Meeting minutes
Approval of minutes from the last two meetings: 1 2
ora: Minutes!
<ora> PROPOSAL: Approve last two weeks' minutes
<pfps> minutes look OK
<pfps> +1
<ktk> +1
<AndyS> +1
<ora> +0.5 (regrets for one call)
<Souri> +1
<doerthe> +0.5
<rubensworks> +0
<olaf> +1
<tl> +1
<niklasl> +0.5 (regrets for one)
<TallTed> +1
RESOLUTION: Approve last two weeks' minutes
Review of open actions, available at 3
ora: Haven't acted on my issues.
Review of open PRs, available at 4
ora: Anything to work on today?
ktk: Should we merge the undefined errors?
… They are from James, who is not here.
ora: defer to next week
AndyS: Is this text to go into every document?
ktk: Yes, that was the idea.
Identifying issues to solve before CR 5
ora: Let's go to the issues next. We have a lot to go through.
<rubensworks> w3c/
<gb> PR 366 Add collection point for RDF 1.2 implementation reports (by rubensworks)
rubenswork: I created a PR about a place to collect the implementation reports.
… currently it covers only RDF. We may do the same for SPARQL.
… This is based on the EARL importer from gkellogg
… I didn't change anything (it's written in Ruby). But it seems to work.
ora: What do you need?
rubenswork: Maybe people can look at it.
ktk: Any idea why the job is failing?
rubensworks: I don't know.
ora: Great. Thank you!
AndyS: Where did the reports actually go?
rubensworks: Same way as JSON-LD does it ..
… there is a reports directory
… I added one file as an example
AndyS: Okay, I will have a look.
ora: ktk and I spent some time going through much of the stuff (excluding SPARQL and RDF/XML)
… and proposed a lot of issues for closing.
<AndyS> https://
ora: Can we look at them now?
ktk: In general, we were a bit "aggressive" - pessimistic
… close most of the issues unless there is a clear reason not to
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 18 multiple `p` elements (by domel) [propose closing] [spec:editorial]
ktk: if anyone has strong feelings, please queue
… Of course, they can be reopened.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 127 Check punctuation of all bulleted lists (by TallTed) [propose closing] [spec:editorial]
ktk: No objections to 18 - closed
… Objection to closing 127?
TallTed: PR needed to close this issue (127)
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 270 why is `^^i18n:` a good idea? (by VladimirAlexiev) [propose closing] [spec:editorial]
ktk: Do you have the energy to create a PR?
TallTed: will try
ktk: Issue 270 was from Graphwise
… no objections to closing it -- closed.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 281 where is a discussion of risks inherent in representing triple terms (by lisp) [propose closing]
ktk: Issue 281 from James
… Let's discuss it next week when James is around again.
… The "implement TAG .." issues will be discussed next week when pchampin is back
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 104 Make the version declaration an RDF statement (by filip26) [propose closing]
Issue 104 was proposed to close by Domenik
ora: Let's close it.
AndyS: The point was that it breaks parsers.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 109 Erratum: indicate that N-Triples is a syntactic subset of N-Quads (by pchampin) [ms:CR] [propose closing]
ktk: Issue 109 was indirectly by David Booth
… Domenik proposed closing
… closed!
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 74 Decide on "period" vs "full stop" (by gkellogg) [propose closing] [spec:editorial]
ktk: Issue 74 seems something we can close.
TallTed: It should be the same name in all documents.
ktk: "full stop" is used only in a table in N-Triples
<AndyS> https://
TallTed: We should be consistent.
ktk: I will take a look across all documents.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 29 RDF Collections? (by riannella) [Editorial] [propose closing]
ktk: Issue 29 - don't think this will happen unless someone creates PR
niklasl: I don't mind having this on my TODO list. Assign it to me. If I fail, we can close it.
ktk: OK
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 21 Ensure the triple annotation example is useful (by niklasl) [propose closing] [spec:editorial]
ktk: Issue 21, niklasl already agreed to close it
… Closed!
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 22 Black Backgrounds (by riannella) [propose closing] [spec:editorial]
ktk: Issue 22, we saw a bunch of PR related to this issue
… Any others planned?
niklasl: I have plans. Keep the issue open.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 26 Add list of (all known) RDF serialization formats (by hartig) [propose closing] [spec:enhancement]
ktk: Issue 26 -- ora and I don't see the point
… quite random list
… We think we shouldn't maintain such a list.
<AndyS> https://
AndyS: There is a mention of a list in RDF Concepts
… It is a sample, and was discussed at length.
ktk: We agree to close issue 26
AndyS: Yes, too difficult to list /decide about all the corner cases
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 144 [Editorial] capitalization of "SPARQL string", "SPARQL Query string", and "SPARQL Update string" (by TallTed) [documentation] [propose closing]
ktk: Closed.
… Issue 144 - question is whether we do a grep to catch them?
ora: TallTed, it's yours. What do you think?
ktk: It is not easy to 'grep' them
TallTed: Truly editorial; can be pushed. I would not close it though.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 146 [Editorial] Need to improve presentation of, e.g., `""" (1 double quote)` (by TallTed) [documentation] [propose closing]
ktk: Issue 146 is similar
TallTed: Also this, I think is purely editorial.
… Definitely confusing wherever this comes up.
ktk: Keep it open?
TallTed: Yes
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 187 Confirm organisation of implementation reports (by afs) [needs discussion] [propose closing] [ms:CR]
ktk: Issue 187 ? Ah, rubensworks created a PR for it
rubensworks: We can close the issue and continue in the PR
ktk: Closed!
TallTed: Wait! Closing issues before their PR is problematic.
ktk: Fine to reopen it until the PR is merged.
TallTed: There is a "PR exists" label
… which helps tracking these cases.
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 194 Remove Macintosh file type code in documents defining document formats (by kasei) [propose closing] [tracking]
ktk: Issue 194 - AndyS added a comment; let's leave it open
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 154 Description of implicit bnodes in reifying triples is imprecise and duplicated (by rubensworks) [Editorial] [propose closing]
ktk: Issue 154 - Is this still relevant? The PR was merged.
rubensworks: can be closed
ktk: Closed!
<ktk> w3c/
<gb> Issue 155 Last sentence in Reifying Triples seems unnecessary (by rubensworks) [Editorial] [propose closing]
ktk: Issue 155 - PR is not merged yet - remove "proposed closing" label
… We are through the list!
Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting
AndyS: Regarding the mime type registration, I see that many of the entries are random
… There needs to be person details.
<AndyS> https://
AndyS: Maybe we wait for pchampin
<AndyS> See "Person & email address to contact for further information:"
AndyS: In this section, there is an item "Person..."
TallTed: From other groups, it is still necessary. Using the group as a contact is perfectly valid.
AndyS: Example?
TallTed: Have to find one.
ora: Anyone else has other business?
… We got a lot of stuff done. Good!