14:51:17 RRSAgent has joined #rdfa 14:51:17 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc 14:51:21 Meeting: RDFa Task Force 14:51:27 zakim, this will be rdfa 14:51:27 ok, RalphS; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes 14:52:02 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0141.html 14:52:26 -> http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html previous 2007-09-06 14:52:33 rrsagent, please make record public 15:01:06 SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started 15:01:13 +??P11 15:02:57 zakim, code? 15:02:57 the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck 15:03:19 +markbirbeck 15:03:22 +Ralph 15:03:50 zakim, ??p11 is Manu 15:03:50 +Manu; got it 15:04:57 ShaneM has joined #rdfa 15:05:25 +??P0 15:05:34 zakim, P0 is ShaneM 15:05:34 sorry, ShaneM, I do not recognize a party named 'P0' 15:05:41 zakim, ??P0 is ShaneM 15:05:41 +ShaneM; got it 15:06:42 +benadida 15:06:51 benadida has joined #rdfa 15:08:36 zakim, pick a victim 15:08:36 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Ralph 15:09:01 Chair: Ben 15:09:04 Scribe: Ralph 15:10:41 Ben: next TF telecon is 20 Sep 15:11:25 ... the SWD WG telecon on Tuesday 25 Sep is critical to getting review before the SWD f2f 15:11:49 ... so all our issues should [result in] minor changes to the document right now 15:12:52 Mark: how frozen is the f2f agenda? 15:12:59 Ralph: I don't think it's frozen yet 15:13:51 -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/AmsterdamAgenda SWD WG Amsterdam Agenda 15:14:30 Topic: Doc status check 15:14:48 Ben: we've made some non-binding resolutions that we're now depending on 15:14:57 ... @instanceof, handling of @src, ... 15:15:19 ... I think we should proceed with the non-binding resolutions as long as we can 15:15:27 Manu: main issue is the spelling of @instanceof 15:15:41 ... haven't seen many alternatives being discussed recently in mail 15:15:53 Ben: yes, I just want to be clear on what we've finally resolved 15:16:12 Mark: should we refer to these non-binding resolutions in the document? 15:16:27 Shane: we said 6 weeks ago these were non-binding 15:16:31 ... that was 6 weeks ago 15:16:37 ... let's move on at this point 15:17:00 Ben: I definitely want to move forward but I've made procedural mistakes in the past that people have called to attention 15:17:55 ACTION: Ben collect all the non-binding resolutions into a mail message and call for a vote 15:19:26 Ralph: so our objective is to turn all non-binding resolutions into either closed issues or open issues and document the open issues in the published WD? 15:19:30 Ben: yes 15:19:46 Ralph: ... by next telecon 15:19:57 Ben: we should have a new editor's draft by next Tuesday evening 15:20:25 ... act as if the resolutions were resolved, revisit Thursday if not resolved 15:20:56 Mark: will the Tuesday draft be the one we send to the WG? 15:21:16 Ben: by Tuesday night we should have a draft that is ready to go to the WG except for the non-binding resolutions 15:21:27 ... we can do limited edits on Friday 15:21:48 Ben: we really want to send a document to the WG by Friday 21 Sep 15:23:29 Shane: the document we give to the WG on 21 Sep does not have to pass W3C pubrules, right? 15:23:41 Ralph: right, it's a draft for the WG to review to decide to request W3C publication 15:24:41 Ben: we also need the XHTML2 Working Group to formally decide to publish the document 15:24:49 ... since it's joint work of the two WGs 15:26:01 Shane: we're not going to have a shortname and issue the W3C request for publication on 21 Sep, right? 15:26:03 Ralph: right 15:27:53 ACTION: Ben to write up @instanceof referring to other subjects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] 15:27:56 -- done 15:28:06 ACTION: Michael look for a more semantically correct predicate for tests 42-45 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] 15:28:08 -- continues 15:28:19 ACTION: Michael make sure to confirm a design for checking that the ASK SPARQL queries evaluate (yes/no) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action07] 15:28:21 -- continues 15:28:33 ACTION: Ben add an isbn: resource example to the Primer to illustrate @resource overriding @href [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action08] 15:28:35 -- continues 15:28:49 Ben: I worked on this but had trouble fully integrating, so still in progress 15:29:01 Mark: I did include an isbn: example in the Syntax doc 15:29:19 Ben: isbn: was a simple use case for @resource overriding @href 15:29:35 ... I'm still working on a convincing case for @resource overriding @src 15:29:44 Mark: FOAF has an "online ID" 15:29:58 ... something that isn't meant to be a clickable link; just an identifier 15:30:20 [DONE] ACTION: Ben send mail to the TF list when the Primer editors' draft is