13:09:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
13:09:58 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc
13:10:02 <Steven> zakim, list
13:10:02 <Zakim> I see Team_Global(review)8:00AM, UW_UWA()9:00AM active
13:10:03 <Zakim> also scheduled at this time is W3C_(W3F_TF)8:00AM
13:10:20 <Steven> zakim, this will be rdfa
13:10:20 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, Steven
13:10:35 <Steven> rrsagent, make log public
14:03:09 <Steven> zakim, this will be rdfa
14:03:09 <Zakim> ok, Steven; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 57 minutes
14:19:45 <Ralph> Ralph has joined #rdfa
14:42:03 <Steven> Steven has joined #rdfa
14:56:30 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
14:58:12 <msporny> msporny has joined #rdfa
14:59:03 <ShaneM> zakim, code
14:59:03 <Zakim> I don't understand 'code', ShaneM
14:59:09 <ShaneM> zakim, what is the code
14:59:09 <Zakim> I don't understand 'what is the code', ShaneM
14:59:31 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has joined #rdfa
14:59:31 <ShaneM> why oh why can I never get this stupid thing to tell me what I want?
14:59:34 <Ralph> zakim, code?
14:59:34 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Ralph
15:00:16 <Zakim> SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
15:00:23 <Zakim> + +1.763.767.aaaa
15:00:25 <Zakim> +Ralph
15:00:25 <ShaneM> I see that now.    it should be as forgiving as possible imho...
15:00:31 <ShaneM> zakim, aaa is ShaneM
15:00:31 <Zakim> sorry, ShaneM, I do not recognize a party named 'aaa'
15:00:48 <markbirbeck> will be a minute or two.
15:00:52 <ShaneM> zakim, aaaa is ShaneM
15:00:52 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it
15:01:09 <Zakim> +??P10
15:01:30 <msporny> zakim, I am ??p10
15:01:30 <Zakim> +msporny; got it
15:03:08 <Ralph> Meeting: RDF in XHTML Task Force
15:03:34 <Ralph> -> http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes previous 2008-03-13
15:04:16 <Ralph> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0245.html
15:04:32 <Zakim> +Ben_Adida
15:04:35 <benadida> benadida has joined #rdfa
15:04:43 <Ralph> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0247.html
15:06:19 <Zakim> + +0208761aabb
15:06:27 <markbirbeck> zakim, i am aabb
15:06:27 <Zakim> +markbirbeck; got it
15:07:43 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
15:07:43 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
15:07:45 <Zakim> +Steven
15:08:12 <Ralph> Topic: Action Review
15:08:17 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben to update RDFa schedule to include CR [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
15:08:22 <Ralph> -- done
15:08:36 <Ralph> ACTION: Manu to enable EARL output in RDFa Test Harness [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
15:08:38 <Ralph> -- continues
15:08:48 <Ralph> ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
15:08:50 <Ralph> -- continues
15:09:00 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL transform transferred to W3C [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
15:09:02 <Ralph> -- continues
15:10:13 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben to respond to issue 87 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
15:10:15 <Ralph> -- continues
15:10:28 <Ralph> ACTION: Manu write a response to Christian Hoertnagl for issue 7 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
15:10:31 <Ralph> -- continues
15:10:45 <Ralph> Manu: I have a draft response
15:11:52 <Ralph> ACTION: Mark/Shane include issue 89 correction in Changes section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
15:11:54 <Ralph> -- continues
15:12:14 <Ralph> Shane: I forgot to update the Changes section after making the other correction
15:12:42 <Ralph> Topic: Media Type / Self-Describing Web
15:13:02 <Ralph> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0231.html The Self-Describing Web [Steven 2008-03-19]
15:13:08 <Ralph> Steven: we'd have to re-issue a spec
15:13:17 <Ralph> ... the current media type spec says we control it
15:13:28 <Ralph> ... normally media type specifications are issued via IETF as an RFC
15:13:36 <Ralph> ... so normally a new RFC is issued
15:13:47 <Ralph> ... the change would be something like "the document may include RDFa"
15:13:57 <Ralph> ... I think this is almost daft; I don't see why it's necessary
15:14:07 <Ralph> ... you can scrape loads of metadata out of existing documents
15:14:19 <ShaneM> The current media type document explicitly includes XHTML family markup languages
15:14:26 <Ralph> Ben: we haven't changed anything about the media, have we?
