W3C

ERT WG

21 May 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Shadi, Johannes, Mike, CarlosI, CarlosV
Regrets
none
Chair
Shadi
Scribe
CarlosI

Contents


Publishing "HTTP Vocabulary in RDF" and "Representing Content in RDF"

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-HTTP-in-RDF-20080220

SAZ: Let's have a look first to HTTP in RDF
... first the abstract

CV: typo in the last sentence

SAZ: Next section

JK: what is the special vocabulary for HTTPS?
... don't think we have anything special for HTTPS

SAZ: should be just including HTTPS
... back to the Status section
... couple of editorial notes
... what changes happenned and what feedback are we looking for
... a sort of two minutes elevator speech
... any other open questions on the section?
... lets move on and come back to this section later

JK: what about the namespace for Content?

SAZ: we can assume it as correct
... use cases need further elaboration
... It looks like there is lots of implicit information there
... Think there was another use case somewhere
... JK could you look for that?

JK: will try to

SAZ: Now section 2.2.1 body property
... we could use several representations for the same content
... how to bind them here?

CV: could we use rdf:Alt

SAZ: it implies order
... three alternatives
... Sequence implies a sort of numerical order
... Alt is something like a default and other alternatives
... Bag is a generic container
... in same cases the default may be relevant, in others not

JK: in case something is XML you can use three alternatives with XMLContent as the default then TextContent and finally base64
... if its not XML but is still text you can have a TextContent default and then a base 64
... if it's not even text then use base64

SAZ: think we need two things here
... an example of using the body property after its description
... after the example there should be a note or something with clarification of representing content in several ways and an example
... think we should be flexible
... the author should decide the kind of container
... just say you should use a container and maybe do a proposal
... don't think all this have any impact on the schema
... does this sound ok?

JK: looks good

CV: ok

CI: +1

JK: should we say don't use multiple bodies properties?

CV: what if I just have one option?

JK: then you don't need any container
... at most one body property

CV: if it's base64 content don't need container, just use body property

JK: if it's XML Content but you just want one representation the use also just body property, don't need any container
... that doesn't work
... you need a Bag or any other container
... I think this is not proper RDF

SAZ: you need parsetype collection

JK: this is a different thing
... is like a closed list
... containers are open

SAZ: we agree on having a section that shows how to do multiple representations of a body with an example

RESOLUTION: include a section that shows how to do multiple body representations with an example

JK: a question about httpVersion
... what's the literal?
... just the version number or include http?

<JohannesK> "1.1" versus "HTTP 1.1"

JK: maybe clarify in the description
... just add the version number

SAZ: "Property representing the HTTP version number as a Literal."

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ improve working of the abstract section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action01]

<shadi> ACTION: JK send SAZ updated HTML for section 2.2.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action02]

CV: now just two possiblities 1.0 and 1.1
... fix that on the schema?

SAZ: don't think is a good idea

CI: nor do I

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ clarify that HTTP version is only the numerical value (digit.digit format) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action03]

SAZ: now at section 3

MS: what does "other specifications" mean?
... regarding "RCF 2616 or other specifications"

JK: the section don't define new terms

CV: the first paragraph is confusing

SAZ: we pick some values from other places than RCF 2616 and should mention them

JK: should say they are not mentioned in the document just in the RDF file

SAZ: but the RDF file is part of the spec
... can't separate them

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ clarify the first paragraph of section 3 (to note the separation between the document contents and the RDF files, but also to clarify that other RFCs are used) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action04]

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ collapse sub-section in section 3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action05]

<shadi> ACTION: JK send SAZ the HTML for appendix A [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action06]

SAZ: also subsection not necessary in Appendix A
... just one paragraph again at Appendix B
... move it to the introduction

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ move limitations to the introduction section as a note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action07]

JK: the range for the body property should be open, not Content

SAZ: think also we should take out the range

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ remove range from the body property (in appendix C and schema files) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action08]

SAZ: not sure if Appendix E and F are out of date
... need to have a look at it

<shadi> ACTION: JK send SAZ updates to appendix E [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action09]

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ clean up appendix E and F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action10]

SAZ: not avalaible next week
... do not know when I can meet
... can meet next week
... see you all nex week

!quit

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: JK send SAZ the HTML for appendix A [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: JK send SAZ updated HTML for section 2.2.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: JK send SAZ updates to appendix E [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ clarify that HTTP version is only the numerical value (digit.digit format) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ clarify the first paragraph of section 3 (to note the separation between the document contents and the RDF files, but also to clarify that other RFCs are used) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ clean up appendix E and F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action10]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ collapse sub-section in section 3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ improve working of the abstract section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ move limitations to the introduction section as a note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ remove range from the body property (in appendix C and schema files) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-er-minutes.html#action08]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/05/21 14:48:01 $