IRC log of rdfa on 2008-02-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:51:45 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
15:51:45 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:51:51 [Ralph]
Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML Task Force
15:51:57 [Ralph]
rrsagent, please make record public
15:52:07 [Ralph]
15:52:21 [Ralph]
Chair: Manu
15:52:21 [Steven]
Steven has joined #rdfa
15:52:40 [Ralph]
15:52:54 [Ralph]
Regrets: Ben, Simone
15:53:20 [Steven]
(Steven also sent his regrets for last week)
15:53:29 [Steven]
(Not mentioned in minutes)
15:53:44 [Ralph]
Regrets+ Michael
15:53:55 [Ralph]
(I'll update last week's minutes, Steven)
15:54:07 [Steven]
ach, not a real prob
15:55:09 [Steven]
15:55:20 [Steven]
Probable regrets for next week too: returning from a FtF
15:56:21 [Ralph]
Scribe: Ralph
15:56:24 [msporny]
thanks Ralph :)
15:57:20 [msporny]
does that mean you dreamed about it?
15:57:32 [Ralph]
15:57:35 [msporny]
haha :)
15:58:05 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
15:58:08 [Zakim]
15:58:12 [Zakim]
15:58:20 [msporny]
zakim, I am ??P3
15:58:20 [Zakim]
+msporny; got it
15:58:20 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p3 is Manu
15:58:21 [Zakim]
I already had ??P3 as msporny, Ralph
16:00:37 [Steven]
zakim, dial steven-617
16:00:37 [Zakim]
ok, Steven; the call is being made
16:00:38 [Zakim]
16:02:30 [markbirbeck]
markbirbeck has joined #rdfa
16:02:50 [Ralph]
Steven: coordination with Hypertext CG?
16:03:24 [markbirbeck]
zakim, code?
16:03:28 [Zakim]
the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
16:03:43 [Zakim]
16:04:10 [Zakim]
+ +0208761aaaa
16:04:17 [markbirbeck]
zakim, i am aaaa
16:04:17 [Zakim]
+markbirbeck; got it
16:04:54 [Ralph]
Topic: Action Review
16:05:03 [Ralph]
ACTION: Ben to email mailing list to think about last substantive issue on tracker: [recorded in]
16:05:05 [Ralph]
-- continues
16:05:11 [Ralph]
ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL transform transferred to W3C [recorded in]
16:05:13 [Ralph]
-- continues
16:05:18 [Ralph]
ACTION: Ben to add status of various implementations on [recorded in]
16:05:20 [Ralph]
-- continues
16:05:27 [Ralph]
ACTION: Manu write 2 new tests for img[@src] as subject [recorded in]
16:05:28 [Ralph]
-- continues
16:05:34 [Ralph]
ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in]
16:05:35 [Ralph]
-- continues
16:05:52 [Ralph]
Topic: Getting Syntax Document to Last Call
16:06:06 [msporny]
16:06:10 [Ralph]
-> Manu's status
16:06:26 [Ralph]
16:06:57 [Ralph]
Mark: my changes to the Syntax document are still in progress
16:07:15 [Ralph]
... Shane has made the changes he is confident of
16:07:35 [Ralph]
... my plan is to insure completion tomorrow
16:08:14 [Ralph]
Shane: there's a diff-marked version, so change review should be quick
16:09:16 [Ralph]
Ralph: responding to the comments with pointers to sections in the diff-marked version should suffice
16:09:33 [Ralph]
Shane: I'll publish the new editors' draft when ready
16:10:58 [Ralph]
... and will send the response to Diego and Ed based on Manu's draft when the new draft is up
16:11:49 [Ralph]
ACTION: Shane send response to Diego and Ed review comments when new editors' draft is up
16:20:52 [Ralph]
Mark: I've skimmed Manu's draft response to the comments and don't see problems but until I finish the edits I won't know for sure
16:21:06 [Ralph]
Manu: what about Ed's comment about reference implementation?
