See also: IRC log
<rreck> shucks
<HarryH> cribe: john-l
<scribe> scribe: john-l
<HarryH> DanC - we have begun
<HarryH> jjc is phone only
<HarryH> PROPOSED: to approve GRDDL WG -- 1st Aug 2007 as a true record
<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2007/07/18-grddl-wg-minutes.html
<HarryH> RESOLVED: approved GRDDL WG -- 1st Aug 2007 as a true record http://www.w3.org/2007/07/18-grddl-wg-minutes.html
HarryH: Meeting next week?
<HarryH> PROPOSED: to meet again Wed, 15th Aug 11:00-0400. scribe volunteer?
chimezie: Regrets for next week.
FabienG: Regrets as well.
jjc: Questionable attendance late August.
HarryH: Skip next week, go for the 22nd instead.
<HarryH> PROPOSED: to meet again Wed, 22nd Aug 11:00-0400. scribe volunteer?
Murray: Regrets for all future meetings.
<HarryH> RESOLVED: to meet again Wed, 22nd Aug 11:00-0400
<rreck> sure
<HarryH> RReck is scribe for 22nd.
jjc: Need to test that the
renamed library tests still pass.
... Expect that that should work, as they haven't
changed.
... Chunk of text was in the base document and now is in
limbo.
<DanC> sounds like 1 action is done, one continues
DanC: Status text was a bit more negative than might be desired.
jjc: I'll put negative bit at the end of the status comment.
HarryH: Some comments on this, but no response from the XQuery WG yet.
Murray: The spec says that the author is making the claim of faithful rendition, not GRDDL itself.
<dbooth> +1
<HarryH> "The GRDDL specification states that any transformation identified by an
<HarryH> author of a GRDDL source document will provide a Faithful Rendition
<HarryH> <http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#sec_rend> of the information expressed in
<HarryH> the source document. "
Murray: No good replacement exists.
<DanC> sounds good... "GRDDL permits authors to express that transformations will produce a faithful rendition..."
jjc: GRDDL allows authors to claim a faithful rendition.
chimezie: The lead in sentence can be modified to be more careful about mapping to the spec.
<dbooth> "The GRDDL specification states that by identifying a GRDDL transformation, the document author states that the GRDDL source document will provide a Faithful Rendition of the information expressed in the source document."
Murray: The GRDDL specification allows authors to make promises.
<DanC> too many "source documents"
Murray: one of those source documents needs to be "GRDDL result".
<rreck> probably the first one
Murray: and it may be "some portion" of the information.
jjc: Concept of faithful
rendition is a key one.
... but it's not obvious, so the more casual reader needs those
concepts reinforced.
<dbooth> The GRDDL specification states that by specifying a GRDDL transformation, the document author states that the GRDDL results will provide a Faithful Rendition of the source document."
dbooth: This doesn't talk about "a portion of" since that is how Faithful Rendition is defined.
<DanC> "results will provide a faithful rendition" seems wrong. rather: "results _are_ a faithful rendition"
<DanC> "part of" is harder to leave out than to keep in
Murray: leaving out a discussion of "a part of" is wrong.
dbooth: We could quote the faithful rendition paragraph at the problematic location.
Murray: I don't think any phrasing would be adequate or appropriate.
<chimezie> I would prefer to be certain what was incorrect about the original text and allow paraphrasing to elaborate what is a key concept but not properly communicated (or at least not well understood)
jjc: One spec-writing view asserts that one should never paraphrase, at the risk of contradiction, but I think paraphrasing without error is valuable.
<HarryH> "By specifying a GRDDL transformation, the author of a document states that the transformation will provide a faithful rendition in RDF of information (or some portion of the information) expressed through the XML dialect used in the source document.
<HarryH> Likewise, by specifying a GRDDL namespace transformation or profile transformation, the creator of that namespace or profile states that the transformation will provide a faithful RDF rendition of a class of source documents which relate to that namespace or profile. A namespace document or a profile document also provide a means for their authors to explain in prose the purpose of the transformation or any policy statements.
<HarryH> "
HarryH: I think it's ok to change the lead-in sentence, but the remainder of the paragraph is carefully crafted to appease the XQuery WG.
<HarryH> ACTION: Chime to take an action to the sentence that Murray objects to in the GRDDL Test Case document. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/08-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action01]
chimezie: I'd like to take an action to make a correction; I think I know what's wrong and how it can be fixed.