15:14:33 <Ralph> ... did we change something when adding GRDDL?
15:14:59 <Ralph> Steven: if someone uses our module in another language, are they also going to have to change their media type registration?
15:15:29 <Ralph> Ben: the main argument seems to be that HTML didn't update when GRDDL became a REC
15:15:41 <Ralph> ... the claim will be that GRDDL introduced no new attributes
15:16:03 <Ralph> Shane: our media type application/xml+xhtml is specifically meant to be extended
15:16:39 <msporny> ack Ralph
15:18:30 <ShaneM> q+
15:18:38 <Steven> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt
15:19:24 <Steven> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt
15:22:12 <Ralph> Ralph: is there enough indirection from the mime type registration to the XHTML specification at W3C such that when W3C changes XHTML definition we don't have to change the mime registration?
15:22:20 <Ralph> Shane: we don't need to do anything
15:22:49 <Ralph> Ralph: can we update an XML Schema document for XHTML?
15:22:53 <Ralph> Shane: there isn't one
15:22:59 <Ralph> ... CR hasn't been approved
15:23:06 <Ralph> Ralph: is that a process issue?
15:23:09 <msporny> +1 - in agreement with being able to create new XML documents using XHTML modules
15:23:26 <Ralph> Ben: given XHTML modularization, one can cobble together a bunch of modules into a new schema
15:23:52 <msporny> +1 for not updating existing media-type registrations.
15:23:53 <Ralph> ... that new schema does not require a new media type
15:24:04 <Ralph> Ralph: we're not being asked to change the media type, but to update the registration
15:24:08 <ShaneM> q-
15:24:09 <Ralph> Shane: Ben is exactly right
15:24:10 <Steven> "With respect to XHTML Modularization [XHTMLMOD] and the existence 
15:24:10 <Steven>       of XHTML based languages (referred to as XHTML family members) 
15:24:10 <Steven>       that are not XHTML 1.0 conformant languages, it is possible that 
15:24:10 <Steven>       'application/xhtml+xml' may be used to describe some of these 
15:24:10 <Steven>       documents.  However, it should suffice for now for the purposes of 
15:24:11 <Steven>       interoperability that user agents accepting 
15:24:13 <Steven>       'application/xhtml+xml' content use the user agent conformance 
15:24:15 <Steven>       rules in [XHTML1]."
15:24:32 <Ralph> Mark: if TAG would be happy with a link to a GRDDL transform
15:24:38 <Ralph> ... isn't this apples and pears?
15:25:00 <ShaneM> I think that the issue is that the TAG wants a way to know that a document contains extractable meta data
15:26:58 <ShaneM> @version="XHTML+RDFa 1.0"
15:27:19 <msporny> Shane, is XHTML2 going to do that?
15:27:37 <ShaneM> XHTML2 is @version="XHTML2 1.0"
15:27:46 <ShaneM> XHTML+RDFa is the other.
15:28:10 <msporny> So, are you saying that we do @version="XHTML+RDFa 1.0" in the current RDFa Syntax Document?
15:28:26 <ShaneM> yes 
15:28:49 <msporny> are you saying that we do that in addition to @profile and the DTD type?
15:28:54 <msporny> or in place of?
15:29:14 <ShaneM> oh I dont mind.  I was just pointing out that we have this declaration mechanism too.  See http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#a_DTD_driver
15:32:17 <Ralph> Ben: do we agree the TAG is wrong on the need to update the media type?
15:32:17 <ShaneM> The declaration does not help address the real TAG issue, which is that they want to know when a resource contains triples.
15:32:20 <Ralph> Ralph: I abstain
15:34:41 <Ralph> ... what's the status of the XHTML1 Schema document?
