IRC log of rdfa on 2009-01-22
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:54:36 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
- 15:54:36 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/22-rdfa-irc
- 15:54:41 [Ralph]
- zakim, this will be rdfa
- 15:54:41 [Zakim]
- ok, Ralph; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
- 15:55:11 [Ralph]
- Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML Task Force
- 15:55:14 [Ralph]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jan/0088.html
- 15:55:18 [Ralph]
- Chair: Manu
- 15:55:39 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html previous 2009-01-08
- 15:55:47 [Ralph]
- rrsagent, please make record public
- 15:56:05 [Ralph]
- Regrets: Ben
- 15:56:40 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has joined #rdfa
- 15:57:28 [msporny]
- Is there any way we can remove this "lisa@ubaccess.com" person from RDFa - her autoresponder is spamming anybody that posts to the RDFa TF mailing list
- 15:58:19 [Ralph]
- there's always a way ...
- 15:58:23 [msporny]
- :)
- 15:59:10 [msporny]
- heh
- 15:59:13 [Ralph]
- removed.
- 15:59:18 [msporny]
- thanks!
- 15:59:38 [Zakim]
- SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
- 15:59:44 [Zakim]
- +ShaneM
- 16:00:08 [Zakim]
- +Ralph
- 16:00:37 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 16:00:44 [msporny]
- zakim, I am +IPcaller
- 16:00:49 [Zakim]
- sorry, msporny, I do not see a party named '+IPcaller'
- 16:00:50 [msporny]
- zakim, I am +[IPcaller]
- 16:00:59 [Zakim]
- sorry, msporny, I do not see a party named '+[IPcaller]'
- 16:01:15 [msporny]
- zakim, I am [IPcaller]
- 16:01:19 [Zakim]
- ok, msporny, I now associate you with [IPcaller]
- 16:03:09 [markbirbeck]
- markbirbeck has joined #rdfa
- 16:03:20 [Ralph]
- Topic: Action Review
- 16:03:28 [Ralph]
- scribenick: ralph
- 16:03:39 [markbirbeck]
- zakim, code?
- 16:03:56 [Zakim]
- the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
- 16:04:03 [Ralph]
- [CONTINUES] ACTION: fix the .htaccess for the XHTML namespace [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
- 16:04:12 [Ralph]
- [CONTINUES] ACTION: Manu to create TC to test @resource="[]" does not set object based on TC 123. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
- 16:04:27 [Ralph]
- [DONE] ACTION: Manu to look at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Dec/0037.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
- 16:04:37 [Ralph]
- Manu: first part of the comment was a misunderstanding of the test
- 16:04:46 [Ralph]
- ... I explained how we do negative results in the test suite
- 16:05:10 [Ralph]
- ... second part of the comment came from use of old saxon parser
- 16:05:54 [Ralph]
- ... there is a choice of which RFC to follow and they result in different xpath URIs
- 16:06:23 [Ralph]
- ... it's a strange issue with XSLT-based implementations
- 16:06:34 [Ralph]
- Shane: does the XSLT spec reference the wrong thing?
- 16:06:46 [Ralph]
- Manu: no, it gives a choice of RFCs
- 16:06:56 [Ralph]
- ... I need to check the XSLT spec more closely
- 16:07:22 [Ralph]
- ... Sergey said he'd talked with the implementor and there isn't yet an updated implementation that he could use
- 16:07:43 [msporny]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jan/0092.html
- 16:08:09 [Ralph]
- ^Re: Problematic test cases in the RDFa test suite [Manu 2009-01-22]
- 16:08:16 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: 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]
- 16:08:23 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: 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]
- 16:08:35 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: 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]
- 16:08:47 [Ralph]
- [DONE] ACTION: Manu talk with Jamie McCarthy about an AskSlashdot piece [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action04]
- 16:08:55 [Ralph]
- Manu: I've written to Jamie
- 16:09:11 [Ralph]
- ... he hasn't responded, so I propose to close it for now
- 16:09:49 [Ralph]
- s/[DONE] ACTION: Manu to look/[CONTINUES] ACTION: Manu to look/
- 16:10:04 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases for Ivan. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
- 16:10:17 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Manu write the perl code for Slashdot. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
- 16:10:29 [Ralph]
- Manu: I've spent some time on this and it looks like a lot of work
- 16:10:38 [Ralph]
- ... Slashdot doesn't generate clean HTML4
- 16:10:44 [Zakim]
- +markbirbeck
- 16:10:56 [markbirbeck]
- sorry I'm late....!
