15:55:25 RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star 15:55:29 logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-irc 15:55:31 meeting: RDF-star WG meeting 15:55:39 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/11e4d020-9c58-4fff-83c5-37c9e2502295/20260611T120000/ 15:55:39 clear agenda 15:55:39 agenda+ RDF Semantics feedback from the ML -> 1 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2026May/0014.html -> 2 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2026May/0036.html -> 3 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2026Jun/0004.html 15:55:40 agenda+ Threat Modeling Next Steps 15:55:40 agenda+ Horizontal Reviews Status -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8 15:55:42 agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting 15:55:48 RRSAgent, draft minutes 15:55:50 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk 15:55:53 RRSAgent, make log public 15:56:06 present+ 15:57:46 AZ has joined #rdf-star 15:58:05 pfps has joined #rdf-star 15:59:31 Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star 15:59:58 niklasl has joined #rdf-star 16:00:03 ora has joined #rdf-star 16:00:27 present+ 16:00:37 present+ 16:00:40 chair+ 16:00:40 present+ 16:00:46 lisp has joined #rdf-star 16:00:47 present+ 16:01:02 present+ 16:01:03 scribe+ 16:01:10 william-vw has joined #rdf-star 16:01:20 present+ 16:01:22 previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/06/04-rdf-star-minutes.html 16:01:22 next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/06/18-rdf-star-minutes.html 16:01:34 present+ 16:01:41 present+ 16:01:47 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed 16:02:37 ora: I contacted Valentina Tamma, general chair of ISWC 2026 16:02:51 ... she thinks that a joint session between TPAC and the RDF group would be good 16:03:05 ... on 26 October 2026 on the workshop day 16:03:09 present+ 16:03:13 present+ 16:03:17 ... it would be considered as a workshop in the conference 16:03:31 ... we should give her a couple of timeslots to work on the programme 16:03:34 regrets+ 16:04:04 Zakim, open item 1 16:04:04 agendum 1 -- RDF Semantics feedback from the ML -> 1 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2026May/0014.html -> 2 16:04:04 ... https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2026May/0036.html -> 3 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2026Jun/0004.html -- taken up [from 16:04:04 ... agendabot] 16:04:08 ktk: the deadline for TPAC is next week so we must give feedback before 16:04:52 regrets+ olaf, enrico, fsasaki 16:04:59 ora: pchampin, you sent something the Michael Schneider? 16:05:10 j22 has joined #rdf-star 16:05:11 s/the/to 16:05:21 present+ 16:05:25 q+ 16:05:30 ack pfps 16:05:30 pchampin: the first message was already addressed 16:05:44 PRs mentioned by Enrico: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/pull/198 16:05:45 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/pull/198 -> Pull Request 198 Michael Schneider's feedback (Part 2) on RDF-Semantics (by franconi) [Errata] [ms:REC] 16:05:51 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/199 16:05:52 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/199 -> Issue 199 Michael Schneider's feedback (Part 3) on RDF-Semantics (by franconi) [Errata] [ms:REC] 16:05:52 pfps: there is already a PR that already address all 3 of them thanks to Enrico 16:06:00 s/the ML/the mailing list/ 16:06:15 ... in RDF 1.2 Semantics we should see a PR for Part 2, and 16:06:23 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed 16:06:29 ... Part 1 is merged 16:06:48 ... I don't know if there are official email responses yet 16:06:55 q? 16:06:57 Souri has joined #rdf-star 16:07:00 present+ 16:07:05 ... Enrico has issues with Part 2 and Part 3 16:07:16 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/196 16:07:17 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-semantics/issues/196 -> Issue 196 Michael Schneider's feedback (Part 2) on RDF-Semantics (by franconi) [Errata] [ms:REC] 16:07:37 q+ 16:07:41 doerthe has joined #rdf-star 16:07:43 pfps: there hasn't been an official response yet [by the working group] 16:07:52 ack pchampin 16:07:52 present+ 16:08:02 pchampin: responding to the email with a pointer to the PR would be adequate 16:08:48 ... although not all people have Github accounts 16:10:03 to be clear: I was suggesting to point them to the PRs *on the mailing list*, and let them respond where they see fit (GH or ML) 16:10:07 pfps: somebody could already response to Part 1 which is already merged 16:10:24 ... I can try to do it 16:10:45 TallTed: Enrico already replied to the last email 16:11:07 ora: do we need to discuss Part 2 and Part 3? 