IRC log of rdf-star on 2023-03-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:01:34 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
17:01:38 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-irc
17:01:38 [olaf]
olaf has joined #rdf-star
17:02:14 [AZ]
AZ has joined #rdf-star
17:02:14 [AndyS]
zakim, start this meeting
17:02:14 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
17:02:16 [Zakim]
please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), AndyS
17:02:44 [gtw]
present+
17:02:44 [AndyS]
meeting: RDF-star WG 2023-03-02
17:02:59 [AndyS]
present+
17:03:03 [AndyS]
present+ ora
17:03:08 [AndyS]
present+ ktk
17:03:55 [TallTed]
TallTed has changed the topic to: RDF-Star WG — 2023-03-02 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0002.html
17:04:02 [pfps]
present+
17:04:10 [AZ]
present+
17:04:19 [enrico]
enrico has joined #rdf-star
17:04:24 [olaf]
present+
17:04:27 [TallTed]
present+ ora ktk
17:04:30 [TallTed]
present+
17:04:34 [enrico]
present+
17:04:39 [Dominik_T]
Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
17:05:06 [TallTed]
agenda:
17:05:08 [TallTed]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/8a431cda-d732-4c77-a896-be3a6e4a0028/20230302T120000#agenda
17:05:09 [agendabot]
clear agenda
17:05:09 [agendabot]
agenda+ Pick scribe
17:05:09 [agendabot]
agenda+ Approve last week's minutes: -> https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html">https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html
17:05:09 [agendabot]
agenda+ Updates on WG-organization (raised last week)
17:05:10 [agendabot]
agenda+ Quick status update of ongoing activities
17:05:13 [agendabot]
agenda+ Report from conversations with I18N
17:05:15 [agendabot]
agenda+ Continuation of the semantic predication discussion
17:05:18 [agendabot]
agenda+ AOB (time permitting)
17:05:28 [TallTed]
TallTed has changed the topic to: RDF-Star WG — 2023-03-02 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/8a431cda-d732-4c77-a896-be3a6e4a0028/20230302T120000#agenda
17:06:16 [Doerthe]
Doerthe has joined #rdf-star
17:06:26 [Doerthe]
present+
17:07:19 [Dominik_T]
Dominik_T has joined #rdf-star
17:07:45 [Dominik_T]
present+
17:08:27 [TallTed]
Zakim, agenda?
17:08:27 [Zakim]
I see 7 items remaining on the agenda:
17:08:28 [Zakim]
1. Pick scribe [from agendabot]
17:08:28 [Zakim]
2. Approve last week's minutes: -> https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html">https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html [from agendabot]
17:08:28 [Zakim]
3. Updates on WG-organization (raised last week) [from agendabot]
17:08:29 [Zakim]
4. Quick status update of ongoing activities [from agendabot]
17:08:29 [Zakim]
5. Report from conversations with I18N [from agendabot]
17:08:29 [Zakim]
6. Continuation of the semantic predication discussion [from agendabot]
17:08:29 [Zakim]
7. AOB (time permitting) [from agendabot]
17:08:35 [pfps]
scribe pfps
17:08:48 [TallTed]
scribe+ pfps
17:08:57 [pfps]
zakim, next agendum
17:08:57 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- Pick scribe -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:09:13 [pfps]
zakim, agendum 2
17:09:13 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'agendum 2', pfps
17:09:21 [pfps]
zakim, next agendum
17:09:21 [Zakim]
agendum 1 was just opened, pfps
17:09:42 [TallTed]
Zakim, close agendum 1
17:09:42 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Pick scribe, closed
17:09:43 [Zakim]
I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:09:43 [Zakim]
2. Approve last week's minutes: -> https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html">https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html [from agendabot]
17:09:45 [pfps]
antoine: having a rotation of scribes would be useful
17:09:51 [TallTed]
Zakim, next agendum
17:09:58 [pfps]
+1 to antoine
17:10:16 [pfps]
ora: +1
17:10:39 [gtw]
+1 to that. The last SPARQL WG had a scribe list on the wiki, and you just shifted your name down to the bottom when you scribed.
