GRDDL Weekly -- 22 Nov 2006

<danja> whoah - skype worked first time!

<HarryH> Excellent.

<danja> I had this morning set aside for grddl coding - then got up to find a hole in the office floor

<danja> I'd have preferred to do the software kind of building...

<HarryH> That's okay - the building I'm has just had the lower level flooded, so an irritated secretary wants me not to be on the phone right now :)

<HarryH> Luckily I'm on the second floor!

<danja> ah

<danja> time of year for such things mayber

<HarryH> Does anyone want to scribe?

<HarryH> IanD sent regrets.

<HarryH> Zakim this is grddl

Convene GRDDL WG meeting of 2006-11-22T11:00-0500

<HarryH> We need a scribe!

<HarryH> Scribe: fgandon

<DanC> ACTION: Harry to send info about WWW2007 GRDDL tutorial [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action01]

<DanC> minutes 15 Nov

Approved minutes of the last meeting.

<HarryH> RESOLVED: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2006Nov/att-0066/grddl-wg-minutes-2006-11-15.html is a true record of Nov 15th meeeting

About the tutorial

Cross-document Introduction

HH: currently talking with ben about join tutorial with RDFa

<HarryH> Waiting for initiative from BenA

Brian: is ok with comments on cross-intro

fabien: not read yet

DanC: I would like wording to be suggested.

<HarryH> ACTION: Danja to suggest wording changes in light of recent comment cross-document introduction [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action02]

Test cases for GRDDL with XML documents

Danny: didn't have time yet to work on it but should be done by christmas

<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/testlist1#xmlWithGrddlAttribute

<DanC> test materials are http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/xmlWithGrddlAttribute.xml v 1.1 2006/11/01 07:44:09

Brian: any implementation?

<DanC> ... and http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/xmlWithGrddlAttribute-output.rdf

DanC: yes 3 of them. every implementation I know have run this test case.
... this is not a namespace test case.

Chimezie: in a lot of cases you spend time dereferencing namespaces you don't really need.

Harry: consensus on this test case approved

<HarryH> RESOLVED: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/testlist1#xmlWithGrddlAttribute is a correct and proper test case.

RESOLVE: test case approved

<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/testlist1#projectsSpreadsheet

DanC: test on RDF from spreadsheet tools

Chimezie: I haven't run this one.

DanC: I ran all o the 5 test cases
... we could wait for other testers to run this test

<scribe> ACTION: Chimezie to verify http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/testlist1#projectsSpreadsheet [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action03]

<HarryH> RESOLVED: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/testlist1#projectsSpreadsheet is a correct and proper test case .

<DanC> ACTION: DanC to update test manifest to show these 2 tests approved [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action04]

<HarryH> danja: "information resource" - kinda weird. Stephen King didn't write the page.

<danja> (not danja - bwm?)

<DanC> (the page is a representation of something stephen king wrote, IMO)

<scribe> ACTION: Brian to have a closer look at the Stephen King example in the spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action05]

GRDDL and (non-XML) HTML

<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2006OctDec/0028.html

Harry: Normans Gray's issue "error behaviour: The GRDDL spec doesn't say what a GRDDL processor should do if fed something which isn't one of these media types [text/xml, application/xml, and */*+xml], or which purports to be but isn't, or isn't well-formed."

DanC: the spec is written in terms of XPath so (...)

<DanC> grddl with pre-XHTML HTML input 26 Jul 2006

Danja: there are many pages out there using microformats so how should we handle them? use tidy?

<HarryH> fgandon: the question is non-wellformed XML but could still be used in a GRDDL transformation?

<HarryH> fgandon: tagsoup parser and tidy being used in our wiki project...but sometimes cleaning up HTML can destroy the metadata.

<danja> (I agree with the notion that HTML DOM -> GRDDL could work equivalent to XSLT, but also see Tidy as being problematic, no single algorithm)

<bwm> (me wonders what effect brackets round text has)

<danja> (stage whisper?)

HarryH: we only lincence the use of GRDDL for XHTML and other use are allowed at your own risk.

<DanC> (comments like this are on the record, but sorta 2nd-class, since they weren't vocalized.)

<scribe> ACTION: Fabien to add a sentence about non-XML HTML in the Use Case document. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action06]

ACTION 6 = Fabien to add a sentence about non XML sources in the Use Case document.

<bwm> ( i'm uncomfortable with "allowed at own risk" - GRDDL is defined on welformed XML and undefined otherwise. If someone transforms malformed xml into well formed xml and then runs a transform - that is up to them.)

<scribe> ACTION: Harry to respond to Norman Gray [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action07]

[#issue-output-formats] whether GRDDL transformations may produce RDF in a format other than RDF/XML

Chimezie: it is not clear if you can access the right mime type within a stylesheet.

Harry: can we use the Atom test case

<chimezie> <xsl:output

<chimezie> method = "xml" | "html" | "text" | qname-but-not-ncname

<chimezie> media-type = string />

DanC: it is the job of the transformation to specify the mime type of its output.

