13:43:01 RRSAgent has joined #xhtml
13:43:01 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/09/24-xhtml-irc
13:43:18 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0017.html
13:43:18 Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/09/17-xhtml-minutes
13:43:25 Chair: Roland
13:43:30 Scribe: Gregory
13:43:31 rmerric has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0017.html
13:43:37 ScribeNick: oedipus
13:43:45 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Sep/0017.html
13:43:58 Zakim, this will be XHTML2
13:43:58 ok, rmerric; I see IA_XHTML2()9:45AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:44:07 rrsagent, create minutes
13:44:07 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/24-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
13:44:16 rrsagent, make minutes world-visible
13:44:16 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes world-visible', oedipus. Try /msg RRSAgent help
13:44:30 IA_XHTML2()9:45AM has now started
13:44:32 rrsagent, make minutes public
13:44:32 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', rmerric. Try /msg RRSAgent help
13:44:36 +Gregory_Rosmaita
13:44:49 rrsagent, make log public
13:45:16 Regrets: Alessio
13:45:40 Meeting: XHTML2 WG Weekly Teleconference
13:45:48 rrsagent, make minutes
13:45:48 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/24-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
13:46:04 +Roland
13:47:06 +ShaneM
13:47:23 I am having phone trouble. Will join if I can.
13:47:49 zakim, who is here?
13:47:49 On the phone I see Gregory_Rosmaita, Roland, ShaneM
13:47:50 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, ShaneM, oedipus, Tina, Roland
13:48:40 TOPIC: Agenda Review & New Business/Announcements
13:48:49 + +04670855aaaa
13:49:03 zakim, aaaa is Tina
13:49:03 +Tina; got it
13:49:17 zakim, who is here?
13:49:17 On the phone I see Gregory_Rosmaita, Roland, ShaneM, Tina
13:49:18 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, ShaneM, oedipus, Tina, Roland
13:50:52 TP Registration: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Aug/0000.html
13:51:22 RM: TPAC - who has registered
13:51:35 GJR: will probably not be able to make it due to health reasons
13:51:49 SM: i have registered
13:51:50 I have not registered, and will not be attending
13:51:54 TH: i have not
13:52:04 s/SM/RM
13:52:09 rrsagent, make minutes
13:52:09 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/24-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
13:52:27 RM: remote participation
13:52:32 GJR: probably
13:52:33 I will be able to join via phone all days
13:52:58 TH: should be able to attend by phone - intend to join via phone all days
13:53:05 GJR: all days and times possible
13:53:20 RM: SP requested speaker phone, so we can do calls
13:53:31 Steven has joined #xhtml
13:53:31 GJR: can always do the skype thing as we did in italy
13:53:39 RM: not sure about alessio or mark
13:53:57 zakim, dial steven-617
13:53:57 ok, Steven; the call is being made
13:53:59 +Steven
13:54:04 Sorry, lost track of time
13:54:49 SP: since turnout will be low, requested telecon phone
13:55:28 SP: Roland, Mark, Steven - yes; Alessio - maybe; GJR: more unlikely than probable
13:55:44 SP: low attendence, so try to do as last time, via teleconferencing
13:55:53 TOPIC: Actions
13:56:10 RM: have a lot that hang around -- would like to use tracker to clean up outdated and overdue issues
13:56:24 http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/
13:56:51 trackbot has joined #xhtml
13:56:51 Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
13:56:52 If you want to associate this channel with an existing Tracker, please say 'trackbot, associate this channel with #channel' (where #channel is the name of default channel for the group)
13:58:01 zakim, meeting?
13:58:01 I don't understand your question, oedipus.
13:58:36 zakim, list
13:58:36 I see Team_W3M()8:00AM, IA_XHTML2()9:45AM, TAG_f2f()10:00AM active
13:58:37 also scheduled at this time are I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM, T&S_EGOV()9:00AM
13:58:53 http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc
13:59:15 TOPIC: Tina's Primer
13:59:21 http://www.dev-archive.net/articles/xhtml.html
13:59:26 rrsagent, make minutes
13:59:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/24-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
13:59:35 TH: won't publish new draft until have all new info folded in
13:59:46 RM: working on media type heuristics?
