IRC log of swbp on 2004-10-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:59:52 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swbp
15:00:09 [Ralph]
Meeting: SemWeb BPD HTML Task Force
15:00:13 [Ralph]
Chair: Ben Adida
15:00:42 [Ralph]
Previous: 2004-10-22 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0024.html
15:00:58 [Ralph]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0048.html
15:01:08 [Ralph]
Ralph has changed the topic to: SWBP HTML TF agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0048.html
15:02:22 [Zakim]
SW_BPD(xhtml)11:00AM has now started
15:02:29 [Zakim]
+Ralph
15:02:55 [Zakim]
+ +aaaa
15:03:04 [DanC]
DanC has joined #swbp
15:03:10 [Ralph]
zakim, aaaa is Jeremy
15:03:10 [Zakim]
+Jeremy; got it
15:03:18 [Zakim]
+DanC
15:04:57 [benadida]
benadida has joined #swbp
15:05:25 [jjc]
jjc has joined #swbp
15:05:28 [Zakim]
+Ben_Adida
15:06:03 [Ralph]
Regrets: Mark
15:08:26 [Ralph]
ACTION: Ben report back HTML WG on our evaluation of RDF/A
15:08:39 [Ralph]
ACTION 1= Ben report back to HTML WG on our evaluation of RDF/A
15:09:06 [Ralph]
zakim, who's on the call?
15:09:06 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Ralph, Jeremy, DanC, Ben_Adida
15:10:20 [Ralph]
Topic: Action review
15:10:36 [Ralph]
ACTION BenA assesses impact of namespace and media type change on CC
15:10:51 [Ralph]
BenA: talked with Mike, CTO of CC
15:11:10 [Ralph]
... happy to have an XHTML 2 solution but we expect adoption to not be immediate
15:11:57 [Ralph]
... CC has to decide how to move to a notation that will be XHTML2-compliant and that is going to at least render correctly in current deployed browsers and ideally that would validate
15:12:10 [Ralph]
... may adopt the current RDF/A syntax inside our recommended HTML
15:12:14 [DanC]
(hmm... is there an XHTML2 validation service yet?)
15:12:34 [Ralph]
BenA:... regarding literals, considering Jeremy's comments it appears we are in fine shape
15:12:49 [Ralph]
... we don't see a need for XML literals
15:12:58 [Ralph]
... we do need plain literals
15:13:14 [Ralph]
JJC: do you care about having to duplicate content?
15:13:27 [Ralph]
BenA: I am a big supporter of not having to duplicate content, yes
15:13:43 [Ralph]
action complete
15:13:44 [Ralph]
BenA determines CC requirement with respect to literals
15:13:51 [Ralph]
complete (see above)
15:13:59 [Ralph]
BenA to find someone to determine requirement with respect to FOAF and literals
15:14:13 [Ralph]
BenA: will be contacting Dan Brickley
15:14:17 [Ralph]
action continues
15:14:30 [Ralph]
ACTION JJC to check nodeID and bnode issues
15:14:33 [Ralph]
completed
15:15:37 [Ralph]
ACTION: JJC contact Dan Brickley to determine requirement with respect to FOAF and literals
15:15:47 [Ralph]
(replace similar action on BenA)
15:15:55 [Ralph]
s/replace/replaces/
15:16:04 [Ralph]
ACTION Steven and Mark to add about="" to example 6.1 (CC)
15:16:34 [Ralph]
http://www.formsplayer.com/notes/rdf-a.html appears to have last been modified on 2004-09-22
15:16:37 [Ralph]
action continues
15:17:02 [Ralph]
ACTION DanC: ask for contact from SHOE/DAML/OWL "how do I put this in my web page?" community
15:17:08 [Ralph]
action continues
15:18:19 [Ralph]
DanC: what is the time window for getting a SHOE/DAML/OWL person into the discussion and up to speed?
15:18:39 [Ralph]
BenA: HTML WG meets f2f week after next and hopes to go to Last Call shortly thereafter
15:18:55 [Ralph]
JJC: want to talk about complexity. This may hurt the HTML WG schedule
15:19:38 [Ralph]
DanC: GRDDL does not depend on the HTML WG taking further action
15:21:21 [Ralph]
Ralph: I fully expect this TF to come back to GRDDL discussions once we've gotten our feedback to the HTML WG
15:21:53 [Ralph]
Topic: Jeremy's XSLT2 implementation of RDF/A
15:21:55 [jjc]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Oct/att-0052
15:22:01 [DanC]
q+ to suggest recruiting a reviewer, or at least an alpha tester
15:22:38 [Ralph]
JJC: I just updated the XSLT2 implementation and now believe it to be a complete implementation of RDF/A except for the bnode() Xpointer scheme
15:22:42 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to suggest recruiting a reviewer, or at least an alpha tester
15:23:33 [Ralph]
ACTION: Ben test JJC's implementation on CC cases
15:23:36 [jjc]
(oh there's a bug to do with whitespace within XMLLiterals)
15:24:10 [Ralph]
JJC: the key goal of the implementation was to have a clear mapping from the document to the code
15:24:37 [Ralph]
... the critical sections (4 and 5) correspond paragraph-by-paragraph
15:24:46 [DanC]
(hmm... is it worth putting the "simple rules using XPath expressions" in the RDF/A spec?)