16:12:16 pfps: Enrico responded to the email on Part 3 explaining that Part 1 is done, and that we would not do anything on Part 3 16:12:20 Zakim, next item 16:12:20 agendum 2 -- Threat Modeling Next Steps -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:12:32 ... so the ball is in his [Michael's] court 16:12:55 q+ 16:13:00 ack pchampin 16:13:03 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2026May/0014.html 16:13:08 ... there is also a comment on Concepts from Michael Schneider 16:13:24 pchampin: I made a PR to address the comment on Concepts 16:13:34 ... I responded with an email already 16:13:49 pfps: Michael is happy with the Concepts comments 16:14:33 ora: what do we do with the threat modelling? Updating the diagram? 16:14:45 ... we decided for the syntax changes 16:15:01 ... AndyS, will you make the changes to SPARQL syntax? 16:15:06 AndyS: that's all done now 16:15:13 q+ 16:15:54 ack pchampin 16:16:07 ktk: on the threat modelling, the idea is to have what we have already in the documents and align it and present it to the security people 16:16:34 pchampin: from the discussion with the CG, this kind of things is never finished, so we won't have a final thing 16:16:57 ... we will refactor the security consideration that we have in the document but we will not make something original 16:17:08 ... I will work on this but not done yet 16:17:38 ktk: do you mean we will have a threat modelling document and documents pointing to it 16:18:06 q+ 16:18:13 pchampin: we will have sections pointing to the threat modelling document, shouldn't imply much change 16:18:15 ack AndyS 16:18:41 AndyS: how much do we need to write? we don't have descriptions of actors of the threat. We should keep it short 16:18:57 q+ 16:18:57 ... a diagramme and a few sentences 16:19:07 ack pchampin 16:19:28 pchampin: the conclusion from the meeting is that the current diagramme is very broad and ambitious 16:20:11 ... we could project the diagramme to different parts as sub-diagrammes 16:20:40 q? 16:21:05 Zakim, next item 16:21:05 agendum 3 -- Horizontal Reviews Status -> 4 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/8 -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:21:25 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed 16:21:31 ktk: we were supposed to submit something but not done yet 16:21:46 ... we quickly go through the reviews 16:22:19 ktk: first is n-triples 16:22:35 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/issues/79 16:22:36 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/issues/79 -> Issue 79 Horizontal Reviews tracker for N-Triples (by pchampin) [ms:CR] 16:23:25 q+ 16:23:51 ack pchampin 16:23:53 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/pull/107 16:23:54 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-n-triples/pull/107 -> Pull Request 107 implement TAG recommendation about error handling (by pchampin) [spec:substantive] 16:24:29 pchampin: this one has approval from Dominik_T and AndyS 16:24:46 ... there is no breaking changes 16:25:08 ... once this is merged, we can go back to TAG. Or we point them to the PR before merge? 16:25:21 ora: maybe this is easier for them 16:25:33 ... do we have 2 reviews for that? 16:26:12 ... let us point the TAG to this PR and when we have feedback we can merge 16:26:18 pchampin: I am happy to do it 16:26:51 ktk: the Security one is open because of the thread modelling issue 16:27:06 ktk: that's it for n-triples 16:27:11 ktk: next one is Turtle 16:27:40 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/127 16:27:41 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/127 -> Issue 127 Horizontal Reviews tracker for RDF Turtle (by pchampin) [ms:CR] 16:28:10 AndyS: there's something from i18n 16:28:20 q? 16:30:02 pchampin: we can ping them and maybe then timeout 16:30:14 q+ 16:30:52 ... we need to wait for the TAG so we still have some time, but could be quick 16:31:08 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/131#issuecomment-4402374327 16:31:08 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/131 -> Issue 131 The `\u` escape range in Section 6.4 (by xfq) [i18n-needs-resolution] [propose closing] 16:31:54 AndyS: the issue for several documents 16:32:25 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-request/issues/303 16:32:25 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-request/issues/303 -> Issue 303 rdf12-n-quads 2026-03-22 > 2026-04-24 (by ktk) [REVIEW REQUESTED] [LC] 16:32:46 ktk: is 131 the same as 303 [link above] ? 