14:53:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #swbp
14:53:03 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/01/17-swbp-irc
14:53:12 <RalphS> Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML TF
14:55:07 <Steven> Steven has joined #swbp
14:59:57 <MarkB> MarkB has joined #swbp
15:00:59 <Zakim> SW_BPD(rdfxhtml)10:00AM has now started
15:01:07 <Zakim> +Ralph
15:01:08 <RalphS> zakim, Ben is with Ralph
15:01:08 <Zakim> +Ben; got it
15:01:21 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
15:01:21 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
15:01:23 <Zakim> +Steven
15:02:11 <Zakim> +??P25
15:02:12 <MarkB> zakim, i am ?
15:02:12 <Zakim> +MarkB; got it
15:02:50 <jeremy> jeremy has joined #swbp
15:03:08 <RalphS> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Jan/0015.html
15:03:19 <benadida> benadida has joined #swbp
15:03:31 <jeremy> (late regrets - not dialling in)
15:03:45 <MarkB> zakim, mute me
15:03:46 <Zakim> MarkB should now be muted
15:03:46 <RalphS> Previous: 2006-01-10 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Jan/0009.html
15:03:57 <RalphS> zakim, who's on the call?
15:03:57 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ralph, Steven, MarkB (muted)
15:03:57 <benadida> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:59 <Zakim> Ralph has Ralph, Ben
15:04:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ralph, Steven, MarkB (muted)
15:04:07 <Zakim> Ralph has Ralph, Ben
15:05:25 <RalphS> Ben: if DanBri shows we have another agenda item to discuss -- the schema for html rel values
15:05:35 <RalphS> Ben: I've make all the critical changes to rdfa-syntax
15:05:50 <RalphS> ... the rules are consistent with everything we've discussed
15:06:03 <RalphS> ... issues remaining may be around the examples
15:06:54 <MarkB> zakim, unmute me
15:06:54 <Zakim> MarkB should no longer be muted
15:07:00 <RalphS> Topic: new examples from Mark
15:07:17 <RalphS> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Jan/0010.html Additional Examples for RDF/A Primer
15:07:46 <RalphS> Mark: my goal was to start from the viewpoint of someone who is already an HTML author and wants to 'beef up' his document
15:08:58 <RalphS> ... starting with blogs, as FOAF works well with them
15:09:43 <RalphS> ... got diverted on discussion with DanBri on distinction between document and person and which URI applies to each
15:10:10 <RalphS> ... I've come to a new radical conclusion that I will write up
15:10:31 <RalphS> ... no longer basing RDF/A on the URI of the document
15:11:29 <RalphS> ... a common use case is: given an item of some type, I want to add properties to them
15:11:34 <RalphS> ... e.g. an item for sale
15:12:11 <RalphS> ... for a FOAF home page, the URI shouldn't identify the person
15:12:16 <RalphS> ... could have two FOAF pages at different URIs talking about the same person
15:12:32 <RalphS> ... so the actual URI of where the document is is not such important information
15:13:01 <RalphS> ... even the information about a license is in another document
15:13:04 <RalphS> q-
15:13:59 <RalphS> [Ralph thinks Mark's realization is plausible; will have to see what implications he draws from it.]
