W3C

– DRAFT –
RDF and SPARQL Working Group

30 July 2026

Attendees

Present
AndyS, doerthe, gtw, ktk, niklasl, ora, pfps, TallTed, tl
Regrets
niklas, niklasl, olaf, pchampin, Souri
Chair
ora
Scribe
pfps

Meeting minutes

Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: 1 2

ora: Minutes

look fine to me

<ora> PROPOSAL: Approve last two weeks' minutes

<ktk> +1

<tl> +1

<AndyS> +1

<ora> +0.5 (not present on the 23rd)

<pfps> +1

<TallTed> +1

<niklasl> +present

<doerthe> +0

<niklasl> +0 (wasn't present)

<lisp> +1

<gtw> +1 (I was present on 16 July, but missing from the present list)

RESOLUTION: Approve last two weeks' minutes

Review of open actions, available at 3

ora: ISWC email done, they understand our constraints and things should work out

ora: I'll close the action

Review of open PRs, available at 4

<ktk> w3c/rdf-n-quads#108

<gb> PR 108 Undefined errors (by lisp)

ora: James, were you able to add the compliance bit

lisp: see above, this is the minimal wording as I said last week

<AndyS> w3c/rdf-turtle#152

<gb> PR 152 address erratum 14 (by pchampin) [ms:CR]

ora: where are we with erratum 14

andys: what I didn't understand is the comment from pchampin

<AndyS> I'll update the PR for the agreed changes.

ora: is this a broader question than just the Turtle spec?

andys: the "may not" in quoted literals are just observations, not in defining text

ora: this is about formal wording

andys: yes

ora: how much work should be put into improving wording

andys: the issue here is the use of "may not", perhaps change to "cannot"

<niklasl> +1 "cannot" makes it clear and avoids misinterpretation (it's about consequences of the concrete grammar)

ora: should we go through all the specs looking for "may not"

andys: the errata appears to be about a specific part of one document

andys: OK, I'll see how far I can get

andys: I looked through the rdf-tests ones, I need to look at #363; #356 is stalled; #354 is a draft

<gb> Issue 356 not found

<gb> Issue 354 not found

<gb> Issue 363 not found

andys: I don't think we can resolve any of these today

<ktk> w3c/rdf-new#18

<gb> PR 18 what properties can or should link to triple terms? (by rdfguy)

ktk: rdf-new PR?

ora: I need to recreate my lost files and get rdf-new moving

ora: I'll get this going by two weeks from now

ora: Is that all?

ora: I don't understand tests #360

<gb> Issue 360 not found

andys: should work

ora: someone who understands Ruby might look at this

andy: it's a patch so just put it in

ora: what about the SPARQL PRs?

ora: #409 is waiting for andys

<gb> Issue 409 not found

andys: I just approved and merged it

ktk: #280 was discussed last week, pchampin still needs to look at it

<gb> Issue 280 not found

Identifying issues to solve before CR 5

ktk: still a long list of open items

ora: there are a whole bunch of editorials, some bugs ..

ora: what are the two different bug tags

andys: just historical - they mean the same

ora: ok, also for other variations

andys: #146 refers to a closed PR

<gb> Issue 146 [Editorial] Need to improve presentation of, e.g., `"&quot;" (1 double quote)` (by TallTed) [documentation]

ora: close it

ktk: in the chairs' call lets discuss how to attack these

ora: OK

andys: the timeline for the RDF and SPARQL ones are different

andys: some of these may end up being d

andys: some of these may end up being deferred to maintenance mode

ora: there are two big categories - editorial, bugs, enhancement ... spanish inquisition

ora: splitting between RDF and SPARQL makes sense

ora: also to discuss at the chairs' meeting

Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting

ora: any other business

ora: I gave an interview related to 25 years of RDF

ora: not much about RDF 1.2

ora: anything on implementations

ktk: QLever 1.2 is not yet

lisp: I posted a note to the mailing list with links to our implementation

<TallTed> the ODBMS.org interview

ora: what was difficult

lisp: there is the issue of leaking information in a dictionary-based implementation

lisp: things went much as I expected in the implementation

lisp: unasserted triples require indexing

lisp: we ended up associating unasserted triples with their reifier

ora: I would like to have an implementers' meeting at some point

lisp: my posts are quite detailed

* I think claudish is the best

ora: anything else?

ora: adjourn

Summary of resolutions

  1. Approve last two weeks' minutes
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 248 (Mon Oct 27 20:04:16 2025 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/find/fine/

Succeeded: s/deffered/deferred

Succeeded: s/the mean the same/they mean the same/

Succeeded: s/25 year of RDF/25 years of RDF/

Succeeded: s/a implementers' meeting/an implementers' meeting/

Succeeded: s/is comment from pchampin/is the comment from pchampin/

Maybe present: andy, lisp

All speakers: andy, andys, ktk, lisp, ora

Active on IRC: AndyS, doerthe, gtw, ktk, lisp, niklasl, ora, pfps, TallTed, tl