15:34:58 <Ralph> Steven: we had to combine several documents and were forced to go through Last Call again
15:35:05 <Ralph> ... we're trying to complete that Last Call
15:35:15 <Ralph> ... and discussing whether we have to have a CR
15:35:29 <Ralph> ... as XHTML modularization is a methodology
15:35:47 <Ralph> ... there's no processor to write; the processors are schema or dtd processors
15:36:20 <ShaneM> XHTML Modularization 1.1 is the spec that is held up
15:36:36 <Ralph> Ralph: so the schema document we would update to add a transform URI is held up in this process?
15:36:39 <Ralph> Steven: yes
15:37:21 <ShaneM> Note that I dont think this schema technique is valid.  It would mean that EVERY xhtml document genereated triples.  We don't mean that.
15:37:28 <ShaneM> s/genereated/generated/
15:37:33 <benadida> ACTION: Ben to follow up on media type discussion with Steven, Ralph, and TAG
15:37:47 <Ralph> Topic: Test Cases
15:38:04 <Ralph> Manu: we need to resolve XMLLiteral first; all the new tests depend on that
15:38:26 <Ralph> Topic: XML Literal
15:38:48 <Ralph> -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/97 issue 97
15:39:20 <Ralph> Ben: I agree with Mark that the abstract RDF graph contains XML literals in canonical form
15:39:32 <Ralph> ... however, in practice a parser always returns some serialization of RDF
15:40:27 <Ralph> ... so even if there was a parser that always stores a canonical representation internally it is still permissible for that internal representation to be re-serialized in non-canonical form
15:40:30 <ShaneM> q+
15:41:09 <Ralph> ... so if the output of an RDF parser is _a_ valid serialization, it doesn't matter whether the canonicalization was actually done in an internal step
15:41:29 <Ralph> Mark: yes, and Ivan gave the example of an RDF serialization that uses ' instead of "
15:41:50 <Ralph> ... it's valid serialization but is it a true representation of the RDF graph?
15:41:55 <Ralph> ... moving the problem elsewhere
15:42:05 <Ralph> ... RDFa is defined in terms of RDF, not in terms of a serialization of RDF
15:42:29 <Ralph> ... we have to describe the result of _parsing_ and this is clearly defined
15:42:38 <Ralph> ... the result is a canonicalized string
15:42:45 <Ralph> Ben: only in the internal store
15:42:59 <Ralph> ... when the result is output, the canonicalization does not apply
15:43:23 <Ralph> ... the spec can say that in the abstract graph the result is canonicalized
15:43:27 <msporny> q+
15:43:34 <Ralph> Mark: but Ivan also notes that you need to preserve the namespaces
15:43:49 <Ralph> ... and preserving the namespaces is exactly what canonicalization does
15:44:08 <Ralph> ... it would be wrong to drop the namespaces from the XML output
15:44:18 <Ralph> Ben: yes, it has to be _a_ serialization, not the canonical one
15:45:00 <Ralph> Mark: at the start of the thread I said we could dump the namespaces on the toplevel element
15:45:03 <Ralph> ... and people objected
15:45:09 <Ralph> Ben: maybe there was mis-communication
15:45:41 <Ralph> Mark: the 'apex' node; the [outermost] element in the fragment
15:45:55 <Ralph> ... if there's a DIV there, we're all set
15:45:56 <msporny> q-
15:46:07 <Ralph> ... but if there's a text node then you have to scan inside it
15:46:36 <Ralph> Ben: so we agree that the only thing we need to do is put the namespaces somewhere so that the result yields the same canonicalization
15:46:38 <Ralph> Mark: yes
15:46:52 <Ralph> ... but then Ivan added that this is more than he wants to have to do in his parser
15:47:07 <Ralph> ... there's a lot of processing that has to be done
15:47:34 <Ralph> ... so I propose that either we do the analysis on the content or drop the whole idea
15:48:24 <Ralph> Shane: is there a belief that the RDF that is emitted by an RDFa compatible parser needs to be isomorphic to itself in some way?
15:48:42 <Ralph> ... do I need to be able to turn the triples back into RDFa in some way?
