See also: IRC log, previous 2008-11-06
Ben: I was invited to talk with Interlab (at
Lawrence Livermore) alongside some Microformat folk,
... had a lovely time
... agreement that there was a place for both RDFa and Microformats
... a range of stuff people want to express
... use microformat vcard if it does what you want, use RDFa if you need to
extend
... that audience pretty quickly saw the need to add their own extensions
<msporny> http://microformats.org/wiki/Main_Page
<msporny> http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard
Manu: Microformats is starting to markup their site in a style similar to W3C
Ben: get them to use RDFa in their specs :)
Ralph: yeah, embarass W3C into publishing RECs with RDFa by being second to do it ;)
ACTION: [DONE] Ben to add forward pointer to old task force page to point to new TF page. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
Ben: required writing a new task force page 'cause we didn't really have one
<benadida> old tf page --> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/
<benadida> new tf page --> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/
Ben: Michael had created a page, now cited from the new page, but it had too much detail for a TF home page
Manu: add a link to the wiki
ACTION: [PENDING] Ben to add public-rdfa examples to wiki and think of slightly improved top-level organization [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
ACTION: [PENDING] Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa" with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
ACTION: [DONE] Manu to add test case for empty @about inside a chain [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
Manu: see test case 120; "empty string "" is not equivalent to NULL"
ACTION: [PENDING] Jeremy to demonstrate GRDDL with XHTML/RDFa once the NS URI is set up. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action03]
ACTION: [PENDING] Manu talk with Jamie McCarthy about an AskSlashdot piece [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action04]
ACTION: [DONE] Manu to create two TCs to test fragment identifiers dropped during URI resolution against [base] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
Manu:see test cases 118; Fragment identifiers stripped from BASE and 119; Fragment identifiers resolved correctly for subjects/objects
ACTION: [PENDING] Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases for Ivan. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
ACTION: [PENDING] Manu write the perl code for Slashdot. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
ACTION: [PENDING] Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
Ben: should we look for more resources on this? some collaborators?
Mark: I volunteered for this action because I
do have an old wizard for XForms
... was originally written for a plug-in that required installation
... we have a new project; Ubiquity XForms that's an ajax library
... the wizard running in Ubiquity XForms would run on any browser
... that's what I've been planning to do
... just been swamped
Ben: I'd come across Ubiquity XForms while
searching for something else
... seems pretty cool
... perhaps I might be able to help
Mark: happy to share what I have; may be a good
way to learn XForms too
... it's not a complex wizard
... I used the FOAF RDF Schema in my old wizard, which I thought made this
more useful
<Steven> Advert for Ben - http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2003/xforms-for-html-authors.html
Ben: yes, nice to drive the whole thing from RDF
ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
ACTION: [PENDING] Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
ACTION: [PENDING] Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
ACTION: [PENDING] Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
Ben: RSS+RDFa came up at the Interlab talk
<markbirbeck> Ubiquity XForms http://ubiquity-xforms.googlecode.com/
Ben: extensibility is important
Steven: I wrote something on one of Mark's
wikis a while ago
... but it disappeared
Mark: yeah, unfortunately I lost that wiki data due to spam
Manu: there's a lot of similarity between hAtom
and SIOC
... ought to be easy to write a tool to extract the SIOC triples and rewrite
it as hAtom
... use SIOC as the base syndication format
Ben: Atom is built to be extensible
... so there's an interesting case to be made specifically for this use
case
<Steven> [1]
<Steven> <http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/2005/01/xhtml-2-as-universal-document.htm
<Steven> l>
<Steven> [2] <http://www.xforms-wiki.com/bin/view/Main/LanguageRdfAExampleRSS>
Steven: [2] is the dead link
<Steven> More on rss+RDFa - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/syndication/message/548
<msporny> TC 116: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Nov/0027.html
-> Test Case #116: Relative URLs must be resolved in resulting triples
<msporny> Title should be "XML Entities must be supported by RDFa parser"
Ralph: it's important that the MIME type of the document describing the expected results is clear. E.g. if it's XML then some re-encoding is needed
RESOLUTION: test case 116 approved
<msporny> TC 117: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Nov/0028.html
Manu: 117 is Toby Inkster's test for reserved words in @property; a negative test
Manu: any other triples that shouldn't be generated? :)
Mark: Toby's wording suggested a specific
triple shouldn't be generated
... in fact, this test should generate _no_ triples
RESOLUTION: test case 117 approved
<msporny> TC 118: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Nov/0029.html
<msporny> Description should be: "This test case should strip the fragment from [base] when generating the subject of the triple."