13:59:51 Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/09/17-xhtml-minutes
13:59:59 TH: only piece waiting for from XHTML WG
14:00:12 SP: didn't give myself an action to do that
14:00:18 ACTION: Steven to send examples of media type heuristics to Tina
14:00:18 Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
14:01:00 trackbot, associate this channhel with #xhtml
14:01:00 Sorry, oedipus, I don't understand 'trackbot, associate this channhel with #xhtml'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
14:01:19 TOPIC: M12n Request
14:01:27 SP: should be done next week
14:01:30 RM: before or after call?
14:01:44 SP: send update a.s.a.p - team calls cancelled last 2 weeks
14:02:12 trackbot, associate this channhel with IA_XHTML2()9:45AM
14:02:12 Sorry, oedipus, I don't understand 'trackbot, associate this channhel with IA_XHTML2()9:45AM'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
14:02:22 RM: Shane - review requests?
14:02:28 SM: Role is fine with me
14:02:34 TOPIC: Role Module
14:03:02 SP: resolved to go transition, but then received new comments; no revised version of spec since comments came in
14:03:24 SM: resolved not to request CR until CURIE ready to go to CR, and then needed to wait for TAG to give us comments on CURIE
14:03:35 SM: don't remember comments on Role
14:04:16 RM: link to comments?
14:04:33 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JulSep/0009.html
14:04:43 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JulSep/0009.html
14:05:07 references: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xhtml-role-20080407/ draft
14:05:14 RM: work through these now?
14:05:19 SM: haven't read yet
14:05:23 GJR: me neither
14:05:33 RM: walk through them quickly
14:06:05 (1) First, we congratulate the XHTML Working Group for providing a useful and clear namespace document for the namespace
14:06:05 http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/
14:06:05 We wish more groups responsible for namespace did so well by the users of their namespaces.
14:06:30 RM: no action needed
14:06:47 (2) That said, we think the namespace document could be improved by the addition of some more information. A document date would be helpful, and the identity of those responsible for the text of the document, and for the namespace, could be stated more explicitly. (From the fact that "The XHTML specifications are developed by the W3C XHTML 2 Working Group as part of the W3C HTML Activity", it may be thought to follow that it is the XHTML 2 Working Group whic
14:07:20 SM: vocab is NOT A NAMESPACE DOCUMENT!!!
14:07:27 SP: that's what people call it
14:07:44 SM: but not a namespace URI, but vocab URI - namespaces declare elements and attributes
14:07:53 SM: cultural change which should start here
14:07:58 SM: why we never call it a namespace
14:08:10 SP: reply should be "please to not consider as a namepace"
14:08:19 http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/
14:08:20 RM: thought talking about vocab
14:08:20 http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/
14:08:20 It calls itself a namesapce
14:08:23 SM: we are
14:08:35 RM: part of vocab doc is "namespace"
14:08:39 RM: change title?
14:08:49 SP: will do right now once we agree what to substitute
14:09:36 first 3 paragraphs of vocab doc:
14:09:36 This is a vocabulary collection utilized by XHTML Family modules and document types using XHTML Modularization, including XHTML Role and XHTML + RDFa as defined in rdfa-syntax.
14:09:36 The XHTML specifications are developed by the W3C XHTML 2 Working Group as part of the W3C HTML Activity.
14:09:36 For more information about XML, please refer to the Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 specification. For more information about XML namespaces, please refer to the Namespaces in XML specification.
