IRC log of rdfhtml on 2004-09-07

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:50:23 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #rdfhtml
12:50:34 [Ralph]: Meeting: RDF-in-HTML Task Force
12:50:38 [Ralph]: Chair: Ben Adida
12:50:44 [Ralph]: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Sep/att-0010/telecon-2.html
12:51:17 [Steven]: Steven has joined #rdfhtml
12:54:13 [Ralph]: Previous: 2004-08-04 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Aug/0020.html
12:54:27 [Ralph]: zakim, this will be rdfhtml
12:54:27 [Zakim]: ok, Ralph; I see SW_BPD(htmltf)9:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
12:55:18 [benadida]: benadida has joined #rdfhtml
12:58:11 [Zakim]: SW_BPD(htmltf)9:00AM has now started
12:58:18 [Zakim]: +Ben_Adida
12:59:11 [Mark]: Mark has joined #rdfhtml
12:59:34 [Zakim]: +Ralph
13:00:07 [Zakim]: +HTML
13:00:54 [Zakim]: + +1.646.519.aaaa
13:00:58 [Zakim]: +David_Wood
13:01:02 [Mark]: zakim, ??aaaa is Mark
13:01:02 [Zakim]: sorry, Mark, I do not recognize a party named '??aaaa'
13:01:21 [Mark]: zakim, aaaa is Mark
13:01:21 [Zakim]: +Mark; got it
13:01:30 [Steven]: zakim, who is here?
13:01:30 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Ben_Adida, Ralph, HTML, Mark, David_Wood
13:01:31 [Zakim]: On IRC I see Mark, benadida, Steven, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ralph, mimasa
13:01:54 [Ralph]: zakim, html has Mimasa, Steven
13:01:54 [Zakim]: +Mimasa, Steven; got it
13:02:02 [David_Wood]: David_Wood has joined #rdfhtml
13:02:13 [htmlwg]: htmlwg has joined #rdfhtml
13:02:50 [Steven]: zakim, HTML also has David, Beth, MarkS, Rich, Kevin, Shinichi
13:02:50 [Zakim]: +David, Beth, MarkS, Rich, Kevin, Shinichi; got it
13:03:23 [MarkS]: MarkS has joined #rdfhtml
13:03:36 [Steven]: agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Sep/att-0010/telecon-2.html
13:03:44 [Kevin]: Kevin has joined #rdfhtml
13:03:55 [RichS]: RichS has joined #rdfhtml
13:04:04 [Ralph]: Scribe: Ralph
13:04:13 [Steven]: Ralph +1
13:04:25 [Steven]: Chair: Ben
13:04:36 [Ralph]: rrsagent, please make log world-visible
13:05:19 [Ralph]: zakim, who's on the phone?
13:05:19 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Ben_Adida, Ralph, HTML, Mark, David_Wood
13:05:20 [Zakim]: HTML has Mimasa, Steven, David, Beth, MarkS, Rich, Kevin, Shinichi
13:05:37 [Ralph]: Steven: HTML WG plan is to go to Last Call the end of this month
13:06:11 [Ralph]: MarkB: presents Metainformation Module
13:06:23 [projector]: projector has joined #rdfhtml
13:06:33 [Ralph]: ... recall motivations;
13:06:39 [benadida]: zakim, mute me
13:06:39 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should now be muted
13:06:56 [David_Wood]: zakim, mute me
13:06:56 [Zakim]: David_Wood should now be muted
13:07:10 [Zakim]: +??P4
13:07:39 [Ralph]: zakim, ??p4 is Jeremey_Carroll
13:07:39 [Zakim]: +Jeremey_Carroll; got it
13:08:04 [Ralph]: Mark: trying to address 2 different worlds; HTML and RDF
13:08:07 [DanC]: DanC has joined #rdfhtml
13:08:18 [Ralph]: ... HTML wants to do what they do every day; e.g. metadata for news
13:08:27 [Ralph]: ... RDF wants to join metadata from different sites
13:08:37 [RRSAgent]: See http://www.w3.org/2004/09/07-rdfhtml-irc#T13-08-27
13:09:06 [Ralph]: ... want to make it so people in HTML world are encouraged to put more of the rich metadata into their documents
13:09:14 [Ralph]: ... and so people in RDF world can get this data out
13:09:33 [Ralph]: ... not a solution for HTML community to put metadata into an external document
13:09:33 [Zakim]: +DanC
13:10:05 [Ralph]: ... but also HTML community want more metadata elements; couldn't address these individually, wanted an open-ended solution
13:10:52 [Steven]: (wanted more semantic-based elements -- would be closer)
13:11:42 [Ralph]: Mark: need to keep in mind that we have these two communities
13:12:26 [Ralph]: ... original attempt was to try to import all the RDF attributes into XHTML
13:12:49 [Ralph]: ... thought we had succeeded, such that a current RDF parser would be able to accept an XHTML document
13:13:11 [Ralph]: ... but ultimately this did not succeed
13:13:43 [Ralph]: ... in the process we did have triples, properties, etc.
