14:04:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwg
14:04:07 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/07/02-dxwg-irc
14:04:21 <csarven> scribe+
14:04:46 <csarven> Scribe: csarven
14:04:49 <YoucTagh> scribenick: csarven
14:05:46 <YoucTagh> Chair: FranckC
14:05:52 <csarven> agenda?
14:06:09 <RiccardoAlbertoni> RiccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwg
14:06:17 <RiccardoAlbertoni> present+
14:06:17 <csarven> FranckC: We have some new info on TFs and continue discussion on tools.
14:06:27 <nicholascar> present+
14:06:31 <csarven> FranckC: Also we'll look into who is here and not over the summary
14:06:41 <YoucTagh> present+
14:06:50 <nicholascar> who is here?
14:06:55 <csarven> FranckC: proposed: approve last week's minutes
14:07:02 <csarven> proposed: approve last week's minutes
14:07:14 <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1
14:07:15 <Jakub> +1
14:07:15 <YoucTagh> +1
14:07:17 <nicholascar> +1
14:07:22 <LarsG> 0 (wasn't there...)
14:07:22 <Les> +1
14:07:26 <FranckC> +1
14:07:32 <csarven> resolved: approve last week's minute
14:07:33 <nicholascar> zakim, who's here?
14:07:35 <Zakim> Present: RiccardoAlbertoni, nicholascar, YoucTagh
14:07:35 <Zakim> On IRC I see RiccardoAlbertoni, RRSAgent, Zakim, LarsG, nicholascar, Les, Jakub, YoucTagh, FranckC, csarven, agendabot, pchampin
14:08:36 <nicholascar> Present: Les, LarsG, csarven, FranckC
14:08:55 <csarven> FranckC: IRC would be the primary way of queuing and more formal way of reacting to WG material. Zoom chat will be more informal.
14:09:06 <Jakub> Present: Jakub
14:09:20 <nicholascar> zakim, who's here?
14:09:20 <Zakim> Present: Jakub
14:09:22 <Zakim> On IRC I see RiccardoAlbertoni, RRSAgent, Zakim, LarsG, nicholascar, Les, Jakub, YoucTagh, FranckC, csarven, agendabot, pchampin
14:09:51 <csarven> FranckC: Was informed by pchampin that it'd be better to do resolutions in the IRC chat and allow people to explicitly react to it. Will keep this going. If not, please remind me.
14:10:28 <csarven> topic: maintenance
14:11:17 <csarven> FranckC: pchampin looked into liberal or conservative reading of the charter wrt maintenance.
14:12:24 <csarven> FranckC: It seems csarven's interpretation is aligned with the charter. That is, we have quite a bit of room to update/revise and do creative stuff. We'll send a message to the group about this.
14:13:38 <pchampin> present+
14:14:33 <csarven> pchampin: What csarven reported re Social Web charter, seems correct. We're in the same situation.. in that "maintenance" can be read liberally. Class 4 changes is possible. We need to go through the Rec track cycle. That is allowed by the charter.
14:15:01 <csarven> topic: introductions
14:16:30 <csarven> LarsG: With DE National Library. large interest in RDF. About 10 years ago, I realised in order to serve RDF properly, we need to use profiles for different vocabularies. That was presented in Amsterdam back then. One thing we need to do is consult with IETF on best way to ??? Enjoyed being here again.
14:17:08 <csarven> topic: task forces
14:17:09 <LarsG> s/???/register the new header(s) for ConnegP/
14:17:59 <csarven> FranckC: Antoine documented / emailed who is interested in the TFs for the deliverables in our charter.
14:18:50 <csarven> FranckC: Some reactions on the mailing list
14:19:41 <pchampin> regrets+ AntoineIsaac
14:19:47 <pchampin> regrets+ FranckMichel
14:19:58 <pchampin> regrets+ ArofanGregory
14:20:12 <nicholascar> regrets+ SimonCox
14:20:19 <pchampin> regrets+ SamCox
14:20:33 <nicholascar> s/SamCox/SimonCox/
14:20:35 <csarven> topic: Candidate editors
14:21:15 <csarven> FranckC: VVD, we have 3 candidate editors
14:21:35 <RiccardoAlbertoni> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Main_Page
14:21:40 <csarven> s|emailed|emailed https://www.w3.org/2026/06/25-dxwg-minutes.html
14:23:16 <FranckC> VVD:
14:23:16 <FranckC> - candidate editors: FrankM, Arofan, Dan
14:23:16 <FranckC> - task force: FrankM, Dan, Arofan, Riccardo (+Simon) (+FranckC?)