- 16:10:56 [Ralph]
- ... I don't want to have to fix all their templates; it will be a large patch that they may not accept
- 16:11:15 [Ralph]
- ... I won't have the time to generate this massive patch
- 16:11:32 [Ralph]
- ... would need more buy-in from Slashdot
- 16:11:42 [Ralph]
- ... I think I've done as much as I can
- 16:12:04 [Ralph]
- s/[PENDING]/[WITHDRAWN]
- 16:12:20 [Ralph]
- Shane: Slashdot is an interesting community but it doesn't really affect the broader community
- 16:12:38 [Ralph]
- ... Drupal on the other hand would affect a broader community and makes more sense for our attention
- 16:12:47 [Ralph]
- Manu: Wordpress would be another likely candidate
- 16:13:04 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
- 16:13:22 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Mark to review reasoning on setting explicit about="" on HEAD and BODY [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/12/18-rdfa-irc]
- 16:13:26 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
- 16:13:36 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
- 16:13:44 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
- 16:13:49 [Ralph]
- [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
- 16:14:14 [Ralph]
- Topic: Feedback on RDFa from WHATWG/HTML5
- 16:14:45 [Ralph]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jan/0075.html Discussion with Ian and Henri about HTML5+RDFa (part 1/2) [Manu 2009-01-19]
- 16:15:10 [Ralph]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jan/0076.html Discussion with Ian and Henri about HTML5+RDFa (part 2/2) [Manu 2009-01-19]
- 16:15:18 [Ralph]
- Manu: there was less opposition than I'd expected
- 16:15:26 [Ralph]
- ... but demonstrated use cases are important
- 16:15:43 [Ralph]
- ... may need to assume less familiarity with RDF when describing the use cases
- 16:17:13 [Ralph]
- ... details of RDFa aren't familiar to most folk I've talked with; CURIE seemed to trigger most concerns
- 16:17:41 [Ralph]
- ... Henri Sivonen said he'd be willing to accept RDFa if it dropped CURIEs
- 16:18:05 [Ralph]
- ... other concerns about @rel and @rev unrelated to RDFa
- 16:18:08 [markbirbeck]
- http://webbackplane.com/mark-birbeck/blog/2009/01/rdfa-means-extensibility
- 16:18:23 [Ralph]
- ... @rev historically misused so some feeling that it should be removed from HTML5
- 16:18:27 [Ralph]
- Shane: next step?
