IRC log of rdfa on 2007-07-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:53:41 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
14:53:41 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/07/26-rdfa-irc
14:53:46 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #rdfa
14:53:50 [RalphS]
zakim, this will be rdfa
14:53:50 [Zakim]
ok, RalphS; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
15:03:29 [markbirbeck]
it will be a low turnout today!!
15:03:36 [markbirbeck]
zakim, code?
15:03:36 [Zakim]
the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
15:04:15 [benadida]
benadida has joined #rdfa
15:04:22 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
15:04:29 [Zakim]
+ +1.617.395.aaaa
15:04:37 [benadida]
zakim, I am aaaa
15:04:37 [Zakim]
+benadida; got it
15:04:39 [Zakim]
+Ralph
15:04:43 [RalphS]
Meeting: RDFa
15:05:47 [RalphS]
-> http://www.w3.org/2007/07/19-rdfa-minutes previous 2007-07-19
15:05:56 [RalphS]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0202.html
15:08:48 [Zakim]
+??P0
15:08:53 [markbirbeck]
zakim, i am ?
15:08:53 [Zakim]
+markbirbeck; got it
15:18:06 [Zakim]
-markbirbeck
15:18:28 [markbirbeck]
dropped for some reason
15:18:40 [markbirbeck]
dialling back
15:19:55 [Zakim]
+??P0
15:20:00 [markbirbeck]
zakim, i am ?
15:20:00 [Zakim]
+markbirbeck; got it
15:30:03 [benadida]
scribe: Ben
15:30:10 [benadida]
scribenick: benadida
15:30:39 [benadida]
none of these are resolutions, but we have agreement that we move forward with implementations and test cases in order to resolve the remaining issues.
15:30:53 [benadida]
for now, we'll go with @instanceof
15:31:55 [benadida]
<span resource="#foo">
15:31:57 [benadida]
...
15:31:59 [benadida]
</span>
15:34:02 [benadida]
we will try out striping where @resource, @href, and the bnode on a @rel or @rev becomes the subject of contained elements
15:34:34 [markbirbeck]
for the purposes of explaining this to 'novices', we used to call this 'chaining'.
15:34:34 [benadida]
<div id="foo" instanceof="foaf:Person">
15:34:48 [markbirbeck]
(Because it felt less RDF-like.)
15:34:59 [benadida]
<#foo> rdf:type foaf:Person .
15:35:59 [benadida]
<div id="foo" rel="p" resource="o">
15:36:27 [markbirbeck]
<a rel="license" href="http://cc....">license</a>
15:37:08 [RalphS]
Mark: we're leveraging this <a href=...> example
15:37:18 [markbirbeck]
<a id="x" rel="license" href="http://cc....">license</a>
15:37:26 [markbirbeck]
Don't want that to change the subject of the triple.
15:37:40 [RalphS]
Ben: right, adding @id to A didn't change the interpretation
15:38:20 [RalphS]
... the only time @id would matter is when neither @href or @resource appear in the element
15:38:22 [benadida]
<div rel="foo:bar">
15:38:59 [benadida]
<div id="foo">
15:39:01 [RalphS]
... without @href or @resource, @id names the bnode subject [of triples from child elements]
15:39:04 [benadida]
<link rel="foo:bar" href="">
15:39:05 [benadida]
</div>
15:39:32 [RalphS]
Mark: current syntax draft has mostly removed references to @id and the remaining reference is mostly wrong
15:40:36 [RalphS]
Ben: @id was used before, as in the <div id='foo'> case, to give the name '#foo' to the subject
15:40:48 [RalphS]
... I may be misremembering, though
15:41:00 [RalphS]
Mark: but there was a reason we removed it
15:42:05 [RalphS]
Ralph: we had a long discussion of the potential confusion between the name of an HTML markup fragment and the name of some real-world resource
15:42:40 [RalphS]
Ben: @rel and @rev cause chaining. @instanceof may also cause chaining.
15:44:49 [RalphS]
Mark @instanceof is special because it's choosing a different subject from <div id=>
15:46:27 [kwijibo]
hi - there's a typo on http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/syntax/#o266637520
15:47:22 [kwijibo]
that section keeps referring to subject resolution section 4.3 - which is the object resolution section
15:48:38 [RalphS]
hi, kwijibo -- we're in a telecon at the moment, so a quick reply to you here might not appear
15:48:57 [kwijibo]
np - just thought I'd mention it
15:51:08 [markbirbeck]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/rdf-a.html
15:53:08 [RalphS]
Mark: I think it is incorrect to use @id to set the subject of child statement is wrong in all contexts
15:56:05 [RalphS]
Ben: my understanding when working on http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/syntax/ was that we were moving away from @xml:id and moving to @id
15:56:43 [benadida]
<div id="foo" instanceof="foo:Bar">
15:57:06 [benadida]
<#foo> rdf:type foo:Bar .
15:57:08 [RalphS]
Ben: is #foo the subject of a triple?
15:59:15 [benadida]
<div about="#bar" rel="s" id="foo" instanceof="t">
15:59:30 [benadida]
<#bar> s ? .
15:59:42 [benadida]
? rdf:type t .
15:59:54 [benadida]
? = _:div0
15:59:57 [benadida]
? = "#foo"
16:00:04 [RalphS]
Ben: I think we agree that the object has rdf:type t.
16:00:04 [benadida]
which one is it?
16:02:02 [markbirbeck]
I agree that Ben has captured this correctly, and I believe that the subject of 'chained' statements should be a bnode.