ready for the TF to read [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] 15:30:28 ACTION: Ben to look into Science Commons use case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/11-htmltf-minutes.html#action04] 15:30:29 -- continues 15:30:52 Ben: the Science Commons use case may be becomming less relevant to this TF but let's keep this action open 15:31:02 ACTION: Ben to recontact implementors Elias, MarkB, triplr [and Fabien] and post their implementations to http://esw.w3.org/topic/RDFa#Implementations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] 15:31:04 -- continues 15:31:11 Ben: I want to add those to the implementations page 15:31:24 ACTION: Ben to work test cases 31 and 32 into primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] 15:31:27 -- continues 15:31:34 ACTION: Ben, Mark, Elias, and other implementors to add xml:lang support [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] 15:31:36 -- continues 15:31:49 Mark: I've implemented xml:lang but not wrapping 15:32:01 ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action06] 15:32:04 -- continues 15:32:30 Ralph: none appear to be critical path for the editors' drafts 15:32:34 Ben: right 15:32:43 Topic: Doc status 15:33:08 i|Ben to write up @instanceof|Topic: Action Review| 15:33:19 -- Conformance Section 15:33:31 Shane: W3C specs are now expected to have a conformance section 15:33:39 ... defines what it means to be conformant 15:33:53 Ben: Mark and I appear to have a bit of a disagreement on what it means to be conformant 15:34:04 Shane: that's exactly why we write a conformance section 15:34:11 Mark: I'm trying to achieve a particular set of use cases 15:34:26 ... the QA people will ask us how we test conformance, so conformance should be testable 15:34:45 ... there's a question about whether I'm non-conformant if I generate extra triples 15:35:35 Ben: the issue is "Can an RDF-conformant parser generate additional triples than those specified in the Syntax specification?" 15:37:10 Ralph: I thought we'd resolved that issue 15:37:46 ACTION: Ben research whether "Can an RDF-conformant parser generate additional triples than those specified in the Syntax specification?" is an already closed issue 15:38:11 myakura has joined #rdfa 15:38:20 Mark: we'll need to work out how we define conformance 15:38:30 Shane: every assertion in the document applies to conformance 15:38:45 ACTION: Shane create a conformance section 15:39:03 Shane: the debate about "what does it mean to conform" is a debate about the entire document 15:39:36 -- will xml:base work? 15:40:06 Ben: the main idea is that if the host language doesn't support xml:base then it doesn't make sense for RDFa to require it 15:40:27 ... and since XHTML1 doesn't support xml:base, we don't depend on it 15:40:59 ... if the host language -- e.g. XHTML2 -- does support xml:base then RDFa will use it 15:41:16 ... so we resolve URIs the same way as the host language 15:41:47 ... and BASE in XHTML1 is called out specifically in the Syntax document 15:42:01 ... the issue resolution is meant to leave the door open to XHTML2 15:42:14 Mark: XHTML modularization also leaves open the door to other languages 15:43:03 ... should I remove the language about xml:base that's in the editor's draft now? 15:43:06 Ben: I think so 15:43:14 ... this document is about RDFa in XHTML1 15:44:23 Shane: we already have a document about RDFa modularization and could move the xml:base words to there 15:44:27 ... or put it into an appendix 15:45:04 Manu: reading the xml:base words from a newcomer's perspective, it appeared to be coming from left field; I didn't understand why that language was there in the document 15:45:35 Ralph: I move to put it into an appendix 15:46:04 Ben: I'm worried about how this document will be accepted by other folks 15:46:39 Mark: I'm talking about consistency and how this module will be used in other languages 15:47:31 Ben: this Syntax document is not a module specification 15:47:53 ... for folks working with XHTML1.1 and writing a parser for that, the language about xml:base is not relevant 15:47:57 The module is defined in http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml-rdfa-20070811/ 15:48:33 Mark: it _is_ possible for xml:base to appear in an XHTML1.1 document 15:48:55 Manu: taking it out of the normal flow of the document and putting it into the end is sufficient 15:49:07 RESOLVED: move xml:base discussion to an appendix 15:49:21 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0142.html 15:49:41 -- SAX Processing 15:49:53 Mark: good idea to find one, but I don't have one at the moment 15:50:07 ... since I say "SAX-like", I'd better find one or clarify 15:50:23 ACTION: Mark find a reference for SAX or clarify the "SAX-like" language 15:50:36 -- datatypes 15:50:54 Shane: the question was "What datatypes are allowed to be specified?" 