15:48:46 <Ralph> Ben: not in that way
15:49:11 <Ralph> ... if someone were to go from RDFa to RDF and then wanted to go back to RDFa, not necessarily in the same markup (presentation information will be lost)
15:49:19 <Ralph> ... it should be possible _in some way_ to do this
15:49:38 <Ralph> ... if you've parsed triples out of an RDFa document you should be able to reserialize in RDFa
15:51:55 <benadida> Ralph: I believe Ivan is right, the answer to Johannes is "yes, the xmlns should have been included in that test case."
15:54:11 <ShaneM> introduce a wrapper element with no semantics to carry the namespace declarations
15:54:36 <ShaneM> xh:wrapper xmlns:foo= xmlns:bar= ....
15:58:30 <Ralph> q+
15:58:48 <Ralph> Manu: are we going to say that we do need to preserve the namespaces?
15:58:52 <benadida> q+
15:59:54 <Ralph> Ralph: I do absolutely think we need to preserve the namespaces
16:00:27 <benadida> <div xmlns:svg="..."><span property="dc:title"><p>Title</p><svg:x>...</svg:x></span></div>
16:00:57 <benadida> ack ralph
16:02:36 <Ralph> Ben: consider the example above; the namespace is declared outside the title markup
16:03:00 <Ralph> ... if we don't follow something like the XML literal rules we might loose the svg namespace
16:03:06 <mhausenblas> mhausenblas has joined #rdfa
16:03:11 <Ralph> ... yes, it's complicated but it's the right thing
16:03:19 <Ralph> Mark: the xml literal starts with the SPAN
16:03:40 <Ralph> ... this would make it clear that there's always an apex node
16:03:55 <Ralph> ... but as Shane notes, you don't know what's going to receive your RDF data
16:04:13 <msporny> <div xmlns:svg="..." property="foo:bar"><svg:x>...</svg:x><svg:y>...</svg:y><svg:z>...</svg:z></span></div>
16:04:32 <Ralph> ... the good news is that we do have all the namespaces in our processing
16:04:42 <msporny> yep... 1 hour ago :)
16:05:07 <msporny> *nod*
16:05:17 <Ralph> Mark: the RDF Concepts spec could be read as "an XML Literal is something that could be canonicalized", not "something that _is_ canonicalized"
16:05:25 <Ralph> ... so you just have to make sure you don't loose anything
16:05:36 <Ralph> ... just somehow have to find an apex node
16:06:01 <msporny> <div xmlns:svg="..." property="foo:bar"><svg:x>...</svg:x><svg:y>...</svg:y><svg:z>...</svg:z></div>
16:06:06 <Ralph> Ben: a wild idea ... suppose there is no apex node; there's a few pseudo-apex nodes siblings
16:06:06 <benadida> foo<div />bar<span />
16:06:32 <Ralph> Ben: if it's easy enough to put the namespaces on one apex node, let's just put them on each of the sibling nodes
16:06:39 <Ralph> ... that would only leave xml:lang to deal with
16:06:56 <Ralph> ... so a warning that XMLLiterals without an apex node might cause xml:lang to be lost
16:07:24 <Ralph> Mark: taking that line of modification, could take the DIV and call it the apex node by dropping @property
16:07:37 <Ralph> Ben: asymmetry between XML literal and plain literal bothers me
16:07:55 <Ralph> s/asymm/the resulting asymm/
16:08:06 <Ralph> ... you couldn't have an apex node that is different from the actual markup
16:08:23 <markbirbeck> <svg:text property="foaf:name">Ben</svg:text>
16:08:33 <Ralph> Manu: I don't necessarily agree with the approach of using the apex node
16:09:13 <Ralph> ... when we say XML Literal, do we really mean XML Literal?