15:25:00 [Ralph]
... there are two transformations from the doc to the final XSLT2 code
15:25:25 [Ralph]
... it's meant to be obvious where to change the code if the spec is changed
15:25:51 [Ralph]
Topic: Jeremy's Comments on RDF/A
15:26:21 [Ralph]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0047.html RDF/A review summary [Jeremy 2004-10-28]
15:26:50 [Ralph]
JJC: the I18N WG raised a formal objection to the RDF Core's decision on xml:lang in XML Literals
15:27:06 [DanC]
(my instinct would be to get the RDF/A spec to the point where the rules could be scraped from it, ala "ical RDF schema: derived from the RFC" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-calendar/2004Mar/0007.html)
15:27:09 [Ralph]
... RDF Core decided to simplify XML Literals so they were just like other datatypes w/o an xml:lang
15:27:31 [Ralph]
... using <span> to add xml:lang back when necessary
15:27:35 [DanC]
q+
15:28:04 [benadida]
ack DanC
15:28:05 [Ralph]
... if RDF/A goes to Last Call as currently written the I18N folk are likely to again raise a strong objection
15:28:28 [Ralph]
DanC: I don't care much about the details until I hear someone actually using a feature
15:28:47 [Ralph]
... RDF Core spent a year on the details of language tagging and I'm not aware of anyone using it
15:28:55 [Ralph]
... people are creating new properties
15:29:13 [Ralph]
JJC: we have Jena users using xml:lang
15:29:48 [Ralph]
BenA: tempted to say this is not in our scope
15:29:56 [DanC]
q+ to suggest the W3C translation system as a use case
15:30:09 [Ralph]
... as the same problem occurs in RDF/XML
15:30:19 [DanC]
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/
15:30:42 [Ralph]
JJC: within RDF/XML the authors are explicitly told that xml:lang is not in scope and if they want it they must include it explicitly
15:30:54 [Ralph]
... whereas with XHTML the expectation is that xml:lang is in scope
15:31:15 [Ralph]
... e.g. language-dependent stylesheets would be expected to work inside this XML markup
15:31:29 [benadida]
ack DanC
15:31:29 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to suggest the W3C translation system as a use case
15:31:55 [Ralph]
DanC: I think Ivan Herman is the person responsible for the W3C translations database
15:32:06 [Ralph]
... think he maintains that by hand, not by automated scraping
15:32:44 [Ralph]
... I18N WG might be able to point to use cases
15:33:43 [Ralph]
DanC: we could point out to the HTML WG the risks of this current solution
15:35:40 [Ralph]
JJC: I have a solution, which doesn't require the HTML author to do anything more; the mapping (XSLT) adds the <span>
15:37:19 [Ralph]
RESOLVED to point out to HTML WG the risk of I18N objections to the RDF/A handling of xml:lang but that we feel a solution exists that requires no additional work for HTML authors
15:37:50 [Ralph]
JJC: regarding literals ...
15:38:06 [Ralph]
... last week people were interested in having plain literals in element content
15:38:08 [DanC]
(pointer to something to stare at, please?)
15:38:30 [benadida]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0037
15:38:41 [DanC]
datatypes + in-line plain literals
15:39:40 [Ralph]
JJC: my suggestion is to take the xpath text if there is other markup present; i.e. ignore the markup
15:40:10 [Ralph]
DanC: example would be more compelling if it used something other than <meta>, as <meta> is already special
15:40:37 [Ralph]
JJC: this would be easy to implement; didn't do it in order to stay strictly to the written spec
15:41:39 [Ralph]
JJC: two ways to denote a plain literal in element content
15:41:52 [Ralph]
... 1. special datatype 2. separate attribute
15:42:14 [Ralph]
DanC: I prefer a separate attribute, as the type of the datatype attribute is QName
15:42:30 [Ralph]
Ralph: we could make a plain literal QName
15:42:55 [Ralph]
JJC: in RDF plain literals have a lang tag so they're not typed
15:43:13 [Ralph]
... prefer separate attribute approach
15:43:39 [DanC]
(yes, "ugh" applies to almost all aspecs of datatypes in RDF.)