14:24:15 <csarven> FranckC: between parenthesis is the reactions in the email thread
14:24:33 <FranckC> Data Cube:
14:24:33 <FranckC> - candidate editors: Sarven
14:24:33 <FranckC> - task force: Sarven, Arofan (+FranckC?)
14:24:41 <csarven> FranckC: Data Cube
14:25:19 <csarven> FranckC: DCAT
14:25:26 <FranckC> DCAT:
14:25:26 <FranckC> - candidate editors: Riccardo, Simon (+Jakub)
14:25:26 <FranckC> - task force: Riccardo, FrankM, FranckC, Arofan, Peter, Jakub, Les, Antoine
14:26:18 <FranckC> PROF:
14:26:18 <FranckC> - candidate editors: Nicholas (+Yousouf) (+Lars)
14:26:18 <FranckC> - task force: Nicholas, Yousouf, Les (+Jakub)
14:26:48 <FranckC> CONNEG-P:
14:26:48 <FranckC> - candidate editors: Nicholas, Yousouf (+Lars)
14:26:48 <FranckC> - task force: same as PROF (-Jakub)
14:27:12 <FranckC> DQV:
14:27:12 <FranckC> - candidate editors: Riccardo, Antoine
14:27:12 <FranckC> - task force: Riccardo, Antoine  (+FranckC?)
14:27:22 <nicholascar> I will contact Rob Atkinson to see if he wishes to continue as an editor of ConnegP & PROF also
14:27:39 <nicholascar> He was an editor of the previous versions
14:27:57 <pchampin> q+
14:28:08 <csarven> ack pchampin
14:29:05 <csarven> pchampin: I was suggesting that we reach out to previous editors that are also in the WG. myself or one of the chairs in the mailing list that they are still welcome to volunteer. I think everyone got the message including them. So we are in a good place regarding that.
14:30:20 <RiccardoAlbertoni> q+
14:30:27 <csarven> pchampin: According to the W3C Process the choice of editors are done by chairs. it is not arbitrary. And any volunteering is welcome. Sometimes political aspects are factored in. This is really a call for volunteers. And chairs will come back with their decision. Just so there is no wrong expectation with this exercise.
14:30:45 <csarven> ack RiccardoAlbertoni
14:31:28 <csarven> RiccardoAlbertoni: I contacted Peter by email, and he mentioned that there is some overlap with meeting making it difficult to attend.
14:31:46 <csarven> FranckC: He'd probably be candidate for DCAT
14:33:17 <csarven> FranckC: We'll update the wiki https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Main_Page with the information based on discussion between the chairs as pchampin said. We have no intention to force someone out from a role in a spec. If perhaps if there are too many editors in one document, we can ask.
14:33:22 <nicholascar> s/Peter/Peter Winstanley/
14:33:36 <csarven> topic: Summer meetings
14:33:50 <csarven> s/topic: /Topic:
14:34:10 <csarven> FranckC: Summer in the sense of the Northern Hemisphere
14:35:26 <csarven> FranckC: We have ~7 people. As it stands, we have maybe a problem for next week. 4 people won't be available. May have a problem in beginning of August. So far 3 people won't be available. Please respond to the email regarding that so we know for next week's meeting and help us decide.
14:36:24 <LarsG> q+
14:36:32 <csarven> ack LarsG
14:37:34 <csarven> topic: Echidna
14:37:59 <csarven> FranckC: Looked into transitioning the document for PROF
14:38:39 <csarven> nicholascar: We're ready go on PROF. CONNEG-P in the repo is also ready to go
14:39:02 <csarven> pchampin: I saw but haven't acted on it. It is on my plate and will take care of it soon.
14:39:15 <csarven> q+
14:39:17 <pchampin> q+
14:39:20 <csarven> ack csarven
14:39:53 <csarven> csarven Purpose was on existing doc?
14:40:21 <csarven> nicholascar: to update the repo representation and have it be automatically publishable
14:41:35 <csarven> nicholascar: We have procedures in place to have double sign offs. PRs made besides the author needs to be approved by two people - any participant in the group but not sure about group of editors and approvers.