16:34:12 ktk: do we have to react on that? 16:36:01 pchampin: the first one we address the second one is just a comment 16:36:25 AndyS: we could close some of our issues that are the same 16:36:42 s/the same/duplicates 16:37:39 ktk: n-quads privacy ok, security we discussed, 16:37:46 ... no update for TriG 16:37:52 ... that's all 16:38:11 ... what's the status of RDF/XML? 16:39:38 The RDF/XML is progressing but is not ready for submitting. A section on rdf:version needs to be added and that is still in early draft 16:39:41 q+ 16:39:41 ktk: what would be the next target? 16:39:46 ack me 16:39:53 ack pchampin 16:40:11 ora: what have we still got before we move on to SPARQL 16:40:45 pchampin: we have RDF Schema (REC track) and RDF New (Note) 16:41:06 Dominik_T: RDF Schema is ready to submit 16:41:27 ... no issues during the last week, it must be quite finished 16:41:35 q? 16:41:58 q+ 16:42:02 ora: in the REC track, apart from SPARQL specs, we have nothing else (+ some notes) 16:42:10 ack pchampin 16:42:32 pchampin: we can start horizontal review for RDF Schema 16:42:44 ... let us have internal reviews for it 16:43:32 ktk: to summarise, I still have to do the TAG's comments 16:44:31 ... I missed the second batch about trig, turtle and n-quads, to submit to the TAG 16:44:41 ... and need to ping the specific groups for update 16:44:47 ... and if we don't get anything, we mmove on 16:44:55 s/mmove/move/ 16:45:03 q? 16:45:19 Zakim, next item 16:45:19 agendum 4 -- Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting -- taken up [from agendabot] 16:45:33 ora: related to ISWC/TPAC 16:45:43 ... who is going to attend what? 16:45:50 q+ AOB issue on several of the documents 16:45:56 STRAWPOLL: Are you attending TPAC (in-person or virtually), ISWC, or none. Vote tpac/virtual/iswc/none 16:46:01 TPAC in person 16:46:02 q+ to ask AOB issue on several of the documents 16:46:08 iswc 16:46:10 none/semantics 16:46:11 ISWC in person (hopefully) 16:46:19 ISWC fot 50% 16:46:23 none 16:46:25 ISWC, will attend TPAC session if it does not conflict with Wikidata Workshop 16:46:31 none 16:46:32 virtually (probably in Asia) 16:46:32 none 16:46:33 From TPAC - with a mild preference for Monday PM 16:46:35 possibly TPAC 16:46:37 q+ 16:46:45 remote to whichever may provide it and call me :-) 16:46:56 possibly iswc 16:46:56 ack pfps 16:47:20 pfps: try not to have the TPAC/ISWC session conflict with Wikidata 16:47:33 s/Wikidata/Wikidata workshop 16:47:42 ack gtw 16:47:42 gtw, you wanted to ask AOB issue on several of the documents 16:47:59 gtw: in all of format documents, we have a media type section 16:48:02 q+ 16:48:34 ack AndyS 16:48:36 ... is there a W3C policy to whether we can get rid of the MAC piece that noone is using 16:49:05 AndyS: I think we should remove it, it's outdated 16:49:08 +1 16:49:55 q? 16:50:11 gtw: removing this part from the spec would not prevent one from using a Mac OS 9 system to do its job 16:50:36 gtw: I'm happy to propose PR to address this 16:50:37 again, no objection to removing this note from our specs 16:50:42 s/PR/PRs 16:51:04 ora: anything else? 16:51:06 I already mentioned earlier my work on a Turtle-like implementation for RDF 1.2, and a related paper has recently appeared here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352711026002451 16:51:17 q+ 16:51:26 ack pchampin 16:52:01 pchampin: the faster we plan the ISWC/TPAC, the more likely we can get the good slot 16:52:18 ... we should tell ISWC organisers our constraints 16:52:41 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed 16:53:00 q+ 16:53:15 ack AndyS 16:53:20 ora: our constraints/preferences are Monday afternoon and avoid conflict with Wikidata workshop 16:53:36 AndyS: last year, Wikidata workshop was all day, wasn't it? 16:55:05 ora: how long do we want to have our session take? 16:55:15 the Wikidata Workshop is likely to be all day 16:55:24 pchampin: it really depends on the working group 16:56:10 ... for us, half a day may be enough, for other groups, it can last 3 days 16:56:40 AndyS: the primary objective may be outward communication, so half day would be enough 16:57:54 RRSAgent, draft minutes 16:57:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk 16:58:02 ora: we're adjourned 16:59:02 s/diagramme/diagram/g 16:59:11 s/sub-diagrammes/sub-diagrams/ 16:59:25 s/thread modelling/threat modelling/g 16:59:31 s/fot/for/ 17:00:31 RRSAgent, draft minutes 17:00:33 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/11-rdf-star-minutes.html ktk 17:09:33 RRSAgent, leave 17:09:33 I see no action items