<msporny> That description should replace the contents of the <p> tag
Mark: I'd like to see a test with base in the
body
... the algorithm for @about="" needs to do the correct thing in both HEAD
and BODY
Manu: could add another triple in the body in 118
<msporny> <body>
<msporny> <div property="dc:contributor">Mark Birbeck</div> added this
<msporny> triple test.
<msporny> </body>
Manu: add this to 118
<msporny> ASK WHERE {
<msporny> <http://www.example.org/tc118.xhtml>
<msporny> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title>
<msporny> "Test 0118" .
<msporny> <http://www.example.org/tc118.xhtml>
<msporny> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/contributor>
<msporny> "Mark Birbeck" .
<msporny> }
..
<msporny> Corrected HTML:
<msporny> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<msporny> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML+RDFa 1.0//EN"
<msporny> "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd">
<msporny> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
<msporny> xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<msporny> <head>
<msporny> <base href="http://www.example.org/tc118.xhtml#fragment"></base>
<msporny> <title property="dc:title">Test 0118</title>
<msporny> </head>
<msporny> <body>
<msporny> <p>
<msporny> <div property="dc:contributor">Mark Birbeck</div> added this
<msporny> triple test.
<msporny> </p>
<msporny> </body>
<msporny> </html>
RESOLUTION: test case 118 approved with addition of triple in body
-> Test Case #119: Fragment identifiers resolved correctly for subjects/objects
<msporny> TC 119: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Nov/0030.html
Manu: note @about as well as @href with an
invalid fragment
... I believe per the HTML spec that the last fragment identifier is the one
that's used
Ben: how do browsers behave?
Mark: not sure you can rely on the browser behavior here
Ralph: I recommend that the test case cite the part of the HTML spec you're relying on for the "#invalid#manu" resolution
Mark: I have a URI test suite that I'd built
out of frustration a while ago
... I believe I have an RFC-faithful implementation
<ShaneM> I get this: <http://www.example.org/tc119.xhtml#tc-119> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/contributor> <http://www.example.org/tc119.xhtml#invalid%23manu>
Mark: and my implementation retains everything
after the first '#'
... the first '#' indicates "from here on you have a fragment identifier"
Shane: I agree with Mark
... as does my implementation
<markbirbeck> http://ubiquity-backplane.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/_unit-tests/main.html
Shane: using a standard perl URI library,
everything after the first embedded '#' is URI-encoded
... kind of surprising; I didn't expect this
<markbirbeck> This is a test suite that uses all of the examples in the RFC.
Mark: the re-encoding isn't wrong
Ben: we need to be sure about the URI spec before we approve 119
<msporny> TC 120: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Nov/0031.html
-> Test Case #120: empty string "" is not equivalent to NULL
RESOLUTION: test 120 approved
<ShaneM> email said: Step 7 and 9 create RDF triples using the [new subject] (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#T_new_subject) I assume these create statements are honored if the [new subject] is not null (same condition as on step 6).
Mark: the reported bug isn't quite correct but
he did spot something
... the question asked if there ought to be a guard against not having a new
subject in other steps
... but in fact the guard isn't needed in step 6 either
Shane: by the time you get to step 6 you will have a new subject
Mark: the step Johan is specifically referring
to mentions @typeof, which will always be the case
... the current guard is not at all necessary
Ralph: not harmful though?
Mark: right, I'd remove it in an errata just so it doesn't confuse anyone else
Shane: let's add it to the errata document
now
... I'll update errata and reply to the commentor
ACTION: Shane to update the errata document to reflect that step 6 has extra text about a new subject - also respond to Johan who sent private mail, copying the task force. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
Ben: next meeting in 2 weeks; 4 December
Mark: I have an almost-finished blog post on relating vocabularies; will finish that for discussion in 2 weeks
Ben: also look at @prefix writeup in the wiki
Mark: [rethinking test 119] I'm now thinking a
fragment cannot contain '#'
... though '?' and '/' are allowed back in fragment IDs
... the reader should stop reading on the second '#'
... that's my interpretation now
[adjourned]