15:14:15 <RalphS> Ben: perhaps a better example for bloggers is that of having a blog be its own RSS feed
15:14:19 <RalphS> ... people will understand this
15:16:13 <RalphS> ... I'm willing to write up this example for consideration
15:18:57 <RalphS> ... I am convinced that more examples makes the document better; thanks, Mark, for pushing this
15:19:36 <benadida> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2006Jan/0025.html
15:19:48 <RalphS> ^ Pat Hayes' comments
15:20:25 <RalphS> ... point 1, on the use of "content"
15:20:43 <RalphS> Steven: "content" comes directly from HTML4
15:21:09 <RalphS> ... it's always been there and it shows the actual relationship between the element content and the thing we're referring to
15:21:28 <RalphS> ... its meaning has not changed from HTML4
15:22:05 <RalphS> ... it's useful for people to see that these are natural uses of HTML
15:23:34 <RalphS> Ralph: "content" is a natural word for folks familiar with HTML and that is our target audience
15:24:21 <RalphS> ACTION: Ben respond to Pat's RDF/A comments
15:24:47 <RalphS> Steven: re point 2, we can say that yes, we agree; IRIs are the new URIs but we don't need to rename
15:25:06 <RalphS> ... in XHTML2 we kept the name URI even though we're changing the value range to IRI
15:25:20 <RalphS> ... we say "thing called URI in XHTML2 _is_ an IRI"
15:26:14 <RalphS> Hayes point 3 -- on including "pure" RDF triples
15:26:31 <RalphS> Steven: I could not see how Pat came to the conclusion that <li> was required
15:26:56 <RalphS> Mark: some of our examples use LI -- perhaps those are the only ones that produce pure triples
15:27:30 <RalphS> Ben: let's give another example [to Pat] that shows how to produce a triple without LI
15:27:50 <RalphS> ... perhaps another example on "pure RDF" could be added to the Primer
15:28:27 <RalphS> ... may be worth reviving the "advanced topics" section of the Primer
15:29:11 <RalphS> Mark: second part of Pat's point relates to Gary Ng's comment on use of html:about rather than rdf:about
15:29:42 <RalphS> ... Pat is suggesting that in-line RDF/XML might be useful
15:30:18 <RalphS> ... I think it's appropriate to respond to Pat that yes, sprinkling LINK and META throughout the document is the way to introduce RDF triples
15:30:41 <RalphS> Mark: could even link to some embedded RDF
15:31:07 <RalphS> Ben: I'd have gone for a separate document in such a case
15:32:07 <RalphS> ... if the author's goal is not to use the rendered content for dual-purpose of metadata, then put the RDF in a separate document
15:32:53 <RalphS> ... so respond to Pat with examples other than LI and remind him that <link rel='meta' ...> still works
15:32:57 <RalphS> so RESOLVED
15:33:21 <RalphS> Hayes point 4 -- using CSS to attach properties
15:33:38 <RalphS> Ben: propose to respond that yes, we agree it would be nice for CSS to become RDF/A aware but that is out of our scope
15:34:11 <RalphS> Mark: I think he's suggesting using CSS selectors to attach properties
15:34:19 <RalphS> ... our response could be "why not just do that in RDF"?
15:34:36 <RalphS> ... e.g. it's not CSS's job to attach an 'age' property to every span
15:34:54 <danbri> danbri has joined #swbp
15:34:59 <RalphS> Ralph: CSS's job is all about presentation and RDF/A is _not_ about presentation
15:35:38 <RalphS> ... I think extending the use of CSS for semantics is muddying the water
15:35:56 <RalphS> Mark: and this complicates Jeremy's implementation; he'd have to parse the CSS too
15:36:29 <RalphS> Ben: I don't believe we resolved an old issue as to whether class and role attributes affect RDF semantics
15:37:21 <RalphS> Topic: next XHTML draft
15:37:34 <RalphS> Ben: is there anything the HTML WG needs from this Task Force at this time?
15:37:45 <RalphS> Steven: no, I'm happy with the state of the document right now
15:37:58 <RalphS> ... we're working hard on a new XHTML2 draft
15:38:15 <RalphS> ... hope to be able to announce a new draft worth looking at by the end of this week
15:38:29 <RalphS> ... we're working on the whole draft, not just the RDF/A bits
15:38:48 <RalphS> ... we discovered a number of issues that were recorded as resolve in the issues list but we hadn't replied to the authors
15:39:22 <RalphS> Ben: Bjorn's email from a year ago has been on my to-do list and I think we can now give a more precise response
15:39:50 <benadida> Gary
15:39:52 <benadida> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2006Jan/0050.html
15:39:56 <benadida> Gary Ng's comments