16:02:29 [markbirbeck]
<#bar> s [ rdf:type t ] .
16:02:43 [benadida]
I think it should be:
16:02:48 [benadida]
<#bar> s <#foo> .
16:02:52 [benadida]
<#foo> rdf:type t .
16:03:15 [RalphS]
Ralph: I never expected @id to behave the way Ben just wrote
16:04:42 [markbirbeck]
(In the last draft that myself and Steven did, we had @nodeID to achive this. :)
16:04:53 [markbirbeck]
s/achive/achieve/
16:05:03 [markbirbeck]
No-one liked it... ;)
16:05:19 [benadida]
<div about="s" rel="p" resource="o">
16:05:25 [benadida]
<span property="foo:bar">Foo!</span>
16:05:26 [benadida]
</div>
16:05:37 [benadida]
s p o .
16:05:56 [benadida]
o foo:bar "Foo!" .
16:07:19 [markbirbeck]
It's not that I saw utility in a recent email...I'm seeing that we might be able to *resurrect* this old technique.
16:08:11 [markbirbeck]
I think the reason is that if we put link and meta inside the div, we wanted it to refer to @about.
16:08:18 [markbirbeck]
It used to be a shorthand for:
16:08:19 [RalphS]
Ben: my reasoning was that without without the @resource, we agreed that the object of @rel='p' is a bnode and that bnode is the subject of the child statements
16:08:29 [RalphS]
... so with @resource, we just give the bnode a name
16:09:02 [markbirbeck]
<div about="s" foo:bar="Foo!" ....
16:09:40 [markbirbeck]
<meta property="foo:bar">Foo!</meta>
16:11:19 [RalphS]
[I've searched http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/syntax/ for examples of @id and @rel on the same element and the only one I find also has @about which clearly seems to me to support Mark's interpretation]
16:12:51 [RalphS]
Mark: some of the [shorthand] features included in old proposals have been dropped, I was wondering if we might eventually want to bring some of them back
16:13:25 [RalphS]
Ben: I'm seeing more deployed examples that rely on bnode features and those should keep the interpretation if @href is added
16:13:46 [markbirbeck]
This:
16:13:47 [markbirbeck]
<div about="#bar" rel="s" id="foo" instanceof="t">
16:13:51 [markbirbeck]
could be written as:
16:14:04 [markbirbeck]
<div about="#bar" rel="s" resource="foo" instanceof="t">
16:15:19 [RalphS]
s/could be written as/compared to/
16:15:20 [markbirbeck]
In other words, the use-case that we want from having @id 'name' the bnode could be achieved by using @resource.
16:15:25 [kwijibo]
kwijibo has left #rdfa
16:15:35 [benadida]
<div id="foo" instanceof="t">
16:16:45 [benadida]
_:div0 rdf:type t
16:19:12 [RalphS]
Ben: it seems for consistency that in this @id @instanceof case that the subject of rdf:type is a bnode
16:19:22 [RalphS]
... do we agree that @instanceof causes chaining?
16:19:29 [RalphS]
Mark: it would seem that it needs to do so
16:19:35 [benadida]
<div id="foo" instanceof="t" rel="rdf:item">
16:19:44 [RalphS]
... what is the minimum markup needed to generate a triple?
16:20:35 [RalphS]
Mark: thinking about the way people understand microformats, there are special markup triggers; e.g. class="vEvent"
16:21:02 [RalphS]
... so it should not be a problem for people to also learn that @instanceof is a trigger for interpretations of the child properties
16:21:38 [RalphS]
Ben: we haven't made any new resolutions in this telecon, as we're not critical mass
16:22:20 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben writeup a summary of this discussion
16:22:53 [RalphS]
Ben: is this a good time for Mark and Shane to start work on the new syntax document?
16:22:54 [Zakim]
-markbirbeck
16:22:58 [RalphS]
Mark: yeah, I think so
16:37:19 [Zakim]
-Ralph
16:37:21 [Zakim]
-benadida
16:37:23 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
16:37:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.617.395.aaaa, benadida, Ralph, markbirbeck
16:37:27 [RalphS]
zakim, bye
16:37:27 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rdfa
16:37:33 [RalphS]
Regrets: Steven
16:37:37 [RalphS]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:37:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/26-rdfa-minutes.html RalphS
16:37:43 [benadida]
benadida has left #rdfa
16:38:07 [RalphS]
rrsagent, please make record public
16:39:18 [RalphS]
Chair: Ben
16:39:28 [RalphS]
Scribe: Ralph
16:39:56 [RalphS]
Scribe: Ralph, Ben
16:40:37 [RalphS]
^leveraging^Scribenick: ralphs
16:40:41 [RalphS]
Scribe: Ralph
16:40:49 [RalphS]
Scribe: Ralph, Ben
16:40:52 [RalphS]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:40:52 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/26-rdfa-minutes.html RalphS
16:42:09 [RalphS]
i/leveraging/Scribenick: ralphs
16:42:11 [RalphS]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:42:11 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/26-rdfa-minutes.html RalphS
16:43:48 [RalphS]
i/leveraging this/Scribenick: ralphs
16:43:50 [RalphS]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:43:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/26-rdfa-minutes.html RalphS
16:44:33 [RalphS]
rrsagent, bye
16:44:33 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/26-rdfa-actions.rdf :
16:44:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben writeup a summary of this discussion [1]
16:44:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/26-rdfa-irc#T16-22-20