16:09:18 <Ralph> ... this is asking a lot of authors
16:09:51 <Ralph> Ben: it's an XML literal, just if there's no apex node we can't carry xml:lang to the toplevel text nodes.  We can carry xml:lang and namespaces to the sibling elements
16:10:11 <Ralph> Mark: this point is also made in the RDF Concepts document
16:10:20 <Ralph> ... typed literals do not have a language
16:10:34 <Ralph> ... so RDF Concepts notes you have to explicitly add an apex node to preserve xml:lang
16:10:51 <Ralph> Ben: so we just stuff xml:lang into as many toplevel elements as we can
16:10:58 <Ralph> Shane: you also have to push the default xmlns
16:11:17 <Ralph> Mark: you have to push all the currently in-scope namespace mappings, since you don't know which might be used
16:12:23 <Ralph> Manu: we're going to include the xmlns in all top-level elements of the literal?
16:12:25 <Ralph> Ben: yes
16:12:35 <Ralph> Manu: I agree with this.  It's just a big pain to implement.
16:12:46 <ShaneM> q+
16:12:53 <Ralph> Mark: this can be done with string parsing; it doesn't require an XML parser
16:12:59 <benadida> ack ben
16:13:30 <Zakim> -Ralph
16:13:33 <benadida> ack shane
16:13:35 <Ralph> [Ralph departs]
16:14:12 <benadida> Shane: about this solution, let's say a child element has the xmlns declaration already. we have to check if it's there.
16:14:59 <benadida> Ben: I don't think this changes the spec
16:15:35 <benadida> ACTION: Manu to add test cases for xmlliterals with namespace preservation, including one where the xmlliteral re-declares one of the namespaces
16:16:46 <benadida> PROPOSE that we resolve "the RDFa syntax does not need any change with respect to XMLLiterals. We note that the easy way to generate a valid serialization of the XMLLiteral is to dump the namespaces and xml:lang into all top-level elements of the xml literal, including xmlns, watching out for redeclarations."
16:17:47 <Steven> +1
16:18:08 <benadida> RESOLVED the RDFa syntax does not need any change with respect to XMLLiterals. We note that the easy way to generate a valid serialization of the XMLLiteral is to dump the namespaces and xml:lang into all top-level elements of the xml literal, including xmlns, watching out for redeclarations.
16:18:17 <benadida> Note that this RESOLVES ISSUE-97
16:22:32 <Zakim> -ShaneM
16:22:48 <ShaneM> does anyone object to @typeof?  
16:22:54 <Zakim> -Steven
16:24:46 <benadida> We'll discuss @typeof on the mailing list
16:25:54 <benadida> ADJOURNED
16:25:56 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
16:25:58 <Zakim> -msporny
16:26:06 <Zakim> -Ben_Adida
16:26:08 <Zakim> SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
16:26:09 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.763.767.aaaa, Ralph, ShaneM, msporny, Ben_Adida, +0208761aabb, markbirbeck, Steven
16:47:32 <ShaneM> ShaneM has left #rdfa
18:17:53 <Ralph> zakim, bye
18:17:53 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdfa
18:18:02 <Ralph> rrsagent, please draft minutes
18:18:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
18:18:46 <Ralph> i/about this solution/scribenick: benadida
18:18:50 <Ralph> Chair: Ben
18:18:58 <benadida> I see you!
18:19:00 <Ralph> rrsagent, please draft minutes
18:19:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
18:19:34 <Ralph> i/why oh why/scribenick: ralph
18:19:40 <Ralph> Scribe: Ralph, Ben
18:19:41 <Ralph> rrsagent, please draft minutes
18:19:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
18:20:05 <Ralph> rrsagent, bye
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> I see 9 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-actions.rdf :
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben to update RDFa schedule to include CR [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action01] [1]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-08-17
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Manu to enable EARL output in RDFa Test Harness [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action13] [2]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-08-36
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [3]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-08-48
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL transform transferred to W3C [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01] [4]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-09-00
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben to respond to issue 87 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [5]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-10-13
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Manu write a response to Christian Hoertnagl for issue 7 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [6]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-10-28
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Mark/Shane include issue 89 correction in Changes section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [7]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-11-52
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben to follow up on media type discussion with Steven, Ralph, and TAG [8]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T15-37-33
18:20:05 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Manu to add test cases for xmlliterals with namespace preservation, including one where the xmlliteral re-declares one of the namespaces [9]
18:20:05 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-rdfa-irc#T16-15-35