13:14:11 [Ralph]: ... current syntax is similar to ntriples
13:14:47 [Ralph]: ... does have nesting; e.g. the subject of a nested <link> can be [inherited from] the nesting <link>
13:15:14 [Ralph]: ... then we evolved the syntax so the new attributes for <meta> and <link> could be used anywhere else in the document
13:15:25 [Ralph]: ... this encourages authors to put more metadata in the document
13:15:37 [Ralph]: ... the attributes are the key part of the syntax
13:16:00 [Ralph]: ... we feel all of the base RDF concepts spec is covered by this syntax
13:16:09 [Ralph]: ... may need a default datatype for <meta>
13:16:23 [Ralph]: ... e.g. all content of <meta> is an XML Literal
13:16:41 [Ralph]: ... not reasonable for a document author to have to say this in every document
13:16:52 [halindrome_]: halindrome_ has joined #rdfhtml
13:16:57 [Ralph]: ... RDF containers and collections are probably covered
13:17:32 [Ralph]: ... rev attribute should allow a list of items to be identified as a Bag
13:17:52 [Ralph]: ... so I think we have pretty much everything in RDF [Core]
13:17:54 [benadida]: zakim, unmute me
13:17:54 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should no longer be muted
13:18:06 [shinichi]: shinichi has joined #rdfhtml
13:18:09 [dom]: dom has joined #rdfhtml
13:18:11 [dom]: sorry
13:18:19 [Ralph]: responded to some email comments
13:18:29 [Ralph]: ... e.g. normative reference to RDF
13:18:37 [Ralph]: ... HTML WG agrees; are looking for suitable wording
13:18:45 [Zakim]: +Dom
13:18:49 [Ralph]: ... the motivation for the syntax _is_ to provide RDF
13:19:55 [benadida]: zakim, mute me
13:19:55 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should now be muted
13:19:58 [DanC]: Subject: Quick glance through xhtml2 meatainformation module
13:19:58 [DanC]: Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 11:33:20 +0200
13:20:13 [Ralph]: [[
13:20:13 [Ralph]: Quick glance through xhtml2 meatainformation module
13:20:13 [Ralph]: From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
13:20:13 [Ralph]: Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 11:33:20 +0200
13:20:13 [Ralph]: To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
13:20:14 [Ralph]: Message-Id: <1091784800.1416.2454.camel@stratustier>
13:20:16 [Ralph]: ]]
13:20:19 [Ralph]: -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Aug/0026.html
13:20:43 [Ralph]: Dom: identified some potential confusion in the model between XML fragments and strings
13:21:30 [Ralph]: ... lack of reference to RDF was damaging; not constraining the source of [properties] will make it difficult to interpret of the results
13:21:50 [benadida]: zakim, unmute me
13:21:50 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should no longer be muted
13:22:10 [Steven]: q+
13:22:29 [Steven]: q-
13:22:40 [Ralph]: Mark: HTML WG would like some feedback on normative RDF references
13:22:49 [Ralph]: ... personally am not sure what a normative reference would be
13:22:59 [Ralph]: ... was thinking specifically of the RDF Concepts specification
13:23:24 [Ralph]: ... in several places, "the RDF Spec" means the whole set of 6 documents
13:23:34 [Ralph]: ... so what does it mean to say "we are referring normatively"
13:24:00 [benadida]: zakim, mute me
13:24:00 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should now be muted
13:24:03 [DanC]: +1 "this is an RDF graph as defined in RDF concepts"
13:24:20 [Ralph]: Jeremy: a reference to Concepts should sufice
13:24:34 [Ralph]: ... saying you are generating an RDF graph as referred to by Concepts
13:24:39 [dom]: -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/ RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax
13:24:51 [Ralph]: ... these graphs are intended to be used according to RDF Concepts
13:25:10 [Ralph]: Mark: would this include Collection and Container? e.g. those would not be our problem?