16:21:13 [Ralph]
... I proposed to cite the test suite
16:21:28 [Ralph]
Ralph: at most the reference would be an informative one
16:21:43 [Ralph]
Steven: citing the test suite in the Status section would suffice
16:22:01 [Ralph]
... also, there's no such thing in W3C as a "reference implementation"
16:22:15 [Ralph]
... our test suite is not a conformance test
16:24:22 [msporny]
16:26:57 [Ralph]
RESOLVED: link to test harness will appear in Status section
16:27:41 [Ralph]
Shane: there are 3 open issues in the Syntax document
16:28:17 [Ralph]
Manu: Ivan's issue about "useless" bnodes being generated
16:28:27 [Ralph]
Mark: I plan to remove that
16:28:40 [Ralph]
... I don't think we should generate useless statements
16:28:58 [Ralph]
... the situation is when the object is a bnode and there are no further references
16:29:05 [Ralph]
Manu: this implies a change to the processing rules
16:29:10 [Ralph]
Mark: yes, but in a minor way
16:29:23 [Ralph]
Manu: not so minor for stream-based processors; requires look-ahead
16:29:50 [Ralph]
Mark: use recursion instead; keep some state that says whether to use the value you already have
16:30:07 [Ralph]
... I will look at adding this and mail a proposal
16:30:22 [Ralph]
... could leave the spec open-ended; leave it up to the implementation
16:30:42 [Ralph]
... the extra triples serve no purpose but it's easier to leave them in the algorithm
16:30:53 [Ralph]
... implementations should not be penalized for dropping them
16:31:00 [Ralph]
Shane: another issue about whitespace normalization
16:31:09 [Ralph]
... we currently refer to CSS2 for the algorithm
16:31:21 [Ralph]
... I don't remember where the current text came from
16:31:29 [Ralph]
Steven: I don't think we should collapse whitespace at all
16:31:34 [Ralph]
... the CSS rules are about presentation
16:31:51 [Ralph]
... I think we should preserve whitespace in the triples because we don't know what it is intended to represent
16:32:03 [Ralph]
Manu: there are quite a few tests that exercise this
16:32:31 [Ralph]
... some of the tests do require that whitespace be normalized
16:33:31 [Ralph]
Ralph: Ben has had some strong input on the whitespace issue
16:33:56 [msporny]
16:34:11 [Ralph]
... and in RDF/XML people have adopted usage styles that assume leading and trailing whitespace will be elided
16:34:33 [Ralph]
Steven: that's fine -- that's what I call XML normalization
16:34:42 [Ralph]
... but the CSS rules have to do with presentation
16:35:00 [Ralph]
Shane: Ben had done some experiments on deployed browsers
16:35:15 [Ralph]
Manu: there's no such thing as preserving whitespace in MSIE's DOM
16:35:23 [Ralph]
... MSIE always returns normalized whitespace
16:35:34 [Ralph]
... and I thought we'd resolved to leave it to the parser
16:35:40 [Ralph]
Mark: how can we ensure consistency?
16:36:02 [Ralph]
Shane: we'll end up with random triples
16:36:10 [Ralph]
Mark: the test suite won't be able to determine
16:36:21 [Ralph]
... does SPARQL have a trim() function?
16:37:12 [Ralph]
Manu: do the whitespace rules apply only to plain literals?
16:37:20 [Ralph]
Mark: they'll need to apply to XMLliterals as well
16:37:42 [Ralph]
Manu: my implementation leaves XMLliterals as-is, only does whitespace normalization on plain literals
16:37:58 [Ralph]
... and we've written the tests so there is no whitespace
16:38:18 [Ralph]
... leading or trailing
16:38:28 [Ralph]
... and embedded whitespace is just a single space char
16:38:46 [Steven]
16:39:30 [Ralph]
Mark: if you have 10 lines of text you'd often write <span>...</span> with newlines and lots of spaces
16:39:36 [Ralph]
Steven: see test 29
16:40:24 [Steven]
16:41:12 [Ralph]
Mark: I thought we'd decided to write the test as if the XPath normalization would be done
16:41:48 [Steven]
What about <pre property="my:poem">
16:41:55 [Ralph]
... the definition says something like "trim all leading and trailing whitespace and compress internal whitespace to a single space"
16:42:02 [Ralph]
Steven: do newlines count?
