Meeting minutes
Announcements and newcomers
olaf: We have a paper accepted in the GRADES Workshop, about mapping graph databases to RDF-star, running querying and seeing the performance impact.
<olaf> "Converting Property Graphs to RDF: A Preliminary Study of the Practical Impact of Different Mappings" http://
Open actions
<Pierre-Antoine> https://
<Pierre-Antoine> https://
pchampin: I haven't spoken to danbri since the last call about w3c/rdf-star#247, but nothing more to report.
<ghurlbot> Action 247 ping DanBri about publishing the final report on the CG page (on pchampin)
pchampin: On w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter#29, I've been waiting for ora's validation on the PR.
<ghurlbot> Action 29 Add Ora Lassila as one of the expected chair (on pchampin) As decided during today's call: https://
ora: Sorry, I missed that. But to be clear, it's okay for me to be a chair, if that's what the group desires.
WG chartering
pchampin: I've sent the charter to W3CM for approval, which is currently in progress.
… The current draft doesn't mention chairs, but I've communicated offline.
… We've also contacted some other potential chairs, and have some positive answers from Vladimir at Ontotext, and will meet him next week at a Dataspace interoperability workshop.
olaf: I also reached out to Adrian Gschwend, who is somewhat skeptical about his suitability. But, he'd like to talk about it some more.
pchampin: Yes, Ora should be there too.
<olaf> Adrian Gschwend from Zazuko
Action: olaf to organize a call with Adrian Gschwend
<ghurlbot> Created action 43 organize a call with Adrian Gschwend (on ) due 27 May 2022
Dominik_T: Any news about Josh? He was also discussed.
pchampin: We had some exchange after the last call, but LinkedIn is not a W3C member, which makes it more difficult.
… They either need to be part of a member organization, or an Invited Expert.
… In the case of Josh, LinkedIn is not a member, and inviting him as an IE is difficult, as he hasn't participated in the group to date.
… That said, Zazuko is not a member or either. But, it's a startup, and that might make it easier.
AndyS: In the past, it was easier to get an IE added, but it's become more difficult.
… In the past, it's been hard to be an IE if you work for a company that would be expected to join as a member otherwise.
pchampin: That might be an issue for Adrian.
gkellogg: Rates for small companies used to be more afordable.
pchampin: I'll talk with the communication team about criteria.
<Pierre-Antoine> https://
pchampin: We have a number of expressions of support, and no contrary expressions to date.
… Some from organizations, some from individuals.
ora: Two weeks ago at the KG conference, I ran into Souriprya Das from Oracle, and they could join.
AndyS: He has his head in the space.
ora: He's interested in the whole PG vs RDF space, and had an interesting presentation on neighborhood aware path queries.
<ora> Souriprya Das from Oracle
pchampin: I think we could do with three chairs, but if we have more than two, one should be identified as "head" chair, or the others as co-chairs.
… With too many chairs, the responsibilities dilute.
… The amount of work justifies more than two chairs.
AndyS: I think it's a good idea.
ora: I'm not sure I like the idea of three chairs. It should be possible for things to get done in a WG without a chair having direct responsibility.
… But, I do like the idea of not being the _only_ chair.
pchampin: Most WGs lately have two (or even three) chairs. If we go for three, I think if we go for three, there should be some kind of hierarchy, but your opinion weighs more.
ora: If we do end up with three chairs, I think it would be good if they're not all Bay Area graph vendors.
pchampin: Having chairs from the industry strengthen's the proposal from the W3M perspective, but other communities should also be represented.
… Chairing the group, it sends a strong signal if a GDB vendor is involved.
ora: I think two chairs from vendors is fine. If three DB vendors are involved, then it might seem that the group is dominated by industry.
pchampin: If we ask Souriprya to chair, we might need to choose between him and Vladimir.
ora: Maybe we just lobby Souriprya to make sure Oracle joins the WG.
Action: Pierre-Antoine to come back to Vladimir
<ghurlbot> Created action 42 come back to Vladimir (on ) due 27 May 2022
pchampin: Thank you ghurlbot!
pchampin: If you can encourage more people to express support on the repo, please do so. That will all help W3M to decide.
Schedule next call
pchampin: I hope to have some W3M answers next week.
… I'm not sure if we need a call before the call for votes goes out. Maybe have a regular call in 2-3 weeks.
… A call in three weeks (June 10) may be in the middle of the call for votes.
<Pierre-Antoine> PROPOSED: have our next call in 3 weeks, 2022-06-10
<Pierre-Antoine> +1
<olaf> +1
<gkellogg> +1
<Dominik_T> +1
<AndyS> +1
<doerthe> +1
<ora> +1
Resolution: have our next call in 3 weeks, 2022-06-10
<ora> (had to check the calendar)
Open-ended discussions
pchampin: TPAC is coming in September, which will be a Hybrid meeting. 12-16 September. It would be nice to have a meeting during TPAC, if a WG is chartered.
<olaf> W3C TPAC, Sep. 12-16, in Vancouver
pchampin: It is in Vancouver.
https://
… It should be in a convenient time slot for other parts of the world.
<AndyS> CA
ora: I may be in Seatle around that time, so going to Vancouver would be easy enought.
olaf: Unfortunately, it overlaps with the European semantics conference.
<olaf> The SEMANTiCS conference in Vienna is in the same week
pchampin: Are there other groups that might also meet at TPAC so we can organize a joint meeting?
AndyS: RDF Canonicalization and DCAT groups may be there.
gkellogg: JSON-LD will probably have at least a BOF at TPAC.