Report of the 25th TREE CG meeting

Hi all,

Yesterday we had a successful 25th TREE CG meeting resulting into a new 
version of the main report being published at 
https://w3id.org/tree/specification

Attendees: Xueying Deng (IMEC), Pieter Colpaert (IMEC), Julián Rojas 
(IMEC), Thomas Bergwinkl (Individual CLA commitment but affiliated with 
TopQuadrant), Sander Van Dooren (Essential Complexity, working for the 
SEMIC programme at the European Commission), Arthur Vercruysse (IMEC), 
Johan Delauré (Representing RedPencil).

The changelog has been updated in the Github releases: 
https://github.com/TREEcg/specification/releases - which clarifies that 
only a minor change has been done to the spec as pull requested by Ieben 
Smessaert (thanks!).

The slides of the meeting can be found here: 
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1uVZTo36iijFKM62GfCVURBz1Dwt3OGCk-_EMcJIonUI/edit#slide=id.g2494e1ca6ae_0_0

We were not able to get through the full agenda. The points that we 
didn’t reach are copied to the 26st TREE CG Meeting in April. See the 
next mail about this.

Updates:

  * We are going to re-organize into smaller work items that will do the 
preparatory work to ask our group to accept certain draft reports as 
TREE CG reports. One of the work items will be on the discovery report 
that we planned. This is going to be prepared thanks to a funded Flemish 
innovation grant called DiSHACLed. Julián Rojas will be the editor of 
this report and is going to organize separate meetings to prepare it.

  * The is a draft PR on a test suite now. Xueying and Pieter are going 
to work asynchronously to evolve the draft PR. It is at the same time 
also going to influence the main spec in order to make it more testable 
and thus unambiguous. We are going to report about the progress again at 
the next TREE CG meeting. Link: 
https://github.com/TREEcg/specification/pull/120

  * A discussion took place on the ability of the Member Extraction 
Algorithm (MEA) to support multiple named graphs. Reported about this in 
the issue itself: 
https://github.com/TREEcg/specification/issues/113#issuecomment-2700997167

  * There also was an update about the paper that was not well received 
by the research community. We proposed to continue the discussion on 
fine-tuning the MEA and the explanation about it. To be continued in the 
next TREE CG meeting.

Kind regards,

Pieter

-- 
https://pietercolpaert.be
+32486747122

Received on Thursday, 6 March 2025 09:30:28 UTC