See also: IRC log
ACTION: [DONE] Ben review Jeremy's actions [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/20-htmltf-minutes.html#action14]
-> following up on issues assigned to Jeremy [Ben]
ACTION: [PENDING] Ben start separate mail threads on remaining discussion topics [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action04]
Ben: expect to complete this this week
ACTION: [DONE] Ben to develop a plan for a marketing/news web site about RDF/A and send it to the list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/13-htmltf-minutes.html#action16]
-> The RDF/A Marketing Site [Ben]
ACTION: Mark, Steven, and Ralph respond to Ben's off-list draft of response to Bjoern [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/13-htmltf-minutes.html#action05]
<Steven_> Done by Steven
Mark: I started writing a reply to Ben, will complete soon. Bjoern has received several messages from us so the tone should not imply this is the first reply. I hope to finish my comments today
Ralph: I'm happy with Ben's latest draft of response to Bjoern
ACTION: Ben update his bookmarklet for XHTML mode [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/13-htmltf-minutes.html#action12] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ben to draft full response to Bjoern's 2004 email [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/24-swbp-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: [WITHDRAWN] Jeremy followup on HEAD about= edge case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action03]
ACTION: [WITHDRAWN] Jeremy followup with Mark on the question of multiple triples from nested meta and add to issues list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action01]
ACTION: [WITHDRAWN] Jeremy look into the XHTML namespace issue and write thoughts into email [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action02]... next
ACTION: [WITHDRAWN] Jeremy propose wording on reification [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action02]
ACTION: Ben integrate Jeremy's actions into list of issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/10-htmltf-minutes.html#action11]
ACTION: [DONE] Mark work on a first draft of an RDF/A XHTML 1.1 module [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action01]
-> [ACTION] Produce XHTML M12N 1.1 Schemas for RDFA [Mark]
ACTION: once Steven sends editors' draft of XHTML2, all TF members take a look and comment on showstopper issues only [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action01] [CONTINUES]
Ben: I presented a version of my Semantic Technologies talk to the W3C Staff last week. This version had more demos and technical detail. There was a lot of interest in seeing how this would work as an XHTML 1.1 module; there is interest in deployment issues for existing browsers
Steven: redefining 'rel' became an issue
Ralph: I think redefining 'rel' is a backwards compatibility question
Mark: 'rel' values without prefix are in the XHTML namespace, and there won't be anything at the URI. HTML has been that way (nothing at the URI) for years, so what's the problem? The layered approach is good and should be emphasized
Ben: Mozilla liked the changes to 'rel'
Ralph: a key message in Ben's presentation is the benefit that comes from putting RDF statements in the same document with the hypertext
Mark: someone has posted a suggestion to use RDF/A to markup text values in an RDF/XML OWL document. He noted that he needed to invent a namespace for the RDF/A attributes in order to do this. The specific task was wanting to identify medical terms in the text; see ~November 2005 in SWBPD list
[post-meeting, scribe finds "RE: [RDFA] Use within RDF" relevant to the use case Mark described]
Ben: the mnemonic "DRY" - Don't Repeat Yourself -- was suggested for the goal to not repeat data between RDF and display
Mark: I found I had to create more new modules rather than just override existing ones. I tried to resolve all the issues; e.g. CURIEs in href. I am not sure what we should try to release first; perhaps just META and LINK everywhere and QNames in 'rel'. Clicking on a link that contains '[...]' is trickier
<Zakim> benadida, you wanted to talk about next WG
Ben: there is interest in having an XHTML 1.1 module proposal to be input to the proposed SemWeb Deployment WG. In that sense, having a complete proposal is good; can now start looking at how much of it could be deployed
Mark: if there's a good case for implementing the whole thing, I'd much prefer that
Ben: there will be concern for folk who choose not to upgrade their browser for a while
Ralph: is the XHTML 1.1 [modularization] specification being reopened for change to accommodate Mark's draft proposal? I'm a neophyte in XHTML 1.1 stuff.
Steven: don't get confused by the "1.1" numbering of both XHTML and XHTML Modularization
Mark: I'm only saying that the changes needed to META and LINK are so fundamental ... what Modularization expects you to do is create a layer that redefines things in the modularization. E.g. to add 'about' you go to 'common.extra' and simply add your attribute. The architecture is designed to make it easy to add elements and attributes. You're not supposed to need layers unless you want to fundamentally alter the architecture and I decided that such a fundamental change was appropriate
Steven: yes, Modularization does provide an extension mechanism but you cannot, e.g. add 'href' to 'common.extras' because you'll get duplicate href definitions
Mark: I only had to modify existing definitions for A, LINK, and imagemap. I found I had to make more changes to the schemas than I would have preferred to make
Ralph: so everything you needed to do to add RDF/A as an XHTML 1.1 module can be done without a WG in the HTML Activity making changes to existing XHTML specs?
Mark: right, the existing specs are enough to support this work
Steven: we've learned that attributes should not be hardwired to specific elements. Modularization does not allow a local attribute to be generalized; this is the one feature we didn't consider, so this makes href more difficult
Mark: we need to discuss how this moves forward; e.g. 'name' is currently required and needs to be made optional. With that change, a new document might not be conformant to an older schema
<Zakim> RalphS, you wanted to ask how best to keep records of the early modularization work on W3C site
Ralph: Mark, please email snapshots of your pages to TF mailing list or to www-archive@w3.org. We could also use W3C Wiki
<Steven_> url of pages?
Mark: there is a 'print' button that will print all the pages as a single document. Note, too, that comments are enabled on the skimstone site
Ben: please read "following up on issues assigned to Jeremy" and respond
next meeting: Tuesday 18 April 1300 UTC
[adjourned]