[question] will rdf 1.2 be part of Solid 1.0?

[melvincarvalho]

The inclusion of RDF-Star, also known as RDF 1.2, in the Coordination section piqued my interest. I was wondering if it is in scope into Solid 1.0, or if it's destined for a future version?

I understand that a definitive decision may not have been reached yet. Still, any indication or guidance text would be very valuable for implementaters.

The natural assumption would be that as RDF progresses it will eventually make its way into the solid suite of specifications. Clarification on whether or not that assumption is correct would be good.

[csarven]

Good question. As far as I know, considerations apply to all successor versions of references, as well as errata, and other information, e.g., plans of a group working on the specification, and so it is within the scope. I would suggest to not put any emphasis on the versions or even specific data formats in the charter. The group can best make those decisions with the most accurate context.

On a related note, the Considerations section of the Solid Protocol gives general advisory about the status of documents in https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol#considerations .

[pchampin]

RDF-Star, also known as RDF 1.2

Just to add more precision about that:

• RDF-star is the extension of RDF allowing to have edges on edges (a.k.a. quoted triples)
• RDF 1.2 is the next version of RDF, which is planned to include the new features introduced by RDF-star (but also will integrate 10 years worth of errata)

The rationale for liaising with the RDF-star WG is more to ensure synchronizations with the evolutions of RDF in general than to promote the use of quoted triples in Solid. Not that I think it could not be interesting, but it could have disruptive consequences in a distributed ecosystem where not all actors evolve at the same pace.

[melvincarvalho]

Thank you for bringing up the 33 errata. After a preliminary review, they appear to be minor updates, as one might anticipate. I believe the advice provided in this issue might be the most we can aim for at this time. I'm satisfied with this resolution and am agreeable to closing the issue.