Murray: Someone has rightly pointed out that XML Schemas can be found at locations other than namespace schema locations.
jjc: The end-user can use independent mechanisms to associate schemas with documents.
DanC: A namespace document is, by definition, a representation of a namespace.
Murray: We don't provide for DTDs
and schemas that don't exist at the namespace location.
... It seems like a big piece is missing from the spec.
... What if users retrieve DTDs and schemas via other
references?
jjc: Supporting those references
was explicitly excluded from the scope of GRDDL.
... This paragraph says that users might want to add on to
GRDDL by getting results from other sources.
Murray: The claim of being a
faithful rendition doesn't apply.
... It's not that it is or is not a faithful rendition, but
that the user is no longer claiming that it is a faithful
rendition.
<DanC> "the author doesn't claim it's a fathful rendition" is quite similar to "it may or may not be a faithful rendition". I can see the difference, but it's not critical to me.
<dbooth> There are two things: 1. the claim that something is a faithful rendition; and 2. whether the resulting RDF actually *is* a faithful rendition.
Murray: The important part of the faithful rendition section is that a claim is being made.
<chimezie> dbooth: I assumed 2. is difficult to quantify if the criteria isn't simply whether or not the author made that claim
dbooth: The author could have made the claim via some other mechanism.
HarryH: The point is that if you do stuff out of the spec, you don't get the aknowledgement of the spec. Can't we just say that?
<HarryH> the results of applying such a
<HarryH> transformation may not be claimed by the author as a faithful rendition.
<HarryH> transformation may not be claimed by the author as a faithful rendition or may not be a faithful rendition.
chimezie: I think I have enough to make the appropriate change.
<rreck> LOL
HarryH: Just tell the XQuery WG that their changes have been incorporated, since our edits are a superset of their request.
<HarryH> ACTION: Chime to change "so it may [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/08-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action02]
<HarryH> be unable to produce the faithful rendition" in response to Murray's comments.
dbooth: We believe that our changes meet their needs.
<HarryH> Danja?
<danja> in irc only
<HarryH> Any progress on Atom?
<HarryH> Danja??
<danja> not as yet, but I've got some day-job work planned to exercise the xslts
<danja> please mark action as continuing for me
<HarryH> The issue is not to exercise the xslts.
<HarryH> Here's the ACTION:
<DanC> huh, arry? not to exercise? "ACTION: danja and john-l to test and see if any XSLT is mature enough to add to ATOM ..." looks like it to me
<HarryH> ACTION [CONTINUES]: danja and john-l to test and see if any XSLT is mature enough to add to ATOM namespace doc and has proper licensing (W3C Software license), as well as canvass all candidate XSLT authors for their opinion on ATOM/RSS 1.0 namespace.
<HarryH> We also have the social aspect to deal with.
<HarryH> The social aspect is likely to take longer :)
<HarryH> Any luck with the social aspect?
<HarryH> Good luck!
<danja> will press on with it...
<HarryH> Danny, any luck with:
<HarryH> ACTION: Danja to e-mail DC back mentioning that DanC has already made transformation to a stable version of their spec, and mention that it would be great to mention RDF and Dublin Core in press release for GRDDL. [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/08-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action03]
<DanC> -- continues
<danja> sorry
<HarryH> No big deal, just give it a shot soon.
<HarryH> Just want to get progress on this before GRDDL WG closes.
<danja> 'k
<danja> right
DanC: I sent mail about the service, and now I think we're in no-man's-land.
HarryH: Can we send Dom flowers
or something?
... We just want to ask as nicely as we can...
DanC: You and I asked, but there's no guarantee.
<HarryH> ACTION [CONTINUES]: Chime to comment to XHTML2 comment list about preserving head/@profile re GRDDL and backwards-compatibility.
rreck: I could write a press release about motion in various communities towards GRDDL support.
<HarryH> Meeting Adjourned.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128 of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/specifying/identifying/ Succeeded: s/aargh, totally forgot that one// Succeeded: s/press release for GRDDL./press release for GRDDL. [Continued]/ Found Scribe: john-l Inferring ScribeNick: john-l Default Present: +0122341aaaa, john-l, rreck, Chimezie_Ogbuji, jjc, FabienG, +1.919.668.aabb, HarryH, Murray_Maloney, DanC, DBooth Present: rreck Chimezie_Ogbuji jjc FabienG HarryH Murray_Maloney DanC DBooth john-l Got date from IRC log name: 8 Aug 2007 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/08/08-grddl-wg-minutes.html People with action items: chime danja[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]