Consider adding CSVW specifications

w3c / rdf-star-wg-charter

Other

10 stars 3 forks source link

Consider adding CSVW specifications #6

Closed gkellogg closed 2 years ago

gkellogg commented 3 years ago

Although they go further, these specifications also serialize RDF, and include some minor cleanup issues that will never be addressed without an appropriate WG.

TallTed commented 3 years ago

Links?

pchampin commented 3 years ago

https://www.w3.org/TR/csv2rdf/

gkellogg commented 3 years ago

All the related documents are on the GitHub page for the group: https://w3c.github.io/csvw/

pchampin commented 3 years ago

this was discussed during today's meeting: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg-charter/issues/6

pchampin commented 3 years ago

per https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/Minutes/2021-11-12.html#a05 action on myself to check with other W3C team to what extent we can add other specs in scope, time permitting

gkellogg commented 3 years ago

We also discussed SHACL, RDFa, RIF, and OWL as specs that a WG might consider updating.

pchampin commented 2 years ago

We didn't have time to discuss this during our last call, but here's the outcome of a discussion I had about with @iherman:

Having a very long list of document marked as "in scope, if we have time" -- this probably won't fly with the AC or W3C management.
What we could do instead is to provide for a rechartering, in case such other documents were proposed to the WG during its lifetime. In other word, if someone came with a mature enough version of CSVW-star during the lifetime of the group, we may recharter to "adopt" that new document.

This makes it explicit that we might touch other documents, but give an opportunity to the AC to give their opinion when/if that happens, rather than requiring a huge wildcard upfront.

pchampin commented 2 years ago

this was discussed during today's call: https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/Minutes/2021-12-17.html#x141