The W3C JSON-LD Community Group
+Go Back
+ ++
JSON-LD CG
+Minutes for 2024-06-12
+
+
+-
+
- Present
- Gregg Kellogg, Ted Thibodeau Jr., Anatoly Scherbakov, Niklas Lindström, Benjamin Young, David I. Lehn, Pierre-Antoine Champin +
- Chair(s)
- Gregg Kellogg +
- Scribe(s)
- Gregg Kellogg +
- Agenda
- https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/08563546-30fd-497a-ac16-77f96e96e8c0/20240612T120000/ +
- Topics
Gregg Kellogg is scribing.
++Topic: Announcements and Introductions +
+Gregg Kellogg: Tentative TPAC schedule at https://www.w3.org/2024/05/tpac2024-schedule-20240523.html#g49174
+Benjamin Young: There is a requested schedule shift, as many participants are in Japan and late friday would be early saturday, but that creates a conflict with the CG time on Thursday.
+... WoT would like the 14:30 slot on Thursday, which is a joint meeting with JSON-LD WG/CG.
+... WoT is a major user of JSON-LD, so it will be important for us to sync up with them.
+Gregg Kellogg: I'm in favor of consolodating with the Thursday afternoon slot.
++Topic: YAML-LD +
+Anatoly Scherbakov: I have some PRs with tests that have been merged. I have some more test issues to work through.
+... I may need some changes to PyLd to address some issues in my implementation.
++Topic: CBOR-LD +
++Topic: JSON-LD Issue Discussion +
+ ++Subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/425 +
+https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/425 -> Issue 425 how to "retype" rdf:JSON to geo:geoJSONLiteral? (by VladimirAlexiev)
+Gregg Kellogg: Using `@container` might work.
+David I. Lehn: Is this round-trippable?
+Gregg Kellogg: I believe so, but that needs to be figured out.
+David I. Lehn: The JSON Literal already has problems with arrays.
+Niklas Lindström: "Stuff": [{"@json": [1, 2, 3], "@type": "cdt:List"}] -- might work
+David I. Lehn: Consider w3c/json-ld-api#599
+https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/599 -> CLOSED Issue 599 Test new GH action (by pchampin)
+David I. Lehn: Consider w3c/json-ld-api#559
+Niklas Lindström: (IIRC "@container": ["@language", "@set"] is a thing already; so e.g. "@container": ["@set", "@json"] would work too I guess.)
+https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/pull/559 -> Pull Request 559 Add JSON literal tests. (by davidlehn)
+David I. Lehn: And w3c/json-ld-api#560
+https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-api/issues/560 -> Issue 560 Various `@json` processing issues. (by davidlehn) [test:missing-coverage] [ErratumRaised]
+David I. Lehn: This is where I was trying to figure out these issues for `@json`.
+... It may be that the solutions can be treated similarly.
+Gregg Kellogg: I think we can handle this through scope allowed through the re-charter.
+Niklas Lindström: I need to look more at the details.
++Topic: Open Discussion +
++Subtopic: JSON-LD-star +
+Gregg Kellogg: I think we can start working on JSON-LD-star issues again.
+Niklas Lindström: +1
+David I. Lehn: Do you see the specs merging?
+Niklas Lindström: Yes. Some form of RDF-star is intended to be part of RDF 1.2, and then JSON-LD 1.2 would follow.
+Gregg Kellogg: It's part of RDF 1.2, so should be part of JSON-LD 1.2 as well.
+Gregg Kellogg: I'd like to see some updates to RDC that consider RDF-star.
+David I. Lehn: Does this flow into SHEX and SHACL and so forth?
+Ted Thibodeau Jr.: Those projects are independent, but the expectation is that they will evolve.
+... The new SPARQL group could pick up ShEx.
+... Rather, the SHACL group could adopt ShEx.
+David I. Lehn: The lack of support for datasets is an issue.
+... I'd rather work with SHACL than JSON Schema.
+Ted Thibodeau Jr.: If you're working with JSON, then JSON Schema is a good way to go.
+Ted Thibodeau Jr.: Note that SHACL isn't about semantics, it's a syntactical verifier. It's not like RDB referential integrity.
++Subtopic: charter renewal +
+Pierre-Antoine Champin: No recent progress.
+... We should be able to submit our request soon.
+... There were some comments by bigbluehat about scope and adding a new document.
++Subtopic: Website +
+David I. Lehn: We're looking to host on Cloudflare; I wasn't sure how to deal with .htaccess.
+... How much do we need to continue to support?
+Gregg Kellogg: CORS headers?
+David I. Lehn: I'm not sure what we have in there is live or not.
+... There is a temporary website; it's just .htaccess stuff that is a problem.
+David I. Lehn: https://json-ld-org.pages.dev/
+Gregg Kellogg: Maybe look at server logs to see what features are used.
+Gregg Kellogg: I would say move it over, and we'll deal with issues that come up.
+David I. Lehn: https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/778
+https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/778 -> Issue 778 RFCs (by davidlehn)
+David I. Lehn: I need to write up some stuff about RFC; there are things DB is doing that should be standardized.
+... For example, safe mode.
+Benjamin Young: I think filing issues against an existing spec is ideal, but may not be clear what this should be.
+... Is the json-ld.org issues repo the right place, or one of the specs.
+David I. Lehn: I have an idea for this, but need to write up a proposal.
+Gregg Kellogg: Perhaps discuss next time?
++Topic: Next call +
+Next call June 26.
+Benjamin Young: We have conflicts with VCWG; our joint meeting with RDF-star conflicts with VCWG.
+... If we try to move things around we may run into problems.
+... We may need to work with RDF-star to move that particular meeting time.
+Pierre-Antoine Champin: RDF-star meets on Tuesday and Thursday mornings. If we move to Tuesday morning, we'd conflict with DID, but that might not be a problem.
+... Tuesday is not critical; I can ask Alex to make the change. I don't think the RDF-star chairs have a preference.
+Benjamin Young: There's also the federated identity WG which has conflicts.
+