14:41:40 <csarven> ack pchampin
14:42:00 <csarven> pchampin: Approvers vary from one group to another. Not dictated by W3C. Anybody in the WG is perfectly okay
14:42:53 <csarven> pchampin: I wanted to point out what FranckC noticed. We made decision to use Echidna for PROF and CONNEG-P. First decide on WG and second is Echidna. We only passed resolution for WD on PROF however..
14:43:16 <csarven> pchampin: Oh, then CONNEG-P is also ok.
14:43:25 <csarven> nicholascar: Right, we just need to resolve the automation.
14:43:43 <csarven> Topic: Slack
14:44:03 <nicholascar> q+
14:44:04 <csarven> FranckC: We had a proposal by Annette
14:44:20 <csarven> FranckC: On the need of more interactive tool and what to use
14:45:27 <RiccardoAlbertoni> q+
14:45:30 <csarven> nicholascar: I propose we don't use Slack. Reason: we have this channel on video, and email, and tickets on GitHub. I think that's quite a bit. If certain members want to chat on another platform, that'd be okay. But I probably won't use. For the WG 2-3 channels is probably sufficient.
14:45:32 <csarven> q+
14:45:40 <pchampin> ack nicholascar
14:45:43 <pchampin> ack RiccardoAlbertoni
14:46:03 <csarven> RiccardoAlbertoni Agree with nicholascar. It may be too much to track.
14:46:05 <csarven> ack csarven
14:46:16 <pchampin> scribe+
14:46:29 <pchampin> csarven: I generally agree; note that W3C has a Slack space (not just for WGs)
14:46:47 <Les> Agree with nicholascar
14:46:51 <pchampin> ... it may be useful for people outside of the group to have ways to track what the group is doing
14:47:11 <pchampin> ... some people may find Slack easier
14:47:45 <pchampin> ... if we are goint to have task forces, that might also be useful
14:47:55 <pchampin> ... but I don't have a strong opinion
14:48:03 <LarsG> s/goint/going/
14:48:32 <csarven> s/doing/doing and also to interact with implementers from that space
14:49:36 <pchampin> csarven: actually, I think it would be a good idea
14:49:44 <pchampin> ... this group has a wide scope
14:50:03 <pchampin> ... the group itself probably does not need it, but it may be useful to other people
14:50:58 <pchampin> scribe-
14:51:08 <csarven> s/wide scope/wide scope and stretching over several years
14:51:18 <pchampin> FTR, it does not look like there already exists a channel for DXWG on the W3C slack
14:51:57 <RiccardoAlbertoni> q+
14:52:20 <csarven> ack RiccardoAlbertoni
14:52:57 <csarven> RiccardoAlbertoni: Re F2F meeting, is there any advancement?
14:53:16 <csarven> FranckC: No, but we thought it is not a good idea at TPAC or ISWC
14:53:45 <csarven> FranckC: We could perhaps discuss that with the chairs tomorrow. Thanks for the reminder. Something we have to go over again.
14:54:37 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
14:54:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/02-dxwg-minutes.html pchampin
14:55:17 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes public
14:55:17 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', pchampin.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
14:55:36 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:56:06 <pchampin> agendabot, find agenda
14:56:06 <agendabot> pchampin, OK. This may take a minute...
14:56:06 <agendabot> Sorry, I did not find an agenda.
14:56:32 <pchampin> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/cf468f73-53d3-4cd8-bb8a-eb534f47bc80/20260702T100000/
14:56:32 <agendabot> clear agenda
14:56:32 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of -> previous minutes https://www.w3.org/2026/06/25-dxwg-minutes.html
14:56:32 <agendabot> agenda+ Housekeeping
14:56:32 <agendabot> agenda+ What is "Maintenance": conclusion
14:56:32 <agendabot> agenda+ Task forces, documents and editors
14:56:35 <agendabot> agenda+ Summer meetings
14:56:37 <agendabot> agenda+ Tools
14:56:40 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
14:56:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/02-dxwg-minutes.html pchampin
14:56:49 <pchampin> meeting: Dataset Exchange Working Group
14:56:51 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
14:56:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/02-dxwg-minutes.html pchampin