13:25:29 [Ralph]: ... can add metadata saying "these are a Collection" and that's enough?
13:25:55 [Ralph]: Jeremy: I would personally not get exercised if you left it that way
13:26:10 [Ralph]: ... but you might not be able to say you are "RDF complete", only "RDF compatible"
13:26:22 [halindrome_]: halindrome_ has left #rdfhtml
13:26:25 [Ralph]: ... I don't think you can create an RDF graph consisting of a triple whose subject and object are the same bnode
13:26:32 [Ralph]: ... that's OK; I'm not worried about that case
13:26:46 [benadida]: zakim, unmute me
13:26:46 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should no longer be muted
13:26:56 [Ralph]: ... fine goal to have something that is accessible to HTML authors, this theoretical problem is less important
13:27:25 [Ralph]: ... there is a class of esoteric problems
13:27:48 [Ralph]: ... the one that worries me the most has to do with language tagging, XML Literals and plain literals
13:27:59 [Ralph]: ... I intend to send an e-mail about this
13:28:27 [DanC]: q+
13:28:31 [Ralph]: Ben: would like an action to determine what parts of RDF cannot be expressed in this XHTML syntax
13:28:43 [Ralph]: Mark: we can add more attributes; e.g. a nodeID
13:28:55 [DanC]: q+ to ask that an explicit algorithm from the XHTML2 syntax to RDF graphs is preferable, to me, to an explanation of which bits are missing
13:28:58 [Ralph]: ... some readers will wonder what this is for and may never use it
13:29:01 [Zakim]: DanC, you wanted to ask that an explicit algorithm from the XHTML2 syntax to RDF graphs is preferable, to me, to an explanation of which bits are missing
13:29:18 [Steven]: q+
13:29:25 [Ralph]: DanC: I want to see a positive mapping from this syntax to an RDF Graph
13:29:34 [Ralph]: ... this is more useful than identifying what is missing
13:29:40 [Ralph]: Steven: we have such a mapping already
13:29:57 [Ralph]: ... we [HTML WG] agreed this morning to include this mapping as an appendix to the XHTML 2 specification
13:30:05 [Ralph]: Ralph: would this be a normative mapping?
13:30:12 [Ralph]: Steven: yes, it is basically a GRDDL filter
13:30:35 [Ralph]: Mark: this GRDDL thing is not quite finished
13:30:46 [Ralph]: ... we did a demo in Cannes but it needs to be updated
13:31:28 [Ralph]: Jeremy: interested in Mark's comment that a nodeID attribute could be added
13:31:41 [Ralph]: ... as this will only be confusing to an HTML author, am surprised that Mark is so willing
13:31:54 [Ralph]: ACTION Mark: send pointer to GRDDL mapping for XHTML2->RDF
13:32:22 [Ralph]: Mark: we haven't worked out what an ordinary ID on <meta> and <link> really means
13:32:31 [Ralph]: ... there is an opportunity there to express something different
13:32:55 [Ralph]: ... we get anonymous nodes now with nested <link>
13:33:38 [Ralph]: ... I don't think that if one of these is named with an ID, does it remain 'anonymous'? Is this up to the RDF processor whether to throw away an ID?