<danja> (Henry Story has an Atom to N3 XSLT 2.0)

<DanC> no, it's the job of the transformation to specify an RDF graph, by whatever means.

<chimezie> We would be limited to resolving mime-types that are registered (RDF/XML is the only one)?

<danja> (me chuckles at facetious test cases)

DanC: the mime type we use should be registered mime types
... we could register a personnal mime type for N3

Chimezie: or use plain text mime type

<HarryH> DanC: Or just leave mime type unspecified and output just plain N3 in text.

<DanC> (hmm... should the test materials have the N3 output, or the RDF/XML, or both? hmm.)

<DanC> ACTION: DanJa to provide XSLT transformation from Atom to N3, and one case where it works [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action08]

<DanC> ACTION: [WITHDRAWN] chimezie to develop test case to demonstrate both sides of the issue with #issue-output-formats [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action09]

[#issue-mt-ns]

<DanC> right; the 2 pending tests I have noted are: "no, xinclude doesn't come for free in xslt", "yes, you can use XProc to say to do xinclude and XSLT"

Chimezie: how to we deal with xinclude ?

<chimezie> what about when xinclude *does* come for free?

DanC: when you point to a transformation it determines a relation between an infoset and an RDF Graph.
... when there is an XInclude it is ignored.
... the XSLT does not specify if we do XInclude first or not.

<danja> (brb)

Murray: there is a policy question: if I am talking about the XML doc are we talking about the brakets or the infoset.

DanC: it is not about the angle brackets

<scribe> ACTION: Chimezie to make an example about XInclude [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action10]

<scribe> ACTION: Murray to send a pointer to the XProc example [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action11]

Murray: is the content you have after you resolve the XInclude is part of the truth of the doc?

DanC: yes

<DanC> (I didn't answer Murray's question)

Murray: replace the XInclude by a triple stating there was an XInclude that wasn't resolved.

<danja> (back)

Chimezie: every transform would have to be aware of that.

<HarryH> ACTION: [WITHDRAWN] ACTION: Murray, DanC, chimezie formulate source examples (with xincludes) for GRDDL transform. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action12]

ACTION- 9

<chimezie> the suggestion seems to be to add an additional test for an XSLT that will extract RDF which uses a term (such as rdfs:seeAlso) to link the source document with the XIncluded url

ACTION- 10

<chimezie> .. so the inclusion can be done within the RDF 'realm'

<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#grddl-xml

<bwm> back - I had to leave to take an urgent call

Chimezie: nothing in the XSLT specs mandates how the parsing should be done.

HarryH: how do we deal with layer processing in general?

<danja> (btw, possible useful ref for wording of "Normative Statement", XPath bit - http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt#section-Conditional-Processing )

HarryH: if we have two different answers from two different implementations we should show both and underline the problem.

DanC: I don't think the XPath doc should have processed the XInclude

Chimezie: this is an open issue.

<chimezie> <root xi:href="someDoc.xml"/> => <> rdfs:seeAlso <someDoc.xml>

<DanC> <letter><sec />...

Murray: Murray gives an example of a letter with three sections, the third one is an XInclude

<chimezie> though rdfs:seeAlso isn't expressive enough to capture what xinlclude is doing

Murray: in that document there is a GRDDL transform "grokletter" that knows how to handle this letter.

<DanC> MM: grokletter.xsl has a pattern to match <xinclude> ...

<chimezie> so we have 3 test cases: 1) stand alone XInclude 2) XInclude mandated by an XML pipeline description 3) a transformation that 'describes' the inclusion using RDF terms

<chimezie> these 3 will be enough to talk through this issue

DanC: so the input still includes the XInclude.

Murray: yes so if the XInclude is in the letter it will be processed by the transform
... if the XInclude has been processed before then your pattern won't fire.

<chimezie> i agree (with bwm)

<bwm> for the log I said thinks the transform is the wrong place to deal with it - the publisher should get to choose whether to use an xinclude or not

Murray: grokletter recognizes the presence of an XIclude and handles it.

<chimezie> we can't resolve this without a policy decision

<bwm> - the transform should not depend on the implementation

Brian: the result should be independent of the implementation.

DanC: I could see both results being right.

Chimezie: the policy decision must be resloved before we resolve this.

<HarryH> ACTION: Murray to write up the pros and cons http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#issue-mt-ns [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/11/22-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action13]

[#issue-base-param]

<HarryH> Scribe: Danja

<fgandon> HarryH: Ian and I achieved some things for the primer but still working on SPARQL

- DRAFT -

GRDDL Weekly

22 Nov 2006

Attendees

Contents

Convene GRDDL WG meeting of 2006-11-22T11:00-0500

Cross-document Introduction

Test cases for GRDDL with XML documents

GRDDL and (non-XML) HTML

[#issue-output-formats] whether GRDDL transformations may produce RDF in a format other than RDF/XML

[#issue-mt-ns]

[#issue-base-param]

Primer Document

GRDDL Spec: General issues

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output