17:10:47 [TallTed]
q+
17:11:15 [ora]
ack TallTed
17:11:30 [Souri]
Souri has joined #rdf-star
17:11:57 [pfps]
tallted: the scribe volunteer is able to interrupt at any time to ensure good recording
17:12:01 [AndyS]
zakim, who is here?
17:12:01 [Zakim]
Present: ktk, ora, gtw, AndyS, pfps, AZ, olaf, TallTed, enrico, Doerthe, Dominik_T
17:12:03 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Souri, Dominik_T, Doerthe, enrico, AZ, olaf, RRSAgent, pfps, Zakim, ora, TallTed, AndyS, Timothe, VladimirAlexiev, driib, ghurlbot, csarven, Tpt, ktk, gtw, rhiaro,
17:12:03 [Zakim]
... agendabot, pchampin
17:12:42 [ora]
q?
17:12:43 [pfps]
tallted: put everyone in the list in the scribe candidates, when someone scribes they are put at the back, pick from the front
17:12:50 [AZ]
+1 to Ted
17:12:57 [pfps]
ora: I will make the initial list
17:13:20 [pfps]
action on rdfguy: make the initial scribe list
17:13:20 [ghurlbot]
Cannot create action. Validation failed. (Invalid user for this repository?)
17:13:26 [pfps]
action rdfguy: make the initial scribe list
17:13:33 [ghurlbot]
Created -> action #25 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/25
17:09:51 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- Approve last week's minutes: -> https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html">https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html https://www.w3.org/2023/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:14:25 [pfps]
pfps: I have an objection for the minutes. The biggest is that the semantic discussion is not an item in the minutes.
17:15:02 [pfps]
ora: there has been discussion on the mailing list on fixing minutes
17:15:02 [TallTed]
q+
17:15:25 [AndyS]
q+
17:15:43 [pfps]
ora: the working group needs to figure out how to do minutes better, with post-editing of source data (not HTML)
17:15:59 [ora]
ack TallTed
17:16:14 [pfps]
tallted: can the chairs please use the queue more?
17:16:54 [pfps]
tallted: typically the staff representative has the ability to edit the log or the HTML or both
17:17:22 [pfps]
tallted: having a WG member actually doing the editing to pass back to the rep is helpful
17:17:46 [ora]
ack AndyS
17:17:48 [pfps]
tallted: there is a link to the processed minutes at the end of the IRC log that WG members can use
17:17:58 [ktk]
q+
17:18:06 [TallTed]
this is today's raw log: https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-irc
17:18:30 [ora]
ack ktk
17:18:39 [pfps]
andy: WG members may not have access to the raw log
17:19:47 [pfps]
adrian: i'll make sure that more information is available
17:20:12 [pfps]
ora: can we provisionally accept the minutes
17:20:37 [pfps]
pfps: I would prefer waiting because there is a missing heading
17:21:02 [TallTed]
`topic:` (and `subtopic:`) does set a heading in the minutes. I had thought that zakim "taking up" an agendum did the same; that appears not to be so; however, the agendum is usable as a reminder of what to set the topic to.
17:21:48 [TallTed]
q?