13:33:58 [Ralph]: DanC: anonymous nodes and [??] are disjoint in the RDF spec
13:34:12 [DanC]: s/[??]/things with ids/
13:34:31 [benadida]: zakim, mute me
13:34:31 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should now be muted
13:34:40 [Ralph]: Mark: there's a difference between an ID on, say, a <div> for purposes of HTML referencing and sticking an ID on a <link> or a <meta>
13:35:10 [benadida]: zakim, unmute me
13:35:10 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should no longer be muted
13:35:19 [Ralph]: Mark: <link> and <meta> make triples explicitly
13:35:37 [Ralph]: Jeremy: one could discourage such a practice
13:35:39 [DanC]: yes, reification is a dirty word. 1/2 ;-)
13:35:54 [Steven]: q-
13:35:57 [Zakim]: Ralph, you wanted to comment on reuse of ID
13:36:54 [dom]: [+1 to Ralph's point]
13:37:32 [Ralph]: Ralph: keep ID in an XHTML document to refer _only_ to bits of (e.g.) XML infosets and not to refer to abstract concepts
13:37:36 [DanC]: q+ to note http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#httpRange-14 (as well as http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#RDFinXHTML-35 )
13:37:57 [Ralph]: Mark: it seems a common use case to use ID to refer to the source of a quote
13:38:08 [Ralph]: Jeremy: referring to something in the body of a document is fine
13:38:33 [Ralph]: ... the are other mechanisms to refer to the subject
13:38:56 [Ralph]: Mark: in some situations we work backwards; noting what an author _could_ write and decide what it might mean
13:39:11 [Steven]: "he is lost" or "he has lost"?
13:39:13 [Ralph]: ... so if we have something that is the object of a triple, it could mean several things
13:40:01 [Ralph]: Jeremy: IDs in HTML documents refer to bits of documents
13:40:25 [Ralph]: ... some such triples might not be useful in an RDF sense
13:41:17 [DanC]: (is the example they're talking about in the draft somewhere?)
13:41:36 [benadida]: zakim, mute me
13:41:36 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should now be muted
13:42:58 [dom]: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt says "For documents labeled as text/html, the fragment identifier designates the correspondingly named element"
13:43:34 [Steven]: THis is most definitely not text/html, by the way
13:43:38 [benadida]: zakim, unmute me
13:43:38 [Zakim]: Ben_Adida should no longer be muted
13:43:42 [dom]: of course, what the semantics of an HTML element is not well-defined afaik (e.g. HTML "infoset", ...)
13:43:45 [Steven]: it is application/xhtml+xml
13:43:47 [dom]: true
13:44:31 [Ralph]: Mark: does reification fall into the same category as not being able to express a bnode as the subject and object of a triple?
13:44:43 [Ralph]: Jeremy: RDF Core did consider dropping reification
13:44:56 [Ralph]: DanC: and I lost
13:45:22 [Ralph]: Jeremy: I wouldn't expect a lot of pushback if XHTML2 does not support reification
13:45:36 [Ralph]: Mark: is the general thinking that OWL handles this?
13:45:38 [dom]: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt has "For documents described with the application/xhtml+xml media type, fragment identifiers share the same syntax and semantics with other XML documents, see [XMLMIME], section 5."