16:42:07 [Ralph]
Mark: I don't recall
16:42:21 [Ralph]
... but I'm proposing to do whatever that function does
16:42:29 [Ralph]
Shane: normalize-space(), I believe
16:43:30 [ShaneM]
16:43:43 [Ralph]
Steven: I'm a little dubious about removing internal whitespace
16:43:54 [Ralph]
Mark: but we have MSIE that does normalize whitespace
16:43:58 [Ralph]
... this forces our hand
16:44:21 [Ralph]
... so the only way we could deal with MSIE is to put normalization into our spec
16:44:24 [Ralph]
Shane: agree
16:44:32 [Ralph]
Steven: that could be a bug in MSIE
16:44:58 [Ralph]
Mark: the alternative is to leave it undefined and draw attention to implementors to trim space in the SPARQL query
16:46:27 [Ralph]
Ralph: I really expect that the majority of RDF use cases will be happy with whitespace normalization
16:46:39 [Ralph]
Steven: what if the internal whitespace is meaningful?
16:46:51 [Ralph]
Shane: there's an XML Schema datatype that says 'preserve my whitespace'
16:46:58 [Ralph]
Steven: will RDFa acknowledge this datatype?
16:47:09 [Ralph]
Mark: XML rules itself does whitespace processing
16:47:37 [Ralph]
Steven: root XML element can state 'preserve'
16:47:59 [Ralph]
... I do acknowledge that there are few places where multiple embedded whitespace is meaningful
16:48:48 [Ralph]
... but I'd consider it a serious problem if there is no way to deliberately include multiple spaces
16:49:20 [Ralph]
Manu: we could add a datatype that says to preserve whitespace
16:49:44 [Ralph]
Mark: that won't help; we have to either force normalization into the language, which gets us to the lowest common denominator
16:50:21 [Ralph]
... or we leave it undefined and therefore users must be careful in their SPARQL queries
16:51:05 [Ralph]
Manu: we have to resolve this or we don't have a Last Call document
16:53:13 [Ralph]
Ralph: I'd propose that we resolve to include normalization and explicitly note the resulting restriction in the Last Call document, asking for objectors to cite specific use cases
16:53:25 [Ralph]
Mark: attribute values are not normalized
16:53:38 [Ralph]
... and attribute values can contain newlines
16:54:23 [Ralph]
Shane: the value of @content is a plain literal, which we're normalizing
16:55:09 [Ralph]
Mark: MSIE with element content is the only situation where we have a problem
16:55:28 [Ralph]
... it's feeling more like a hack to me to specify normalization everywhere
16:55:46 [Ralph]
... but I also don't like a solution that treats attribute values differently from element content
16:56:27 [Ralph]
Manu: if people format their XML so that the markup is readable, will they be upset if the resulting value is not normalized?
16:56:29 [Steven]
<pre about "#me" property="my:address>21 Sandridge Road
16:56:38 [Steven]
St. Albans, Herts
16:56:40 [Ralph]
Mark: shouldn't this be up to the implmeentation to decide how the value is to be used?
16:56:43 [Steven]
16:57:03 [Ralph]
... we're building on top of XML and XHTML
16:57:14 [Ralph]
... the XML DOM does not do your normalization for you
16:57:31 [Ralph]
... an implementor using this data has to normalize explicitly
17:01:16 [Ralph]
Ralph: we could remove normalization from our spec and say it's the application's responsibility to normalize
17:02:59 [Ralph]
Manu: then we'd have to change all the test cases to be sure not to have multiple whitespace
17:03:04 [Ralph]
Shane: we could say nothing
17:03:21 [Ralph]
Mark: we're building on XML, which uses preserve
17:03:39 [Ralph]
... so point out that not all implementations preserve whitespace
17:04:20 [Ralph]
Steven: I can support this
17:04:51 [Steven]
17:05:04 [Ralph]
RESOLVED: RDFa will state that whitespace is preserved and note that some implementations might not behave this way
17:05:24 [Ralph]
Shane: next issue is difference between vocab URI and profile URI
17:05:34 [Ralph]
Manu: any harm in making them identical?
