Meeting minutes
<AndyS> regrets for next week's plenary meeting
TR IRI
nicholascar: all voted on FPWD, all have TR IRIs
… profiles, UI, and overview haven't
… later today we'd like to vote on FPWD for the remaining documents
… we have to have an official vote recorded
HolgerK: everything is stable for core, sparql and nodeexpr
ajnelson-nist: no update from last week, but otherwise I'm happy with profiles going fpwd
nicholascar: the overall mission of the profiling doc is there, PR was merged a few hours ago
edmond: UI is also ready, we had a few PRs merged and a few along the way
bergos: +1
AndyS: we already published and is already in TR, but not in the shape for wide review yet
AndyS: held up by 1 PR
simonstey: was just approved now :)
AndyS: once that's gone in, I'll be able to point people at the shacl rules document for those interested
… also working on updating the grammar, especially putting text about escape sequences (which is necessary for the security section)
… (explaining obfuscation attack on SPARQL update)
vote
nicholascar: Does anybody on the call have any objections to any of those three documents? profiles, UI, overview
nicholascar: does everybody approve the profiles, UI, and overview documents going out as FPWD?
<ajnelson-nist> +1
<HolgerK> +1
<edmond> +1
<mgberg> +1
<simonstey> +1
<bergos> +1
<elianaP> +1
<nicholascar> +1
<Oggy> +1
<caribou> +1
<AndyS> +1
<DavidHabgood> +1
RESOLUTION: the Profile, UI, and Overview document will be published as FPWD
<caribou> Overview is a Note draft though
wide review
nicholascar: we have a template for the wide reviews
… not that thrilling at the moment as I haven't done much with them yet
… In each of the documents, there are currently links to the previous approvals from previous ones.
… And what I'm about to do is that some of those documents will be relevant; some of the decisions about previous reviews of the core and the SHACL documents will be relevant to these documents, just because we're sharing certain information across these documents. So if, for instance, all of our documents have certain parts of them that are the
same, then the approval should carry.
… That review of accessibility may be relevant to the UI group. We'll leave that to the UI task force and the reviewing committee to work out whether it is. I personally don't think it's relevant. I think that the UI group will still only produce code and data. They're not producing actual UI elements, as far as I can tell. So we'll leave that to them to work out.
… again, I'll just have to quickly try and work out whether the reviews are relevant, or whether these separate documents have separate lives which need to be dealt with.
… The Rules document I'm going to put a big draft notice at the top. I've created the issue, but that doesn't mean that the wide review actually has to start. It will really only start when we actually submit
… So I'm going to put down a request that they review by the end of July/June
… And my hope is that by about the end of July, all of these reviews have been completed,
… so that we've done the wide review, we've done all the community first public release, and that the process for getting these documents to be Recommendations and Notes is well underway.