for purposes of HTML referencing and sticking an ID on a or a 13:35:10 zakim, unmute me 13:35:10 Ben_Adida should no longer be muted 13:35:19 Mark: and make triples explicitly 13:35:37 Jeremy: one could discourage such a practice 13:35:39 yes, reification is a dirty word. 1/2 ;-) 13:35:54 q- 13:35:57 Ralph, you wanted to comment on reuse of ID 13:36:54 [+1 to Ralph's point] 13:37:32 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 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 Mark: it seems a common use case to use ID to refer to the source of a quote 13:38:08 Jeremy: referring to something in the body of a document is fine 13:38:33 ... the are other mechanisms to refer to the subject 13:38:56 Mark: in some situations we work backwards; noting what an author _could_ write and decide what it might mean 13:39:11 "he is lost" or "he has lost"? 13:39:13 ... so if we have something that is the object of a triple, it could mean several things 13:40:01 Jeremy: IDs in HTML documents refer to bits of documents 13:40:25 ... some such triples might not be useful in an RDF sense 13:41:17 (is the example they're talking about in the draft somewhere?) 13:41:36 zakim, mute me 13:41:36 Ben_Adida should now be muted 13:42:58 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 THis is most definitely not text/html, by the way 13:43:38 zakim, unmute me 13:43:38 Ben_Adida should no longer be muted 13:43:42 of course, what the semantics of an HTML element is not well-defined afaik (e.g. HTML "infoset", ...) 13:43:45 it is application/xhtml+xml 13:43:47 true 13:44:31 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 Jeremy: RDF Core did consider dropping reification 13:44:56 DanC: and I lost 13:45:22 Jeremy: I wouldn't expect a lot of pushback if XHTML2 does not support reification 13:45:36 Mark: is the general thinking that OWL handles this? 13:45:38 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 and XMLMIME says it's not defined 13:45:57 no, OWL doesn't provide anything that takes the place of reification, FYI 13:46:00 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 Mark: we will need to be able to make statements about other statements 13:46:55 ... so we may need the ID thing 13:47:21 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 Ben: I think we will need to discuss [reification] more, after Jeremy's email 13:48:06 Jeremy: I will try to show how to express reification in the XHTML2 syntax 13:48:26 [I wanted to mention PICS as a use case for making statements about statements] 13:48:48 http://www.w3.org/2003/03/rdf-in-xml.html 13:48:54 [[ 13:48:54 RDF in XHTML 13:48:54 Task Force Document 27 May 2003 13:48:54 ACTION JJC: comment on literals in section 19, 20 of XHTML 2 metainformation model 13:48:55 ]] 13:49:31 Ben: note that some requirements identified in that May document are not addressed by this XHTML2 proposal 13:49:44 ... e.g. not requiring RDF syntax to be rewritten 13:50:16 DanC: there may not be any special support for reification, but it may still be possible 13:50:33 ... specifically, I haven't seen anything done in FOAF that could not be expressed in this syntax 13:51:27 Ben: about the requirement not to have to reformat RDF/XML? 13:52:16 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: I agree that what we have learned in the past 18 months can permit us to re-evaluate requirements 13:52:54 zakim, unmute me 13:52:54 David_Wood should no longer be muted 13:53:04 Ben: relationship of Semantic Web to current Web 13:53:37 ... the semantic web and the "clickable web" appear to be separate 13:53:49 ... the links you click on a Web page are completely separate from RDF triples 13:53:58 ... there appears to be no way to link these two concepts together 13:54:09 ... my position is that we should do more to link these two together 13:54:22 Mark: I agree, we've not done much to connect these 13:54:51 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 ... e.g. doesn't actually require that there be a stylesheet there and that a browser use it 13:55:23 ... can't see changes to things as fundamental as for anchor 13:55:48 ... 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 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 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 DanC: I came to the conclusion that sometimes means 'this is my brother', sometimes it means 'this is a document' 13:56:52 ... seems a big challenge to address all of this in HTML space 13:56:56 (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 ... would like to see progress, but wouldn't suprise me if it turned out to be hard 13:57:36 Mark: role attribute brings in additional information from a known taxonomy 13:57:44 (does xhtml2-rdf.nrl say whether RDF in

is asserted or quoted, mimasa?) 13:58:10 Mark: [role] gives scope for describing the relationship between two documents as a known type 13:58:41 ... e.g. a terms-and-conditions link might be in the header of a document 13:58:42 (DanC, no, just validate XHTML 2 and RDF/XML concurrently) 13:58:53 ... but the browser knows to render it at the foot because of its particular role 13:59:32 Ben: so it might be useful to connect the semantics of the link with the user-visible impact? 13:59:58 Mark: yes there are many applications of this, e.g. accessibility 14:00:29 Ben: I worry about existing links and approaches that could be leveraged 14:01:10 ... perhaps we can discuss this on the mailing list 14:01:36 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 ... semantic Web. 14:01:59 David: there are aspects of creating the Semantic Web that we cannot address solely within the HTML WG 14:02:09 ... but it is critical that we provide a way to link from HTML into the Semantic Web 14:02:22 ... so we need a syntax for embedding the semantics 14:02:27 DanC: I was saying we should discuss the semantic vs. clickable on the mailing list over the next few days 14:02:59 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 ah; I see, benadida 14:03:35 Mark: role does seem to handle this. Creative Commons would be another use case 14:03:44 ACTION BenA: provide some Creative Commons use cases 14:04:03 Steven: Mark is suggesting ? 14:04:06 Mark: yeah 14:04:20 yes 14:04:45 -Mark 14:05:00 Ben: aim for a next meeting in approximately 2 weeks 14:05:13 ... will use mail to schedule 14:05:17 -DanC 14:05:18 -Jeremey_Carroll 14:05:19 -Ben_Adida 14:05:20 -Dom 14:05:21 -David_Wood 14:05:22 -Ralph 14:05:27 -HTML 14:05:28 SW_BPD(htmltf)9:00AM has ended 14:05:29 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 has left #rdfhtml 14:05:35 shinichi has left #rdfhtml 14:06:12 rrsagent, bye 14:06:12 I see 3 open action items: 14:06:12 ACTION: Mark to send pointer to GRDDL mapping for XHTML2->RDF [1] 14:06:12 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/07-rdfhtml-irc#T13-31-54 14:06:12 ACTION: JJC to comment on literals in section 19, 20 of XHTML 2 metainformation model [2] 14:06:12 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/07-rdfhtml-irc#T13-48-54-3 14:06:12 ACTION: BenA to provide some Creative Commons use cases [3] 14:06:12 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/07-rdfhtml-irc#T14-03-44 14:06:19 thanks for taking notes, ralph