15:39:57 <RalphS> Topic: Gar Ng's comments
15:40:02 <RalphS> s/Gar /Gary /
15:40:42 <RalphS> ... section 2, "RDF/A itself"
15:41:29 <RalphS> Ng 2.1 -- on synchronization of metadata
15:41:37 <RalphS> Steven: this is not a new problem and it will never go away
15:41:59 <RalphS> ... e.g. the HTML might claim an image is GIF but it can later change its representation to JPEG
15:43:06 <RalphS> Ralph: this touches on the general SemWeb question of 'trust' -- which metadata do you believe?  that question is out of scope for XHTML
15:43:23 <RalphS> Ben: in our response we can note that the same problem exists in RDF/XML
15:43:43 <RalphS> Steven: and it exists even in pure HTML; the HTTP headers can disagree with the HTML content
15:43:51 <RalphS> Ng 2.2 - consistency
15:44:05 <RalphS> Ben: answer is to use separate files
15:44:32 <RalphS> Mark: Gary's suggestion here is to reuse the RDF attributes directly
15:44:43 <RalphS> ... the reason this fails is because RDF/XML has a striped syntax
15:45:00 <RalphS> ... so you don't know whether you're parsing a resource or properties about that resource
15:45:10 <RalphS> Steven: so the answer is that these syntaxes are different
15:45:40 <RalphS> Mark: a lot of work went into trying to resuse the RDF attributes but this failed due to the striping issue
15:45:59 <RalphS> Ng 2.3 - inheriting via nesting
15:46:29 <RalphS> Ben: seems to be a misunderstanding; there is inheritance if there is no new 'about' attribute
15:46:43 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:46:50 <RalphS> Steven: idea is to nest META elemens, which you can do
15:46:54 <RalphS> zakim, ipcaller is DanBri
15:46:54 <Zakim> +DanBri; got it
15:47:03 <RalphS> s/elemens/elements/
15:47:12 <Steven> Steven has joined #swbp
15:47:26 <RalphS> Mg 2.4 - img element
15:47:40 <RalphS> Steven: response is that XHTML2 does allow content in IMG now
15:48:09 <RalphS> ... but we didn't resolve the question whether the triples apply to the src
15:48:19 <benadida> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-current-issues
15:48:30 <RalphS> Ben: we have a tentative answer to issue 6 of 'yes', pending a further evaluation of the semantics of 'src' from Mark
15:48:44 <RalphS> ... given that XHTML2 says the content is ignored unless the src fails
15:49:13 <RalphS> Steven: in terms of processing XHTML2 says the content should be ignored if src succeeds
15:49:45 <RalphS> ... given nested IMG with a JPEG src inside an IMG with a PNG src ...
15:50:03 <Zakim> This conference is scheduled to end in 10 minutes; all ports must be freed
15:50:15 <RalphS> Ben: can we distinguish between parsing and resolving?
15:50:38 <RalphS> Steven: could create some difficulties, depending on whether the nested elements have src attributes
15:50:48 <RalphS> ... could continue to process the children for semantic content
15:50:55 <RalphS> ... but this would lead to two ways to use the content
15:51:09 <RalphS> ... this mixes up the two bits of processing in a messy way
15:51:20 <RalphS> Ben: this same thing happens for objects
15:51:57 <RalphS> Mark: could specify that META and LINK are the first things to be recognized
15:52:15 <RalphS> ... even before deciding whether the IMG succeeds or fails
15:53:31 <RalphS> Ralph: I prefer the perspective that says the semantics are still intended even if the content is not used for "rendering"
15:53:55 <RalphS> ... for example, a client that is configured not to display images should still consider the metadata to be asserted
15:55:03 <RalphS> Mark: does this answer Gary's question?
15:55:03 <Zakim> This conference is scheduled to end in 5 minutes; all ports must be freed
15:55:37 <RalphS> Mark: a processor that understands RDF/A can make use of the nested value
15:56:16 <RalphS> Ben: but note that the content is _not_ rendered if the src succeeds, so an author cannot expect the metadata to always be rendered
15:57:02 <RalphS> Mark: if both src and about are specified, we generate both sets of triples
15:57:09 <RalphS> ... by the general rule that we generate everything possible
15:57:31 <RalphS> Ben: so advice to authors might be not to specify both src and about [unless you're sure that's what you intended]
15:58:02 <Zakim> This conference is scheduled to end in 2 minutes; all ports must be freed
15:58:11 <RalphS> ... does the HTML WG agree that parsing the content of IMG for metadata is OK even if the src succeeds?
15:58:17 <RalphS> Steven: yes, this isn't a problem
15:58:27 <RalphS> Ben: so we can say that issue 6 is fully resolved as 'yes'?