14:10:06 SM: agree that vocab def document could be better, so need to fix
14:10:19 RM: clarify vocabulary versus namespace
14:10:31 SM: vocabulary not in TR space
14:10:45 SM: can change vocab when needed
14:10:56 SP: because not namespace, don't have to follow rules on namespaces
14:11:10 RM: would be very helpful to state how to manage this type of resource
14:11:21 RM: understanding what will happen with it
14:11:33 SM: elements that are in it won't be removed, but others will be added over time
14:11:36 RM: reasonable
14:11:59 RM: evolve policy - nothing will be removed, things will be defined, refined and added
14:12:39 RESOLVED: policy for vocab document: nothing will be removed; things contained may be more clearly defined/refined, and others added
14:13:01 SM: point 4 - don't like CURIEs - could be done with QNames
14:13:29 SM: 2 points to make: QNames don't belong in attributes and QNames do not map to URIs but URIs and values; we need URIs
14:13:33 RM: sounds reasonable
14:13:36 GJR: plus 1
14:14:21 (5) If it's desired to provide the better validation and easier access to the namespace binding which would be provided by using the xsd:QName type, but nevertheless not to rule out the use of CURIEs which are not QNames, then we suggest the best way to define the role attribute right now would be to define (1) a union of QName and CURIE (in that order), and (2) a list of values from that union, and to make the latter the type of the role attribute. That wou
14:14:38 SM: talking about CURIEs - are they addressing the prefix?
14:15:08 SM: we provided XSD datatype for CURIE which is similar to QNames and should resolve their issues - point them at where datatype defined and how used by role
14:15:44 scribe's note: comments refer to: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xhtml-role-20080407/
14:16:03 SM: probably wasn't updated against latest M12n draft at time of review
14:16:21 SM: love to have them to review, so point them to latest ED
14:16:47 RM: does def of role attribute depends on CURIE i think is question
14:16:59 SM: comment 7 - conflation problem again
14:17:35 SM: thinking about it in context of QNames, and we don't address QNames - comments relevant to QNames, not CURIEs
14:18:00 RM: answer to 7 - these are CURIEs and not QNames and the rules are different
14:18:03 TH: plus 1
14:18:06 GJR: plus 1
14:18:23 SM: if read points 8 and 9 - treating as QNames, but they are NOT QNames
14:18:55 SP: reply should state sorry for any misunderstanding on this point, but these things aren't namespaces and then go through points to debunk comments
14:19:04 TH: reviewed a in context of b
14:19:33 SM: devil's advocate: when look at theses things, many people think/see QNames - can't do anything about that but keep hammering on difference
14:19:40 RM: problem is keying in on QNames
14:20:12 SM: datatype is not XSD QName - no processor should be exposing attributes --
14:20:14 RM: all just strings, not QNames
14:20:44 SP: reviewed spec for "namespace" in role document EXCEPT for references section itself
14:20:56 SM: good catch
14:21:18 SP: in clear - for time being - for everything they say due to misinterpretation
14:22:13 SM: if not vocabulary namespace what to call it?
14:22:18 SP: just "vocabulary"
14:22:46 RM: does it need a qualifier? vocabularies are often defined in element and attribute names and these are about values - more the RDF ontology
14:23:05 RM: grouping of related RDF concepts that has a label associated with it
14:23:11 SM: "taxonomy"
14:23:20 RM: XML Vocabularies will be quite different
14:23:28 SM: good point
14:23:39 RM: people think of language definition as vocabulary
14:24:10 SM: XML Vocabulary could be misleading, but use "vocabulary" throughout RDFa
14:24:22 RM: in Introduction: "set of values with certain semantics..."
14:24:37 SM: agree - intro needs update
14:24:59 SM: how to annotate vocab document in RDF to show what is rel and what is ref
14:25:10 SM: if just big bag of terms, what is relevant where?
14:25:22 SP: sections in vocab itself, but should mechanize?
14:25:37 SM: document is RDFa annotated, but don't know how to categorize stuff
14:25:43 SP: Role DTD
14:25:49 RM: ontology does create structure
14:25:57 SM: can map ontology into RDFa
14:26:16 SP: doctype says "Transitional"
14:27:26 SM: Appendix C of Role Module - example RDF Role ontology - could lift something from that
14:27:45 trackbot, status?