17:22:01 [AZ]
pfps: there are a number of issues in the minutes that need to be fixed
17:22:06 [pfps]
ora: we'll defer accepting until next week so that the problems can be fixed
17:22:30 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:22:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:22:38 [pfps]
action pfps: send message so that ora and adrian can have the minutes fixed up
17:22:43 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, make logs public
17:22:44 [ghurlbot]
Created -> action #26 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/26
17:22:47 [pfps]
zakim, next agendum
17:22:47 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- Updates on WG-organization (raised last week) -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:23:27 [ktk]
q+
17:23:34 [ora]
ack ktk
17:24:47 [pfps]
adrian: I talked to pierre-antoine - the transcript is done for accessibility but the transcript cannot be permanently stored
17:24:50 [pfps]
q+
17:24:56 [TallTed]
s|agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/8a431cda-d732-4c77-a896-be3a6e4a0028/20230302T120000#agenda||
17:24:56 [TallTed]
s|agenda:|agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/8a431cda-d732-4c77-a896-be3a6e4a0028/20230302T120000#agenda|
17:25:02 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:25:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:25:41 [ora]
ack pfps
17:25:41 [TallTed]
s/scribe pfps//
17:25:41 [pfps]
pfps: I don't understand why the message didn't show up until about 12:20
17:26:08 [TallTed]
q+
17:26:33 [ora]
ack TallTed
17:26:54 [ora]
q+
17:26:59 [pfps]
tallted: can we all try to get along with the less-than-perfect technology
17:27:03 [ktk]
The link I posted is here: org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:27:03 [ktk]
18:22 * RRSAgent records action 2
17:27:10 [ora]
ack ora
17:27:11 [ktk]
s/posted/mentioned/
17:27:28 [pfps]
ora: what is your objection
17:27:40 [ktk]
Sorry about that link was broken: https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#meeting-recording
17:27:55 [TallTed]
s|here: org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html|here: https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html|
17:28:08 [pfps]
more or less that there is no chance of editing to remove problematic information
17:28:28 [TallTed]
s/more or less/pfps: more or less/
17:28:37 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:28:39 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:28:50 [pfps]
ora: if the only use is for better understanding then is that acceptable
17:28:58 [ktk]
q+
17:28:59 [pfps]
pfps: OK. I'll withdraw my objection
17:29:12 [ora]
ack ktk
17:29:37 [TallTed]
s/action on rdfguy: make the initial scribe list//
17:29:45 [pfps]
adrian: at each meeting there will be a no recordings without consent announcement
17:29:47 [TallTed]
q+
17:30:10 [ora]
ack TallTed
17:30:29 [pfps]
tallted: edits can be made to the minutes by anyone to fix problems
17:30:36 [pfps]
zakim, next agendum
17:30:36 [Zakim]
agendum 4 -- Quick status update of ongoing activities -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:30:50 [pfps]
q+
17:30:56 [ora]
ack pfps
17:35:43 [pfps]
subtopic: Use Cases Process
17:31:14 [pfps]
pfps: there have been several messages about use cases proposing a methodology
17:31:29 [pfps]
pfps: if the WG is fine with that we can start implementing it
17:31:43 [pfps]
ora: any comments?
17:32:02 [ktk]
q+
17:32:09 [pfps]
pfps: I think I'll need help from pierre-antoine
17:32:09 [ora]
ack ktk
17:32:54 [ora]
q+
17:32:58 [pfps]
adrian: there is a github template for use cases
17:32:58 [ora]
ack ora
17:33:18 [ktk]
Github Use case template: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/new/choose -> "Use case"
17:33:30 [pfps]
ora: i've been writing up use cases - it is not trivial
17:34:13 [pfps]
pfps: one question is how to continue with an issue use case
17:34:40 [pfps]
action pfps: present a use case process to the working group
17:34:42 [ghurlbot]
Created -> action #27 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/27
17:35:27 [pfps]
zakim, next agendum
17:35:27 [Zakim]
agendum 5 -- Report from conversations with I18N -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:35:43 [TallTed]
topic: Report from conversations with I18N
17:35:55 [pfps]
ora: there just was a discussion with I18N group
17:36:10 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:36:11 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:36:53 [pfps]
ora: the group is offering to help us