15:58:31 <RalphS> [no objections]
15:58:59 <RalphS> Steven: I'm pretty sure it's OK but will think about it
15:59:03 <Zakim> This conference is scheduled to end in 1 minute; all ports must be freed
15:59:11 <RalphS> ACTION: Steven confirm an answer on issue 6
15:59:19 <RalphS> Mark: appears to be the middle choice
15:59:38 <danbri> http://www.w3.org/2005/05/hrel/ dangling in limbo... can we get a couple reviewers from the tf?
15:59:54 <RalphS> Ng 2.5 - flexible referrals
16:00:02 <RalphS> Mark: doesn't feel true to me
16:00:03 <Zakim> This conference is scheduled to end now; all ports must be freed immediately
16:00:04 <Zakim> The time reserved for this conference has been exceeded. 8 ports must be freed
16:00:24 <RalphS> ... we've been working on XForms for a while
16:00:28 <RalphS> Ben: maybe another example would help
16:00:46 <RalphS> Steven: what Gary is asking for in forms is already provided in P3P
16:01:12 <RalphS> s/in P3P/in XHTML forms by using P3P/
16:01:29 <RalphS> ... P3P is an annotation vocabulary specifically targetted at privacy
16:01:54 <RalphS> ... Gary's use case has already been covered
16:02:20 <RalphS> q+
16:02:42 <RalphS> Ben: seems we could just use meta and link to annotate elements
16:03:04 <RalphS> ... I don't see that there is a need for special subjects and objects
16:03:13 <RalphS> Mark: could imagine some XLink-like language
16:03:27 <RalphS> ... but it gets messy to add a level of indirection to every element
16:04:22 <RalphS> Steven: Gary seems to be asking to be able to talk about attributes in the same way we can talk about elements
16:04:33 <RalphS> Ben: it's a question of complexity
16:05:01 <RalphS> ... can annotate forms elements
16:05:51 <RalphS> Mark: Gary may be trying to find a way to reuse attribute content as metadata in the way we reuse element content
16:06:46 <RalphS> Ben: propose to respond that RDF/A can annotation forms elements
16:07:05 <RalphS> Mark: and further note that reuse of attribute content for metadata will add too much complication
16:07:35 <RalphS> Topic: RDF Schema for rel attribute
16:07:56 <RalphS> DanBri: it's been some months since I last looked at it
16:08:06 <RalphS> ... I recall that it felt done except for re-doing the image
16:08:21 <RalphS> ... and my knowledge of the specific link types in HTML was sketchy
16:09:00 <RalphS> ... current markup was done by hand yet the text is almost the same as is in the XHTML spec; can we find a way to extract this from the XHTML spec?
16:09:17 <RalphS> Ben: does this seem like something that should be integrated into the XHTML2 spec?
16:09:29 <RalphS> Steven: we've already defined the meaning of the attribute values
16:10:03 <RalphS> ... might be no objection to including an RDF schema for the values as an appendix
16:10:19 <RalphS> DanBri: http://www.w3.org/2005/05/hrel/ does have a list of open issues
16:11:11 <RalphS> ... in some cases I tweaked the [HTML] text to read better as a property description
16:11:54 <RalphS> ACTION: All in the TF to look at http://www.w3.org/2005/05/hrel/ to decide whether it's ready for WG review
16:12:14 <RalphS> Ben: from next week our telecon time is 1 hour earlier
16:12:49 <RalphS> next meeting: 24 Jan, 1400 UTC
16:13:23 <RalphS> ACTION: Ben draft a response to Gary Ng's comments
16:14:11 <benadida> ACTION: Ben to draft a new example of RDF/A as an XHTML document that is its own RSS feed
16:15:01 <RalphS> Ben: should we ask the WG to publish the Primer as a Note or as a WD?
16:15:12 <RalphS> Ralph: I propose WD -- that we set an expectation that we intend to update it
16:15:29 <Zakim> -Steven
16:15:30 <Zakim> -MarkB
16:15:32 <RalphS> RESOLVED: we ask the WG to approve publication of the RDF/A primer as a Working Draft
16:15:32 <Zakim> -DanBri
16:15:34 <Zakim> -Ralph
16:15:35 <Zakim> SW_BPD(rdfxhtml)10:00AM has ended
16:15:36 <Zakim> Attendees were Ralph, Ben, Steven, MarkB, DanBri
16:15:37 <RalphS> [adjourned]
17:27:59 <jeremy> jeremy has left #swbp
18:03:49 <Zakim> Zakim has left #swbp