Re: [Agenda] JSON-LD Teleconference 2018-08-31

> On 31 Aug 2018, at 12:21, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.com <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.com>> wrote:
> 
> On Aug 31, 2018, at 12:18 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
> 
>> Gregg, thanks.
>> 
>> Some editorial comments
>> 
>> - Although not required formally, I think it would be a good idea to add some reference to the work of the CG and make it clear that this document has been derived from the CG documents. I have chased back the FPWD for the annotation model spec[1] which does have some words on that.
> 
> Okay, a reference in SODT should do it.
> 

Yes, that is enough.


>> - It is a great idea to highlight, in green, the important changes v.a.v. JSON-LD 1.0. However, this should be accompanied by some intro making this fact clear, ie, some words about the notational conventions. Without that, it is not clear what those green highlights mean.
> 
> Lookin Typographical Conventions.

Ah. I know why I missed this: because the convention was already used in 1.3 (Terminology) relatively often, and the convention was not introduced yet. Maybe changing the order of 1.3 and 1.4 would be helpful...

Ivan

> 
>> A procedural issue, maybe I should have raised that earlier; my apologies for that. But our charter says:
>> 
>> "To afford asynchronous decisions and organizational deliberation, any resolution (including publication decisions) taken in a face-to-face meeting or teleconference will be considered provisional. A call for consensus (CfC) will be issued for all resolutions (for example, via email and/or web-based survey), with a response period from one week to 10 working days, depending on the chair's evaluation of the group consensus on the issue."
>> 
>> Although it is up to the chairs to see whether this is a contentious issue (I personally do not believe so), I would think that we have to keep to our own rules for something like this. Which means that, although I can certainly issue a provisional publication request next week, the decision should be considered as binding only in a week from now. This means that the next available slot for publication would be the 11th of September. (We should actually keep to that date; I leave for Japan on the 12th and will be away for around 10 days, mostly on vacations.)
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> Gregg
> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> 
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-annotation-model-20141211/ <https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-annotation-model-20141211/>
>> [2] https://www.w3.org/2018/03/jsonld-wg-charter.html#decisions <https://www.w3.org/2018/03/jsonld-wg-charter.html#decisions>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 31 Aug 2018, at 00:35, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 30, 2018, at 9:40 AM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com <mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> 
>>>> Our next call is tomorrow, Friday August 31st at 12 noon Eastern, 9am Pacific, 5pm UK, 6pm Europe.
>>>> 
>>>> The details for the call are, as always:
>>>>    https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-json-ld-wg/2018Jun/0000.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-json-ld-wg/2018Jun/0000.html>
>>>> And please remember to join the IRC channel #json-ld
>>>> 
>>>> Agenda:
>>>> 
>>>> * Scribe Selection
>>>> * Approve minutes of previous call:
>>>> * Announcements / Reminders
>>>>   -- TPAC. Do you feel reminded yet?
>>>>   -- Others
>>>> * Introductions if needed
>>>> 
>>>> * Logistics:  FPWD
>>>>   -- We need a call for consensus to publish the first public working drafts of the specifications.
>>> 
>>> RawGit versions of the proposed publications:
>>> 
>>> syntax: https://rawgit.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/fpwd/publication-snapshots/FPWD/Overview.html <https://rawgit.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/fpwd/publication-snapshots/FPWD/Overview.html>
>>> api: https://rawgit.com/w3c/json-ld-api/fpwd/publication-snapshots/FPWD/Overview.html <https://rawgit.com/w3c/json-ld-api/fpwd/publication-snapshots/FPWD/Overview.html>
>>> framing: https://rawgit.com/w3c/json-ld-framing/fpwd/publication-snapshots/FPWD/Overview.html <https://rawgit.com/w3c/json-ld-framing/fpwd/publication-snapshots/FPWD/Overview.html>
>>> 
>>>> * Issues:
>>>> -- https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/8 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/8>
>>>> PROPOSAL: Remove the "ordered lexicographically by key" from the algorithm and allow implementations to handle this as they see fit.
>>>> 
>>>> -- https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/3 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/3>
>>>>    https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/6 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/6>
>>>> No concrete proposal yet.
>>> 
>>> Possible solution in a comment on #3: https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/3#issuecomment-416754165 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/3#issuecomment-416754165>
>>> 
>>> Gregg
>>> 
>>>>  -- https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/4 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/4>
>>>>     Support JSON values that aren't mapped
>>>> PROPOSAL: Define a @json keyword, initially mapped to jsonld:json, for use with @type to indicate the @value is a json literal value
>>>> 
>>>>  --  https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/15 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/15>
>>>> No concrete proposal yet.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> * AOB
>>>> * Adjourn
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> 
>>>> Rob
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Rob Sanderson
>>>> Semantic Architect
>>>> The Getty Trust
>>>> Los Angeles, CA 90049
>> 
>> 
>> ----
>> Ivan Herman, W3C
>> Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
>> mobile: +31-641044153
>> ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
>> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>