15:50:58 Mark: there's really no limit 15:51:18 Manu: my understanding was that anything in XSD could be used 15:51:38 Mark: and any other datatype URI 15:51:40 Ben: that's also what I understood 15:52:07 PROPOSED: RDFa does not restrict datatypes 15:52:44 Mark: in terms of the abstract syntax, it's any datatype URI 15:52:50 RESOLVED: RDFa does not restrict datatypes 15:53:05 -- definition of canonicalization 15:53:20 Ben: this is complicated by the question of whether the DOM is used to resolve whitespace 15:53:43 Shane: my gut feeling is that we should not pay any attention to the fact that XHTML sets xml:whitespace to 'preserve' 15:54:25 ... XHTML says that whitespace is preserved, so after processing all the whitespace is present, which strictly means that the whitespace should be available to the RDFa processor 15:54:35 ... but in practice all the implementations strip out the whitespace 15:55:03 Mark: we'd had a long discussion in XHTML2 and I thought we'd already agreed that XHTML1 should not have chosen 'preserve' 15:55:08 Shane: I don't think that's true 15:55:21 Mark: still, I don't quite know how we do this 15:55:42 ... unless we create a profile that does not include xml:space=preserve 15:56:03 Shane: do you believe we can access this data from the client side? 15:56:16 Mark: no, implementation-wise I agree [that whitespace is not preserved] 15:56:41 ... but how can we undo what XHTML1 has chosen? How do we get rid of the whitespace that XHTML1 is requiring us to preserve? 15:56:50 ... we could require the parser to strip the whitespace 15:57:08 Shane, Ben: yes, tell the parser to strip it 15:57:20 Shane: defer to the CSS definition 15:57:25 ... I will grab the text from there 15:57:53 PROPOSED: the RDFa parser does canonicalization according to CSS rules 15:58:32 Mark: we don't want to be inconsistent [across implementations] -- that was Fabien's problem 15:58:45 ... with test case 29 15:59:03 XHTML M12N says: On rendering, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2]. 15:59:10 Ben: do the CSS rules only concern whitespace or does it cover other canonicalization questions? 15:59:13 Mark: only whitespace 15:59:32 so we just say "for processing purposes of XML Literals, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2]" 15:59:43 PROPOSED: the RDFa parser does whitespace canonicalization according to CSS rules 16:00:17 Manu: the CSS rules are quite heavy. It's not necessarily clear which ones we're citing 16:00:21 Shane: just the whitespace rules 16:00:37 Ben: from the implementation point-of-view, all the parser needs to do is access the DOM 16:01:03 Shane: yes, that's why we want to make this choice for the client. On the server side you may have to do more work 16:01:57 RESOLVED: for processing purposes of XML Literals, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2] 16:02:19 Mark: it's all literals, not just XML Literals 16:02:27 RESOLVED: for processing purposes of literals, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2] 16:02:33 Shane, yep; that's what I meant 16:02:41 s/Shane,/Shane:/ 16:03:21 Ben: Elias' point was also about stripping elements from markup when @datatype="" 16:03:33 Mark: that was Fabien's question too 16:03:43 ... we've defined rules for converting child elements 16:03:50 ... Fabien asked for clarification of those rules 16:04:07 Ben: FireFox DOM has a notion of 'text content'; is that a standard method? 16:04:15 Mark: I think it is defined in the XML DOM 16:04:22 ... I 16:04:31 ... I'll add better language in the next draft 16:04:50 ACTION: Mark find language for canonicalization of markup in plain literals 16:05:05 -- @lang 16:05:15 Shane: we've resolved to use xml:lang, right? 16:05:35 Ben: XHTML1.1 only uses @xml:lang 16:05:57 RESOLVED: RDFa in XHTML1.1 uses @xml:lang and does not use @lang 16:06:05 Mark: are we sure we ignore @lang in XHTML? 16:06:11 Shane: @lang is not in the DTD 16:06:35 Ben: points 6 and 7 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0142.html left to separate discussions? 