Re: Setting milestones (Re: marathon)

This use case might be better served by the Linked Data Patch Format [1] (wink wink PA), which is more specifically intended for this, and doesn’t require the invention of new semantics for something like solid:where/insert/delete.

Gregg Kellogg
gregg@greggkellogg.net

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/ldpatch/

> On Apr 4, 2022, at 1:53 PM, Jos De Roo <josderoo@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There is a crucial piece of N3 for the specification of the Solid Protocol
> more specifically at https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol#writing-resources <https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol#writing-resources>
> 
> It uses cited formulae with quickvars (?x), so it is beyond N3-Lite
> but it actually is an excellent and practical use case.
> 
> That said, EYE suffers to roundtrip (with --pass) the example in
> https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol#writing-resources <https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol#writing-resources>
> The n3p code at
> https://github.com/josd/n3p/blob/33dde4db84c48467cd9e188744e8f34672675c7e/examples/patch.n3p <https://github.com/josd/n3p/blob/33dde4db84c48467cd9e188744e8f34672675c7e/examples/patch.n3p>
> roundtrips fine at
> https://github.com/josd/n3p/blob/33dde4db84c48467cd9e188744e8f34672675c7e/result.n3p#L103 <https://github.com/josd/n3p/blob/33dde4db84c48467cd9e188744e8f34672675c7e/result.n3p#L103>
> 
> jos
> 
> -- https://josd.github.io
>  <https://josd.github.io/>
> 
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 12:43 PM Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine@w3.org <mailto:pierre-antoine@w3.org>> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/04/2022 09:40, Miel Vander Sande wrote:
>> Hi Jos, all
>> 
>> Thanks for running this marathon; I think we all very much appreciate EYE and the updates that it got because of this. 
> +42 :-)
>> I'm clearly one of the 33 dormant members of this group, mainly because I'm really unqualified to partake in the discussions (I see N3 as a tool, unwary of the insides), but may I ask: 
>> after 42 months, is there a group report in sight? Is there a milestone planned?
> That's a fair question, and we acknowledged during the call last week that, unfortunately, we are not there yet. Defining a clean definition of N3's semantics is getting in the way, and unfortunately eating a lot of our bandwidth. I probably have my share of responsibility in that latter point, and I apologize for it.
> 
> Here is an idea that is maybe silly, but maybe can help us make progress : we could focus, for a while, on a strict subset of the N3 language (coined e.g. N3-Lite), and try to get a self-sufficient CG report on that subset. Then we could try to grow this subset (possibly in several incremental steps) until we cover N3 entirely.
> 
> The subset I have in mind is the following (but that's open for discussion):
> 
> - quoted graphs are disallowed, expect as the head or body of rules
> - rules are not encoded as triples, but handled at their own level
> - quickvars (?x) are only allowed in rules
> - no explicit quantification
> 
> I think that defining the semantics of this subset should be relatively easy (compared to full N3), and that it could be done in such a way that all existing N3 implementation already comply with the semantics.  We would therefore have a first level of interoperabilty formally specified.
> 
> Focusing on N3-lite, we could also come back to our work on builtins (although the most complex ones, such as log:semantics, log:includes, or log:forAll would not be part of N3-lite).
> 
> I know that this is reminiscent of the different profiles of OWL, which some people in this group don't quite like. Maybe to avoid this issue could we decide that N3-Lite needs to disappear once N3 "full" is properly specified. In any case, I think that N3-Lite could be a useful stepping stone.
> 
>> And is there anything non-expert community members can do to help?
> Hopefully, the discussions on N3-Lite will be more accessible, and allow for a wider group to engage. At least, that's one of the goal of this proposal.
> 
>   pa
> 
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Miel
>> 
>> Op ma 4 apr. 2022 om 02:01 schreef Jos De Roo <josderoo@gmail.com <mailto:josderoo@gmail.com>>:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> This group started about 42 months ago https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-n3-dev/2018Nov/ <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-n3-dev/2018Nov/>
>> and for me it really feels like a marathon coming to an end.
>> During this past 42 months we had lengthy discussions
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1A3HAUhjaVnnJ6yVbFAvIBRJQjUY9aFlQ2_bGxkD0mnE/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1A3HAUhjaVnnJ6yVbFAvIBRJQjUY9aFlQ2_bGxkD0mnE/edit>
>> and as a result for the eye reasoner there were 244 releases https://github.com/josd/eye/blob/master/RELEASE <https://github.com/josd/eye/blob/master/RELEASE>
>> 
>> For me what really remains is n3p which is the eye intermediate p-code and from now on
>> I will focus on https://github.com/josd/n3p <https://github.com/josd/n3p> as a https://knows.idlab.ugent.be/team/ <https://knows.idlab.ugent.be/team/> member
>> and stay quiet in this N3 community group like most of the other 33 members.
>> 
>> Thanks and kind regards,
>> Jos
>> 
>> -- https://josd.github.io <https://josd.github.io/>