14:27:45 This channel is not configured
14:28:02 RM: why would anyone be interested in what is in section C?
14:28:15 SM: wanted to include best practices document to provide a role vocabulary
14:28:29 RM: defining how to create additional roles, right?
14:28:30 SM: yes
14:28:34 RM: but we didn't
14:28:39 SM: RDFa is mapped to this
14:28:46 SM: if not, could be
14:29:18 SP: in example, values of rdf:resource is using a CURIE
14:29:30 rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="wairole:region"
14:29:35 s/section C/appendix C
14:29:55 SM: look at top - DTD that defines entities, but doesn't work because don't get expanded
14:30:08 SP: should be &role
14:30:19 SM: DTD should control processing
14:30:42 SM: look at first RDF element - declares namespace, using CURIEs
14:31:10 RM: perhaps should get rid of it
14:31:55 GJR: used to be similar extention example in ARIA -- have to check latest ED
14:32:03 Should be rdf:resource="&wairole;region"etc
14:32:12 s/etc/ etc/
14:32:26 SM: Roland, you think we should remove example
14:32:30 SM: objections?
14:32:32 TH: no
14:32:35 RM: no
14:32:38 SP: no
14:32:39 GJR: no
14:32:56 http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#roles
14:33:14 http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#host_general
14:33:19 http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#host_general_role
14:33:43 SM: delete sentence and ARIA role definitions, because already in our vocab
14:33:56 GJR: wearing PF hat have no objection to that
14:34:06 SM: removing Appendix C
14:34:19 RM: if in, should be working version
14:34:26 http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#m12n
14:34:41 http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#a_impl_roles
14:35:08 GJR: think that it is covered by ARIA still
14:35:32 RM: dealt with all issues relating to role?
14:35:48 SP: another CURIE review has come in
14:35:52 SM: need to add to tracker
14:36:16 RM: response to comments from XML CG -- Shane?
14:36:57 ACTION: Shane - reply to XML CG comments after review by group on list
14:36:57 Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
14:37:06 SM: Role Vocabularies in Introduction?
14:37:31 RM: what vocabulary is about - taxonomy, etc. something that sets the tone - marking as unfamiliar territory
14:37:41 SM: place to put that is paragraph 1 of section 3
14:37:42 RM: ok
14:38:02 RM: role about attribute - proper place to talk about defined values
14:38:49 SP: should we get someone from RDFa TF to provide us with guidance so vocab document is also an OWL schema/taxonomy - extract same triples as if OWL
14:38:57 SP: RDF Schemas, as well
14:39:07 RM: RDF Schema worthwhile investigating
14:39:35 SM: had RDFa TF review this document, and they blessed it; question is how to scope values for machine processor knows what is associated with what
14:39:47 SM: [has a brainstorm]
14:40:06 TOPIC: XHTML 1.2
14:40:20 how about the term "XHTML Terminology Vocabulary"
14:40:27 RM: discussed at last f2f -- SP has action item; would be useful to have for TPAC F2F
14:40:31 SP: include XForms?
14:40:33 SM: no
14:40:47 RDFa/XHTML 1.1/Access/Role
14:41:01 RM: 1.1 plus extra bits (Role, CURIE, Access, RDFa)
14:41:08 SP: no XML Events and no XForms
14:41:30 SP: diff between 1.2 and 2.0 is new structuring stuff, general attributes (href and src) and XML Events and XForms
14:41:44 RM: @target discussion still not resolved
14:41:57 GJR: same for @lang - still no assistive tech that cues off of xml:lang
14:42:12 RM: extracting from XHTML2 putting into 1.2
14:42:37 TH: compromise: go along with @target if drop @role
14:42:46 RM: please make formal proposal
14:42:55