13:45:50 [dom]: and XMLMIME says it's not defined
13:45:57 [DanC]: no, OWL doesn't provide anything that takes the place of reification, FYI
13:46:00 [Ralph]: Jeremy: even without explicit support for reification, if you can construct an arbitrary RDF graph you can construct the triples that reification needs
13:46:47 [Ralph]: Mark: we will need to be able to make statements about other statements
13:46:55 [Ralph]: ... so we may need the ID thing
13:47:21 [Ralph]: Jeremy: reification does this not by referring to the triple but by referring to the subject, predicate, and object of the triple
13:47:48 [Ralph]: Ben: I think we will need to discuss [reification] more, after Jeremy's email
13:48:06 [Ralph]: Jeremy: I will try to show how to express reification in the XHTML2 syntax
13:48:26 [Ralph]: [I wanted to mention PICS as a use case for making statements about statements]
13:48:48 [Ralph]: http://www.w3.org/2003/03/rdf-in-xml.html
13:48:54 [Ralph]: [[
13:48:54 [Ralph]: RDF in XHTML
13:48:54 [Ralph]: Task Force Document 27 May 2003
13:48:54 [DanC]: ACTION JJC: comment on literals in section 19, 20 of XHTML 2 metainformation model
13:48:55 [Ralph]: ]]
13:49:31 [Ralph]: Ben: note that some requirements identified in that May document are not addressed by this XHTML2 proposal
13:49:44 [Ralph]: ... e.g. not requiring RDF syntax to be rewritten
13:50:16 [Ralph]: DanC: there may not be any special support for reification, but it may still be possible
13:50:33 [Ralph]: ... specifically, I haven't seen anything done in FOAF that could not be expressed in this syntax
13:51:27 [Ralph]: Ben: about the requirement not to have to reformat RDF/XML?
13:52:16 [Ralph]: DanC: I don't share that position, however it is reasonable for us to say that the world has moved on
13:52:49 [Ralph]: Ralph: I agree that what we have learned in the past 18 months can permit us to re-evaluate requirements
13:52:54 [David_Wood]: zakim, unmute me
13:52:54 [Zakim]: David_Wood should no longer be muted
13:53:04 [Ralph]: Ben: relationship of Semantic Web to current Web
13:53:37 [Ralph]: ... the semantic web and the "clickable web" appear to be separate
13:53:49 [Ralph]: ... the links you click on a Web page are completely separate from RDF triples
13:53:58 [Ralph]: ... there appears to be no way to link these two concepts together
13:54:09 [Ralph]: ... my position is that we should do more to link these two together
13:54:22 [Ralph]: Mark: I agree, we've not done much to connect these
13:54:51 [DanC]: q+ to note keeping visible/navigable aspects of documents in sync with formal knowledge is important to me, in practice, and motivated the GRDDL design.
13:54:56 [Ralph]: ... e.g. <link rel='stylesheet'> doesn't actually require that there be a stylesheet there and that a browser use it
13:55:23 [Ralph]: ... can't see changes to things as fundamental as <a> for anchor
13:55:48 [Ralph]: ... but to say that there is actually a predicate that gives a specific type of relationship between two documents [that are hyperlinked] does make sense to me
13:55:50 [Zakim]: DanC, you wanted to note keeping visible/navigable aspects of documents in sync with formal knowledge is important to me, in practice, and motivated the GRDDL design.
13:56:37 [David_Wood]: q+ to note that RDF "metadata" may not always exist in XML documents and that navigation into and out of "RDF Space" seems required to implement a fully semantic Web.
13:56:38 [Ralph]: DanC: I came to the conclusion that sometimes <a href=> means 'this is my brother', sometimes it means 'this is a document'
13:56:52 [Ralph]: ... seems a big challenge to address all of this in HTML space
13:56:56 [mimasa]: (just FYI: if anyone still wants to embed RDF/XML directly into XHTML 2 and wants to validate, http://www.w3.org/2000/07/8378/schemas/nrl/xhtml2-rdf.nrl should do the job)
13:57:08 [Ralph]: ... would like to see progress, but wouldn't suprise me if it turned out to be hard
13:57:36 [Ralph]: Mark: role attribute brings in additional information from a known taxonomy
13:57:44 [DanC]: (does xhtml2-rdf.nrl say whether RDF in <blockquote> is asserted or quoted, mimasa?)
