IRC log of htmltf on 2006-04-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:46:19 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #htmltf

12:46:19 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/04/24-htmltf-irc

12:46:23 [RalphS]

Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML TF

12:46:28 [RalphS]

Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML TF

12:46:33 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #htmltf

12:46:37 [RalphS]

zakim, this will be rdf

12:46:37 [Zakim]

ok, RalphS; I see SW_BPD(rdfxhtml)9:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes

12:46:49 [RalphS]

rrsagent, please make record public

12:47:03 [RalphS]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Apr/0044.html

12:47:19 [RalphS]

RalphS has changed the topic to: HTML TF 24 April agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Apr/0044.html

12:47:49 [RalphS]

Previous: 2006-04-18 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Apr/0035.html

12:56:18 [Steven]

Steven has joined #htmltf

12:57:24 [Zakim]

SW_BPD(rdfxhtml)9:00AM has now started

12:57:31 [Zakim]

+Ralph

13:01:11 [Steven]

zakim, dial steven-617

13:01:11 [Zakim]

ok, Steven; the call is being made

13:01:12 [Zakim]

+Steven

13:04:29 [Zakim]

+Ben_Adida

13:04:36 [benadida]

benadida has joined #htmltf

13:04:40 [RalphS]

Chair: Ben

13:06:13 [RalphS]

Steven: most HTML authors think the words "tag" and "element" mean the same thing

13:07:36 [MarkB_]

MarkB_ has joined #htmltf

13:08:00 [RalphS]

Topic: Action Review

13:08:33 [Zakim]

+??P5

13:08:40 [RalphS]

[DONE] ACTION: Ben draft mail to Guus and David regarding continuation of HTML TF work [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-htmltf-minutes.html#action01]

13:08:43 [MarkB_]

zakim, i am ?

13:08:43 [Zakim]

+MarkB_; got it

13:08:50 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben start separate mail threads on remaining discussion topics [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action04]

13:08:53 [RalphS]

-- continues

13:09:00 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben to draft full response to Bjoern's 2004 email [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/24-swbp-minutes.html#action03]

13:09:03 [RalphS]

-- continues

13:09:13 [RalphS]

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]

13:09:16 [RalphS]

-- continues

13:10:32 [RalphS]

Mark: I'm going through and collecting all the little decisions to update the separate RDF/A spec doc

13:10:38 [RalphS]

Topic: RDFa Primer Draft

13:11:17 [RalphS]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2006-04-24-rdfa-primer 24 April Primer editors' draft

13:11:46 [RalphS]

Ben: need further checking to be sure we've addressed all comments

13:12:19 [RalphS]

... the new section 2 side-steps the issue of HTML frag ids (also) naming physical objects

13:12:54 [RalphS]

Steven: I agree that #frag ids in HTML docs should be able to refer to non-information-resources

13:14:30 [RalphS]

Ben: some people hold the position that #frag in an HTML document cannot name physical objects

13:14:53 [RalphS]

... Pat Hayes says such URIs can be either documents or physical objects; it doesn't matter

13:16:21 [RalphS]

Mark: it seems odd to me to treat the HTML resource space in this special way

13:17:36 [RalphS]

Ben: DanC has said that if an HTML document does not contain id="car" then it's ok to refer to a physical car with "#car"

13:17:53 [RalphS]

Mark: then what happens later if the id is added to the document?

13:19:27 [RalphS]

Ralph: my understanding of the TAG's position is that the server distinguishes between information resource and non-information resource by returning 200 or 303

13:19:53 [RalphS]

... so doc#car refers to an information resource if the server returns 200

13:20:08 [RalphS]

... and if doc#car is meant to refer to a physical object, the server should return 303

13:20:31 [RalphS]

... I'm trying to understand if this is deployable

13:22:08 [RalphS]

Ben: I hope to ask the SWBPD WG for reviewers to read this new draft starting Wednesday

13:23:26 [RalphS]

... with a target to get WG to approve publishing at its 8 May telecon

13:23:58 [RalphS]

Ben: in the new section 2 I use role attribute to signal rdf:type

13:24:06 [RalphS]

Steven: I saw that and liked it

13:24:37 [RalphS]

PROPOSE to ask the SWBPD WG to review this editor's draft and submit for publication

13:24:50 [RalphS]

(no objection)

13:25:02 [RalphS]

RESOLVED to ask the SWBPD WG to review this editor's draft and submit for publication

13:25:08 [RalphS]

Steven: what about section 5?

13:25:31 [RalphS]

Ben: I was planning to leave it as is for this version

13:25:41 [RalphS]

... I would like to re-engage the Dublin Core community

13:25:51 [RalphS]

... and add a Dublin Core section in a future version

13:26:11 [RalphS]

Steven: I think it would be nice to have summaries of some of the main vocabularies that people are likely to use

13:26:58 [RalphS]

Mark: Google Calendar has a nice data structuring convention

13:27:08 [RalphS]

... can be read by both RSS and ATOM

13:27:37 [RalphS]

... so iCal folk can use this immediately

13:30:03 [MarkB_]

http://code.google.com/apis/gdata/protocol.html

13:30:20 [MarkB_]

http://code.google.com/apis/gdata/common-elements.html

13:30:50 [MarkB_]

e.g., http://code.google.com/apis/gdata/common-elements.html#gdEmail

13:31:00 [RalphS]

Ben: it would be great to have examples based on Google's gdata vocabulary

13:31:38 [RalphS]

Mark: since we agreed last week that rel can have multiple values, it's easy to markup in multiple vocabularies

13:32:22 [RalphS]

Topic: meta and link referring only to parent

13:32:42 [RalphS]

Steven: about= on head rang bells

13:33:05 [RalphS]