17:06:12 [Ralph]
Mark: conceptually there is no profile
17:06:21 [msporny]
thanks for all the input Steven :)
17:06:27 [Steven]
17:06:27 [Ralph]
... @profile is supposed to indicate how to interpret @name and @rel in meta and link
17:06:35 [Zakim]
17:06:42 [Ralph]
... we're creating a brand new language which is internally consistent
17:06:52 [Ralph]
... the @profile is used as a flag to indicate the presence of RDFa
17:07:08 [Ralph]
... could just as easily add an attribute to the root element
17:07:43 [Ralph]
Ralph: so do you object to the way GRDDL uses @profile?
17:07:57 [Ralph]
Mark: no, GRDDL wires itself into someone else's use of @profile
17:08:21 [Ralph]
... GRDDL hooks itself in behind the scenes
17:09:34 [Ralph]
... it's _only_ legitimate to use @profile to declare new @name and @rel values
17:10:06 [Ralph]
... so we come at it from another direction
17:10:19 [Ralph]
... provide a URI for extensions to the HTML vocabulary
17:10:26 [Ralph]
... use our vocab URI for that
17:10:40 [Ralph]
... this is a legitmate @rel extension, so anyone could use this
17:10:53 [Ralph]
... so @profile='vocab URI' is legitmate
17:11:45 [Ralph]
Shane: indpendently, having 2 reserved URIs that mean "RDFa [here]" is silly
17:11:56 [Ralph]
... I think there should only be one and it should be the vocab
17:12:11 [Ralph]
Ralph: I'm ok with that
17:12:24 [Ralph]
... and it means that all the existing documents out there are not claiming to have RDFa in them
17:14:03 [Ralph]
Mark: using the vocab URI doesn't harm GRDDL usage
17:14:14 [Ralph]
Ralph: [looks at Ben's home page]
17:14:28 [Ralph]
... Ben uses the xhtml+rdfa DTD
17:14:49 [Ralph]
Shane: also, please remove from the document the green box that says "Ivan raised this"
17:15:29 [Ralph]
... about unnecessary triples
17:17:09 [Ralph]
Ralph: what about Last Call duration?
17:17:16 [Ralph]
Shane: 6 weeks seems a long time
17:19:51 [Ralph]
-> "RDFa Last Call period; consider TAG review?" [Ralph 2008-02-14]
17:20:21 [Ralph]
Mark: the fact of existing implementations should help people be confortable
17:30:22 [Ralph]
Manu: I'm fine with either 4 weeks or 6 weeks
17:32:13 [Ralph]
Mark: I'd prefer a shorter period
17:32:25 [Ralph]
Shane: 6 weeks seems long to me
17:32:52 [msporny]
nice... very tasteful, Shane :)
17:35:08 [Zakim]
17:35:54 [Ralph]
RESOLVED: the Task Force sees no need to have longer than 4 weeks Last Call period
17:36:59 [Zakim]
17:39:32 [Zakim]
17:39:34 [Zakim]
17:39:35 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
17:39:36 [Zakim]
Attendees were Ralph, msporny, Steven, ShaneM, +0208761aaaa, markbirbeck
17:39:38 [Ralph]
zakim, bye
17:39:38 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rdfa
17:39:42 [Ralph]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
17:39:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ralph
17:40:25 [Ralph]
rrsagent, bye
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
I see 6 open action items saved in :
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to email mailing list to think about last substantive issue on tracker: [recorded in] [1]
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL transform transferred to W3C [recorded in] [2]
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to add status of various implementations on [recorded in] [3]
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Manu write 2 new tests for img[@src] as subject [recorded in] [4]
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in] [5]
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Shane send response to Diego and Ed review comments when new editors' draft is up [6]
17:40:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in