13:58:10 [Ralph]: Mark: [role] gives scope for describing the relationship between two documents as a known type
13:58:41 [Ralph]: ... e.g. a terms-and-conditions link might be in the header of a document
13:58:42 [mimasa]: (DanC, no, just validate XHTML 2 and RDF/XML concurrently)
13:58:53 [Ralph]: ... but the browser knows to render it at the foot because of its particular role
13:59:32 [Ralph]: Ben: so it might be useful to connect the semantics of the link with the user-visible impact?
13:59:58 [Ralph]: Mark: yes there are many applications of this, e.g. accessibility
14:00:29 [Ralph]: Ben: I worry about existing links and approaches that could be leveraged
14:01:10 [Ralph]: ... perhaps we can discuss this on the mailing list
14:01:36 [Zakim]: David_Wood, you wanted to note that RDF "metadata" may not always exist in XML documents and that navigation into and out of "RDF Space" seems required to implement a fully
14:01:39 [Zakim]: ... semantic Web.
14:01:59 [Ralph]: David: there are aspects of creating the Semantic Web that we cannot address solely within the HTML WG
14:02:09 [Ralph]: ... but it is critical that we provide a way to link from HTML into the Semantic Web
14:02:22 [Ralph]: ... so we need a syntax for embedding the semantics
14:02:27 [benadida]: DanC: I was saying we should discuss the semantic vs. clickable on the mailing list over the next few days
14:02:59 [Ralph]: David: we need XHTML 2.0 to be able to link into the Semantic Web; it would be catastrophic to miss this opportunity in XHTML 2
14:03:23 [DanC]: ah; I see, benadida
14:03:35 [Ralph]: Mark: role does seem to handle this. Creative Commons would be another use case
14:03:44 [Ralph]: ACTION BenA: provide some Creative Commons use cases
14:04:03 [Ralph]: Steven: Mark is suggesting <a href="..." role="..."> ?
14:04:06 [Ralph]: Mark: yeah
14:04:20 [RichS]: yes
14:04:45 [Zakim]: -Mark
14:05:00 [Ralph]: Ben: aim for a next meeting in approximately 2 weeks
14:05:13 [Ralph]: ... will use mail to schedule
14:05:17 [Zakim]: -DanC
14:05:18 [Zakim]: -Jeremey_Carroll
14:05:19 [Zakim]: -Ben_Adida
14:05:20 [Zakim]: -Dom
14:05:21 [Zakim]: -David_Wood
14:05:22 [Zakim]: -Ralph
14:05:27 [Zakim]: -HTML
14:05:28 [Zakim]: SW_BPD(htmltf)9:00AM has ended
14:05:29 [Zakim]: Attendees were Ben_Adida, Ralph, +1.646.519.aaaa, David_Wood, Mark, Mimasa, Steven, David, Beth, MarkS, Rich, Kevin, Shinichi, Jeremey_Carroll, DanC, Dom
14:05:32 [Kevin]: Kevin has left #rdfhtml
14:05:35 [shinichi]: shinichi has left #rdfhtml
14:06:12 [Ralph]: rrsagent, bye
14:06:12 [RRSAgent]: I see 3 open action items:
14:06:12 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Mark to send pointer to GRDDL mapping for XHTML2->RDF [1]
14:06:12 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/07-rdfhtml-irc#T13-31-54
14:06:12 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: JJC to comment on literals in section 19, 20 of XHTML 2 metainformation model [2]
14:06:12 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/07-rdfhtml-irc#T13-48-54-3
14:06:12 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: BenA to provide some Creative Commons use cases [3]
14:06:12 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/07-rdfhtml-irc#T14-03-44
14:06:19 [DanC]: thanks for taking notes, ralph