16:06:52 -- @instanceof behaviour 16:07:13 Mark: Ivan and Elias have also stated a preference for @instanceof applying to the element in which the attribute appears 16:07:25 ... I find it confusing to make @instanceof apply to the child 16:07:45 Ben: perhaps we can resolve this in mail 16:08:08 Mark: this was a reflection of a long practice for LINK being a child of a node 16:08:16 ... this got grey when we reintroduced chaining 16:08:45 ... we ended up with @instanceof referring to the child, even though @class didn't work this way 16:09:14 Ben: I think there are reasonable use cases for either interpretation 16:09:39 ... but an author who puts too many attributes on a single element is just asking for trouble 16:10:03 ... an author who clearly wants separate nodes can make a child 16:10:22 Mark: yes, and I think that approach is much clearer; implicitly creating a bnode is confusing 16:10:49 Ben: when @about and @instanceof are the only attributes, the type applies to the @about 16:11:13 ... when @about, @resource and @instanceof all appear, that's where Mark and my interpretations differ 16:11:15 Mark: yes 16:11:38 ... this turns out to be a minor change to the processing model, so the decision won't have a huge impact on the document 16:12:35 Ralph: yes, making @resource change the interpretation of @instanceof feels like a huge leap 16:12:49 Ben: but from the other direction, it's @about that is changing the interpretation 16:13:03 Mark: yes, and our focus is on the "aboutness" 16:13:22 Ben: it's a matter of the way you think about it; adding @resource to @about or adding @about to @resource 16:13:40 Mark: if you can come up with a good way of picturing what you're describing, you may convince lots of people 16:14:05 ... a clear conceptual model may convince everyone 16:14:28 Topic: Schedule 16:14:47 Ben: everyone OK with Tuesday night for everything we're going to ask the WG to review? 16:14:50 Shane, Mark: yes 16:15:14 -ShaneM 16:16:11 Ben: we'll work to resolve questions 6 and 7 by email 16:31:38 [un-scribed discussion of conformance w.r.t. additional triples ...] 17:00:34 -Ralph 17:00:35 -markbirbeck 17:00:36 -Manu 17:00:37 -benadida 17:00:39 SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended 17:00:40 Attendees were markbirbeck, Ralph, Manu, ShaneM, benadida 17:00:51 rrsagent, please draft minutes 17:00:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-minutes.html RalphS 17:06:23 benadida has left #rdfa 17:43:25 Zakim has left #rdfa 18:13:54 rrsagent, bye 18:13:54 I see 14 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-actions.rdf : 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben collect all the non-binding resolutions into a mail message and call for a vote [1] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-17-55 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben to write up @instanceof referring to other subjects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] [2] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-27-53 18:13:54 ACTION: Michael look for a more semantically correct predicate for tests 42-45 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] [3] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-28-06 18:13:54 ACTION: Michael make sure to confirm a design for checking that the ASK SPARQL queries evaluate (yes/no) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action07] [4] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-28-19 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben add an isbn: resource example to the Primer to illustrate @resource overriding @href [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action08] [5] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-28-33 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben to look into Science Commons use case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/11-htmltf-minutes.html#action04] [6] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-30-28 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben to recontact implementors Elias, MarkB, triplr [and Fabien] and post their implementations to http://esw.w3.org/topic/RDFa#Implementations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [7] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-31-02 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben to work test cases 31 and 32 into primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] [8] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-31-24 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben, Mark, Elias, and other implementors to add xml:lang support [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [9] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-31-34 18:13:54 ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action06] [10] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-32-01 18:13:54 ACTION: Ben research whether "Can an RDF-conformant parser generate additional triples than those specified in the Syntax specification?" is an already closed issue [11] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-37-46 18:13:54 ACTION: Shane create a conformance section [12] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-38-45 18:13:54 ACTION: Mark find a reference for SAX or clarify the "SAX-like" language [13] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-50-23 18:13:54 ACTION: Mark find language for canonicalization of markup in plain literals [14] 18:13:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T16-04-50