> wes-smith: I will go over PR ??
16:57:35 <bigbluehat> ... and bring in grammar and layout fixes requested in the earlier PR
16:57:44 <bigbluehat> ... please review this one and leave feedback
16:57:52 <bigbluehat> ... hopefully this adds clarifications
16:57:57 <ivan> q+
16:57:58 <bigbluehat> s/??/73
16:58:07 <bigbluehat> ack ivan
16:58:25 <bigbluehat> ivan: I am curious how my request will be solved
16:58:56 <bigbluehat> ... there's a discrepancy between the description of the registry here and the registry itself
16:59:30 <ajs6f> bye all!
17:00:50 <bigbluehat> Zakim, end meeting
17:00:50 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been bigbluehat, anatoly-scherbakov, TallTed, ivan, dlehn, niklasl
17:00:52 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:00:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/08-json-ld-minutes.html Zakim
17:00:59 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, bigbluehat; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:01:00 <Zakim> Zakim has left #json-ld
17:01:03 <bigbluehat> rrsagent, bye
17:01:03 <RRSAgent> I see no action items