17:37:05 [pfps]
ora: the earlier we can provide information to them the better
17:37:07 [TallTed]
s/topic: Report from conversations with I18N//
17:37:43 [pfps]
ora: one question is how to determine how much the working group will do in this space
17:37:50 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:37:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:37:58 [pfps]
ora: we could take the JSON-LD work and adapt it
17:38:05 [pfps]
ora: there are questions of backward compatibility
17:38:21 [pfps]
ora: from the process standpoint is this something that is out of charter
17:38:53 [pfps]
ora: my view is that this is a grey area and the working group needs to decide
17:39:26 [pfps]
adrian: if we don't do it in 1.2 then there will be pressure for 1.3
17:39:58 [pfps]
andy: it is quite early in the cycle
17:40:13 [ktk]
For those like me who don't have a clear understanding of the problem, this was helpful for me https://w3c.github.io/i18n-discuss/notes/i18n-action-612.html
17:40:35 [AndyS]
s/andy/AndyS/g
17:41:03 [pfps]
zakim, next agendum
17:41:03 [Zakim]
agendum 6 -- Continuation of the semantic predication discussion -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:41:07 [TallTed]
s/an agendum did the same; that appears not to be so; however, the agendum is usable as a reminder of what to set the topic to/an agendum did the same; that appears to be so, as evidenced later in today's minutes.../
17:42:07 [TallTed]
`andys` is equivalent to `AndyS`
17:42:13 [pfps]
andy: things may have moved on from the discussion that was mentioned
17:42:14 [ktk]
Adrian is ktk
17:42:58 [AndyS]
s/andy/andys/
17:43:25 [pfps]
ora: there is a lot to be discussed about semantic predication
17:43:35 [enrico]
q+
17:43:39 [ora]
ack enrico
17:44:23 [pfps]
enrico: i have a new proposal on semantic predication
17:44:37 [TallTed]
regrets+ pachampin
17:44:37 [TallTed]
chair+ ora
17:44:37 [TallTed]
chair+ ktk
17:44:47 [TallTed]
topic: new proposal on semantic predication
17:45:23 [TallTed]
s/topic/subtopic/
17:45:34 [pfps]
enrico: - presentation of slide that will be sent to mailing list later
17:46:31 [pfps]
enrico: semantic predication is fully transparent but does not require assertion
17:46:41 [pfps]
enrico: semantic predication is about events
17:46:50 [ora]
q+
17:48:12 [Doerthe]
q+
17:48:19 [pfps]
enrico: syntactic predication is about triples - requires variable transparency
17:48:32 [pfps]
enrico: syntactic predication is not about events
17:49:24 [ora]
ack ora
17:49:24 [TallTed]
`rdf:type :{event-type}` will have to be coined for every event type? or added to every ontology now in the wild?
17:49:45 [pfps]
enrico: modal/epistemic predication is a variation of syntactic predication (example is attribution, not belief)
17:50:16 [pfps]
ora: what would the abstract syntax (metamodel) look like?
17:50:53 [pfps]
ora: what is the difference between semantic predication and modal predication?
17:50:58 [TallTed]
q+ to ask for more real-world examples, especially examples which cover some real-world existing data, perhaps digging into DBpedia or UniProt or Wikidata ... and about {event-type} concern above
17:51:55 [ora]
q+
17:52:17 [pfps]
enrico: there is no abstract syntax for triples so a new notion is needed - embedded triples
17:54:20 [pfps]
enrico: it is possible to transform RDF-star graphs to RDF 1.1 graphs
17:55:41 [pfps]
enrico: care needs to be taken to preserve monotonicity
17:55:49 [ora]
ack Doerthe
17:56:10 [ktk]
I'm afraid we are at the end of our slot already
17:56:34 [ktk]
could those with question write them down either here, list or on their own so we could start with them next time?
17:56:40 [pfps]
Doerthe: what about logically-equivalent statements?
17:56:48 [AZ]
enrico's presentation requires discussion but we don't have time now
17:57:17 [pfps]
enrico: this would be done in a language that supports more powerful constructs, such as OWL
17:58:10 [TallTed]
TallTed: I was going ask for more real-world examples, especially examples which cover some real-world existing data, perhaps digging into DBpedia or UniProt or Wikidata ... and about `rdf:type :{event-type}` will have to be coined for every event type? or added to every ontology now in the wild?
17:58:15 [TallTed]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:58:16 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/02-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:58:22 [pfps]
enrico: I will start an email thread on this
17:58:50 [pfps]
RRSAgent, draft minutes