Mark: about= on head was a recent idea; we've not yet settled ths

13:33:09 [RalphS]

s/ths/this/

13:33:26 [RalphS]

Mark: about="" on head isn't resolved

13:33:26 [benadida]

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-current-issues#head-about

13:34:37 [RalphS]

Ben: I had a proposal to specify a default about="" on the HTML root element

13:35:04 [RalphS]

... this would make meta and link in the head work as before

13:35:30 [RalphS]

... might be good to add default about="" to body as well, though this isn't needed for backward compatibility

13:35:50 [RalphS]

Mark: I think it will make the processing rules easier if we specify that body has a default about=""

13:36:52 [RalphS]

... rather than specifying that the default subject is the current document, we specify that the processor looks up the tree to find the first about attribute

13:37:24 [RalphS]

... so some other language, e.g. SVG, could change the default subject by adding their own 'about' if they wish

13:37:48 [RalphS]

Steven: this does solve the problem but I'd hoped we would not have to make special cases

13:38:04 [RalphS]

... so if we can find a better solution, I might prefer it

13:38:29 [RalphS]

Ben: so introducing the special case on body may be too much

13:39:00 [RalphS]

Steven: the proposal to add default about="" to body is new and I don't see the justification

13:39:57 [RalphS]

Ben: meta and link in the head have previously referred to the whole document so adding about="" to the head is an obvious solution

13:40:10 [RalphS]

Mark: let's separate the head and body issues

13:40:29 [RalphS]

... I'm proposing to make things consistent

13:41:09 [RalphS]

... how do you generally declare the rule that the default subject is the current document

13:41:24 [RalphS]

... we could eliminate a rule elsewhere by using the same technique on body as on head

13:42:03 [RalphS]

Ben: we could add the about="" default to _both_ the root HTML element and the HEAD element

13:42:20 [RalphS]

... this makes frames also refer to the current page

13:42:28 [RalphS]

... and avoids special-case for body

13:43:12 [RalphS]

Mark: this would work except for a problem with other rules such as xml:base

13:43:35 [RalphS]

... if head contains xml:base then the subject should be the base URI

13:44:12 [RalphS]

s/xml:/html:/

13:44:17 [RalphS]

s/xml:/html:/

13:44:50 [MarkB_]

<html>

13:44:50 [MarkB_]

<head>

13:44:50 [MarkB_]

<meta ... />

13:44:50 [MarkB_]

<base ... />

13:44:50 [MarkB_]

</head>

13:44:51 [MarkB_]

.

13:44:53 [RalphS]

Ben: but html:base has no children

13:44:53 [MarkB_]

.

13:44:55 [MarkB_]

.

13:44:57 [MarkB_]

</html>

13:45:23 [RalphS]

Ben: it's OK if HTML defines other ways to establish the current URI

13:46:17 [RalphS]

Mark: an RDF/A processor has to find html:base to know the document's URI

13:47:41 [RalphS]

Ben: I'm confused why the triples refer to the html:base value

13:48:03 [RalphS]

... there is still a document at the (non-base) URI

13:48:14 [RalphS]

... so we have to think carefully about the semantics of html:base

13:48:34 [RalphS]

... why should the subject of the triples change from the URI at which the document was fetched?

13:49:37 [RalphS]

Mark: html:base changes the base for relative URIs cited within the document

13:50:11 [RalphS]

... about="" is by definition relative to the "current URI" of the document

13:50:18 [RalphS]

... and html:base can change the current URI

13:51:37 [RalphS]

Mark: we need a rule to say what happens in the absence of an about attribute

13:52:32 [RalphS]

Ben: so to get compatibility for meta and link is to add an explicit about="" to head

13:53:08 [RalphS]

Mark: the reason for this is that meta and link refer explicitly to their parent

13:55:41 [RalphS]

Steven: if we add implicit about="" to the head for backward compatibility then whatever we do to the HTML root element we should say does not change the HEAD element

13:56:07 [RalphS]

Mark: so if you want to make statements about whatever you named in the root, you put those statements in the body

13:57:23 [RalphS]

Mark: think of the example posted to the list a few weeks ago from someone who wanted to use the RDF/A syntax in an OWL document to avoid having to repeat attributes

13:58:25 [RalphS]

Ben: so we're sticking with the rule that the processor searches up the tree to find about=

13:58:48 [RalphS]

... the only change we make is to add explicit about="" on head, which can be overridden by user

13:59:07 [RalphS]

Mark: I will put this in my XHTML1 schema

13:59:32 [RalphS]

RESOLVED: we're sticking with the rule that the processor searches up the tree to find about= and add explicit about="" to head

13:59:50 [RalphS]

Ben: who should have the action to think about the HTML namespace URI issue?

14:00:06 [RalphS]

Steven: propose SWBPD takes this issue

14:00:21 [RalphS]

... but doesn't this go away with CURIEs?

14:00:54 [RalphS]

Ben: we want CURIEs to be backwards-compatible with QNames

14:01:02 [RalphS]

[adjourned]

14:01:04 [Zakim]

-Ralph

14:01:06 [Zakim]

-MarkB_

14:01:07 [Zakim]

-Steven

14:01:08 [Zakim]

-Ben_Adida

14:01:09 [Zakim]

SW_BPD(rdfxhtml)9:00AM has ended

14:01:11 [Zakim]

Attendees were Ralph, Steven, Ben_Adida, MarkB_

14:01:19 [RalphS]

rrsagent, please draft minutes

14:01:19 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/04/24-htmltf-minutes.html RalphS

14:01:27 [RalphS]

zakim, bye

14:01:27 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #htmltf

14:16:26 [benadida]

benadida has left #htmltf

15:04:36 [Steven]

Steven has left #htmltf