RDFa Task Force

Michael: @about in HEAD is causing 2 of the test cases to not validate on new W3C validator; cases 12 and 13

Shane: @about is not permitted on HEAD
... there's a collection of attributes called COMMON, which includes @about
... but HEAD does not accept COMMON
... this may be more of an XHTML question

Action Item Review

all actions still PENDING

Test Cases

Michael: we should review the XHTML1.1 test cases today

<mhausenblas> wiki discuss

RDFaTC (last edited 2007-06-28 12:19:20 by MichaelHausenblas)

<Steven> I get 404 on the actual tests

Michael: I removed a couple of cases because they were out of date w.r.t. current syntax

Test0001

xhtml1-testcases/

Test0001 xhtml

Michael: the -> manifest file describes the structure

ACTION: Michael create a .htaccess hack to make the test case identifiers resolve to something useful [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]

Michael: let's go through to decide which are valid
... do view source on the .xhtml and .sparql

<mhausenblas> human-readable view of manifest

<mhausenblas> ManifestFiles

<Ralph> [trying to load the manifest.rdf into Tabulator ]

Shane: we're talking about XHTML1.1 with RDFa annotation
... focussing for the moment on META and LINK, Mark and I have extended the content model for META and LINK
... we originally did this in the context of XHTML2
... is it right to be pulling this back into XHTML1.1 ?

Mark: it was right for XHTML2
... it has since emerged that browsers move LINK and META back into HEAD
... so we have an issue to consider removing that functionality

Shane: the issue has been raised about META and LINK in BODY
... but no issue yet on content in META and LINK
... so it occurs to me now that these test cases are probably wrong [for XHTML1.1]

Mark: this comes back to the question of changing the host language
... in terms of deployed browsers, it's difficult to permit content in META and LINK
... <META> and </META> are two different elements in [current] parsers
... so nothing after <META> is not currently interpreted as a child of META

Michael: I believe TCs 2 and 3 should not be considered right now for XHTML+RDFa
... so the result of the SPARQL query on TC 1 should be TRUE

Shane: all tests should be structured so TRUE result means 'pass'

Mark: what did we decide about language?

Michael: see Section 3 of Test Suite overview

Mark: best practice in XHTML is to include xml:lang

Shane: on the HTML element?

Mark: yes, but need to check that this is current best practice

Steven: yes, normally the HTML element should have @xml:lang but I'm not sure what is best for our test cases; do we want a lang triple?

Ralph: so we do not expect that there is more than one triple that MUST be generated in TC1?

Michael: yes

RESOLUTION: TC1 accepted

Michael: 2 through 4 should be removed until syntax questions are settled

RESOLUTION: TC2, TC3, and TC4 to be put 'on hold'

Michael: I suggest removing TC5 as well

RESOLUTION: TC5 to be removed

<Ralph> [yay! manifest.rdf does load in Tabulator. The Purpose property seems to be the description I'm looking for]

<ShaneM> There are assertions in here: the manifest

Mark: we shouldn't drop an @xml:base test -- so we should revise TC4 rather than remove it

<mhausenblas> http://validator-test.w3.org report

Shane: it's ok to put @xml:base on SPAN but the test then needs to put something in the content to test

Michael: but the markup doesn't currently validate

ACTION: Shane investigate the @xml:base validation issue [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action02]

Shane: @xml:base should work everywhere; the DTDs may be broken

Michael: I don't want to propose any test cases that the W3C validator rejects

Shane: but this case seems to be a bug in the validator, which I'll look into

Michael: call test case 4 "on hold"

Mark: similarly, TC2 and TC3 have no particular reason to be in BODY; the important parts of those tests could just as well be done in HEAD

<Steven> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_structuremodule

ACTION: Shane to correct DTD to permit RDFa attributes on the head element. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action03]

Michael: so TC2 and TC3 should be changed to "on hold" and I will move the LINK and META to the HEAD
... TC6 is about @rel and @rev

Steven: was concerned for a moment about foaf:img but looks fine

RESOLUTION: TC6 accepted

Mark: can we get rid of excess namespaces at the top?

Ralph: yeah, I think stripping the test cases down to the essentials is better

Steven: I'm happy with TC7

Shane: I agree that test cases should be minimal; excess stuff could be a perturbation

RESOLUTION: TC7 ok

TC8 - empty string @about

Ralph: the triple would be the same if @about were missing

Steven: that's worth testing also

Ralph: I'd suggest a separate test case that omits @about

RESOLUTION: TC8 ok

ACTION: Michael add a test case that test for omitted @about [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action04]

TC9 - @rev

Mark: might want to change the TC order; e.g. test @rev, @rel independently then test the combination

Shane: good test cases are independent, which includes order

Mark: given that we're using example.org I think it's worthwile adding fragment identifiers
... so that these aren't information resources

RESOLUTION: TC9 ok, with #frag added

TC10 - @rel, @rev, @href

RESOLUTION: TC10 ok, with #frag added

TC11 - XMLLiteral

Shane: the SPARQL doesn't escape '<' and '>' -- does it need to?

Michael: that's the way RDF defines XMLLiteral

Ralph: the SPARQL expression is not itself encoded in XML so the special characters do not need to be escaped there

RESOLUTION: TC11 ok

TC12 - @xml:lang

RESOLUTION: TC12 ok

TC13 - @xml:lang inheritance

Michael: same issue with @about

RESOLUTION: TC13 ok

TC14 - @datatype, xsd:integer

RESOLUTION: TC14 ok

TC15 - Blank node via meta and link

RESOLUTION: TC15 ok

Steven: does 15 really produce a blank node?

Michael: the title is misleading

ACTION: Michael correct TC15 title [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action05]

TC16 - Blank node, explicit

Michael: propose to put TC16 on hold

Mark: the test does what it claims, the question is about CURIEs

Michael: same applies to TC17

RESOLUTION: TC16, TC17 on hold pending CURIE decision

TC18 - @rel for predicate

Shane: what does this do differently?

Mark: this tests @rel alone

RESOLUTION: TC18 ok

[adjourned]

<mhausenblas> Thank you all for the hard work!!!

<Ralph> [I think you did most of the truly hard work, Michael!]

<Ralph> [or, at least, the tedious work]

<mhausenblas> well elias and wing did - i just had the pleasure to present it ...

<mhausenblas> more or less ;)

ACTION: [DONE] Ben send email to SWD WG list summarizing RDFa document status [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/31-rdfa-minutes.html#action02]

-> An Update on RDFa Schedule and Docs

ACTION: [DONE] Ben start a list of RDF/XML features that are not supported by RDFa [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-swd-minutes.html#action01]

-> RDFCoverage

ACTION: [DONE] Wing add a property to the test case schema for tracking origin and approval of an individual test [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/05-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]

<Ralph> actually, it's fun to look at the manifest in tabulator

<Ralph> I'll think about what may make it even more fun :)

<mhausenblas> I'll have a look (but zitgist is alos nice :)