W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sparql-12@w3.org > April 2019

CG startup

From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 16:08:01 +0100
To: "SPARQL 1.2 Community Group" <public-sparql-12@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7e47e192-b4bc-80fe-f722-21a045d859ca@apache.org>
Hello everyone.

We have a good number of participants to get started; a few people are 
navigating processes and their organisations to sign up.

How we operate is up to us, the main W3C provision is that we operate 
under the "Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct". We ought to record 
decisions openly and of preference use the public list.  We'll 
undoubtedly refine how we work as things progress.  W3C do suggest a CG 
charter and there is a template:

   http://w3c.github.io/cg-charter/CGCharter.html

which seems like a good thing to fill out.

The goal is to collect and describe SPARQL 1.2 features. I'm sure that 
there will be suggestions we don't see as a simple evolution of SPARQL 
1.1 and we can collect those and label them appropriately.

Process:

We get to decide our processes.  Here are some ideas (weakly held opinions)

Mailing list:  process and coordination.
GH issues:     technical discussions
GH pages:      material for a feature
Telecons:      always hard to find a timeslot

We use GH issues for technical discussions - this is easier than having 
to extract discussions from email archives and makes it easier to follow 
some discussions and not others.

If an issue is leading to a feature, small or large, and someone from 
the CG offers to take on the editor role for it, then a GH page (or 
pages) can be started.  If we have some basic template, it'll help 
producing summaries later.

Discussions around the feature can remain on issues (really, this is up 
to the people involved in the feature).

How do people feel about telecons? Start without and have them when it's 
clearer how they are useful?

Chair:

I think we should have at least two for coverage. Some button has 
already added me (and I'm willing to do it) and I'd like to suggest 
Jerven Bolleman as a co-chair.

Github repo:

We have a github repository: https://github.com/w3c/sparql-12
where there is a minimal place holder github page.

   https://w3c.github.io/

Nearby:

The "RDF Test Curation Community Group" looks after the RDF and SPARQL 
test suites, fixing mistakes and adding tests for clarification.

   https://w3c.github.io/rdf-tests/

The SPARQL Errata document:

   https://www.w3.org/2013/sparql-errata

is the W3C process for recording errors in the specs. The specs 
themselves don't change and there isn't a working group active with the 
charter to change/update them.

W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
   https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/

     Andy
Received on Monday, 1 April 2019 15:08:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 1 April 2019 15:08:28 UTC