15:44:17 [jjc]
.//text()
15:44:25 [Ralph]
PROPOSE to propose to HTML WG a 'plain="true"' attribute
15:44:29 [jjc]
takes the text() nodes of descendenents
15:46:12 [DanC]
yes, let's ask them to replace the metainfo module with RDF/A
15:47:26 [Ralph]
RESOLVED to propose to HTML WG a 'plain="true"' attribute
15:48:13 [Ralph]
RESOLVED to propose to HTML WG a 'plain="true"' attribute for expressing plain literals in element content
15:48:58 [jjc]
PROPOSE We find RDF/A a big step forward and hope that this will supplement the metainformation module
15:49:32 [DanC]
(I'd like to add "it's so nifty I implemented it")
15:49:50 [jjc]
Our detailed criticism of RDF/A is intended to helpfurther improve this work, and is not intended negatively
15:49:59 [jjc]
Our detailed criticism of RDF/A is intended to helpfurther improve this work, and is not intended negatively
15:50:04 [jjc]
Our detailed criticism of RDF/A is intended to helpfurther improve this wok.
15:50:13 [DanC]
(more fodder: "toward the long-standing needs of the RDF deployment community to mix semantic web data with HTML documents")
15:50:41 [Ralph]
. /hope that this will supplement/encourage the HTML WG to use it in place of the 22 July metainformation module
15:52:53 [benadida]
ACTION: BenA to write up a version of the above and send to list
15:53:02 [Ralph]
PROPOSE We find RDF/A a big step forward and encourage the HTML WG to use it in place of the 22 July metainformation module. Our detailed criticism of RDF/A is intended to helpfurther improve this work toward the long-standing needs of the RDF deployment community to mix semantic web data with HTML documents.
15:53:20 [Ralph]
(consensus among the 4 of us)
15:53:30 [DanC]
Connolly 2nds that and trusts ben to stay in that neightborhood.
15:53:42 [Ralph]
JJC: there are quite a number of ways to determine subjects and objects and the objects are particularly complicated
15:53:58 [Ralph]
... it's very hard to keep track of this all
15:54:12 [Ralph]
... my implementation does keep track in an elegant way that is hugely inefficient
15:54:37 [Ralph]
... the resulting complexity is too much for humans to understand and sufficiently hard that programs will frequently be wrong as well
15:54:58 [Ralph]
... getting rid of the the predicate inheritance rules would help some
15:55:26 [Ralph]
... the subject rules amount to 8 different ways to determine a subject
15:55:53 [Ralph]
... this is a lot but not too bad
15:56:20 [Ralph]
... in paragraph 4.4.3 there is a rule
15:57:13 [Ralph]
... different treatment for link & meta elements than all other elements
15:57:46 [Ralph]
... most of the examples in RDF/A actually produce more triples than the authors intend
15:58:15 [Ralph]
... the current draft is good but not yet REC-quality
15:59:01 [Ralph]
... it's not yet clear which rules need to be removed; this is a complex language design issue
16:01:29 [DanC]
PROPOSED: that after initial implementation experience with RDF/A [@@date], the balance between ease-of-authoring and implementation complexity seems not quite right
16:02:05 [DanC]
withdrawn.
16:03:22 [Ralph]
PROPOSED: the current rules provide more options than needed and produce more triples than intended. We offer to work with the HTML WG to simplify the rules for determining resource-valued objects
16:03:41 [Ralph]
JJC: the essential idea of 4.4.3 introduces a huge complexity
16:03:50 [Ralph]
RESOLVED: the current rules provide more options than needed and produce more triples than intended. We offer to work with the HTML WG to simplify the rules for determining resource-valued objects
16:04:03 [jjc]
JJC: but I also like 4.4.3 as well
16:06:57 [DanC]
(http://www.timeanddate.com/ is your friend)
16:07:10 [Ralph]
Ben: I could be available 8:30am-1:00pm EST
16:07:14 [Ralph]
... on Monday
16:07:43 [Zakim]
-DanC
16:07:47 [Zakim]
-Ralph
16:07:48 [Zakim]
-Jeremy
16:07:49 [Zakim]
-Ben_Adida
16:08:05 [Zakim]
SW_BPD(xhtml)11:00AM has ended
16:08:06 [Zakim]
Attendees were Ralph, +aaaa, Jeremy, DanC, Ben_Adida
16:08:14 [Ralph]
rrsagent, bye
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
I see 5 open action items:
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben report back to HTML WG on our evaluation of RDF/A [1]
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/29-swbp-irc#T15-08-26
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: JJC contact Dan Brickley to determine requirement with respect to FOAF and literals [2]
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/29-swbp-irc#T15-15-37
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DanC to ask for contact from SHOE/DAML/OWL "how do I put this in my web page?" community [3]
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/29-swbp-irc#T15-17-02
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben test JJC's implementation on CC cases [4]
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/29-swbp-irc#T15-23-33
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: BenA to write up a version of the above and send to list [5]
16:08:14 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/29-swbp-irc#T15-52-53