- 16:18:38 [Ralph]
- Manu: I thought I'd add "Why" to each use case
- 16:19:02 [Ralph]
- ... present the use cases with Why to WHATWG
- 16:19:13 [Ralph]
- ... Ian H said he'd take a thorough look at this
- 16:19:38 [Ralph]
- ... I have already started adding Whys to the wiki
- 16:19:59 [Ralph]
- Mark: I wrote a blog post about some of these topics
- 16:20:24 [Ralph]
- ... I mention a few bits of history, back to an event in 2004
- 16:20:45 [Ralph]
- ... crossing-over with Accessibility and device independence/content adaptation
- 16:21:01 [Ralph]
- ... I did a presentation on behalf of the XHTML WG talking about @role
- 16:21:31 [Ralph]
- ... other presenters proposed extensions to HTML for content adaptation
- 16:21:51 [Ralph]
- ... they liked the direction the XHTML WG was taking
- 16:22:16 [Ralph]
- ... these supporters haven't been writing to the HTML WG list
- 16:23:51 [Ralph]
- ... but the fundamental philosophical difference over extensibility between the two communities may be the overriding factor
- 16:24:14 [Ralph]
- Manu: we had the same discussion in Microformats about RDFa
- 16:24:37 [Ralph]
- ... some, like Toby, have moved to RDFa; not all are yet posting
- 16:24:55 [Ralph]
- ... discussion allows people to see the arguments and make up their own minds
- 16:25:10 [Ralph]
- Mark: thanks for continuing to pursue this
- 16:26:03 [Ralph]
- Manu: so I'll continue on my project to add Why to each use case and then point the HTML WG / WHATWG at this
- 16:26:40 [Ralph]
- Topic: Finalize behavior of @prefix
- 16:27:16 [Ralph]
- Manu: we've talked about splitting @prefix from the token specification mechanism
- 16:27:25 [Ralph]
- ... Ivan says he sees @prefix as an analog to @xmlns
- 16:27:47 [Ralph]
- ... Mark has suggested that where @prefix is used (HEAD or BODY) could be significant
- 16:28:14 [Ralph]
- Mark: one of the problems with the simple analog is that this forces us into the simple hierarchical model
- 16:28:30 [Ralph]
- ... a long time ago there were discussions with (Reuters?) about using RDFa
- 16:29:02 [Ralph]
- ... one of their use cases was documents, especially small ones -- consider a twitter post -- that may require lots of namespace declarations
- 16:29:11 [Ralph]
- ... would like an xinclude-like mechanism
- 16:29:24 [Ralph]
- ... there's currently no way to use xinclude for this
- 16:29:34 [Ralph]
- ... so simple analogue doesn't offer a solution
- 16:30:20 [Ralph]
- ... I suggest that people may consider documents to be like programming languages; HEAD is an initialization section
- 16:30:48 [Ralph]
- ... an alternative is to say that prefix declarations _only_ are done externally; @profile works like this
- 16:30:58 [Ralph]
- ... so the declarations apply to the entire document
- 16:31:04 [Ralph]
- Shane: with local overrides if you want
- 16:31:13 [Ralph]
- ... a hybrid of @xmlns and @prefix
- 16:31:27 [Ralph]
- Mark: but if we insist on @profile then we don't have local overrides
- 16:31:44 [Ralph]
- ... and if we say @profile is equivalent to @xmlns then we're locked-in to a strict hierarchy
- 16:31:55 [Ralph]
- Shane: I think we can divorce @prefix from this other problem
- 16:32:21 [Ralph]
- ... we could have another set of rules, independent of @prefix and @xmlns, for loading a set of declarations
- 16:32:41 [Ralph]
- Manu: I think we can separate these issues
- 16:33:10 [Ralph]
- ... if we were to permit @profile on any element, we'd get the ability to pull in from anywhere
- 16:33:37 [Ralph]
- Shane: so <head @profile> could apply to the entire document and @profile on any other element applies only locally?
- 16:33:55 [Ralph]
- Manu: makes sense to me that HEAD applies to the whole document but I haven't really thought about this deeply
- 16:34:07 [Ralph]
- Mark: I think we can make this backwards compatible
- 16:34:41 [Ralph]
- ... although @profile is not currently well-defined in HTML, it _does_ say the URI is used with the values of @rel and @rev
- 16:35:27 [Ralph]
- ... consider CSS rules; the stylesheet is loaded in the head and applies throughout the body
- 16:35:47 [Ralph]
- ... we can also consider the form of the external document; my preference is for it to be an RDFa document
- 16:36:08 [Ralph]
- ... it could be just a collection of XMLNS declarations
- 16:36:25 [Ralph]
- ... could propose that the triples loaded from @profile go into a separate graph
- 16:36:46 [Ralph]
- ... so there's the triples from the base document and a separate graph that helps you interpret the base document
- 16:37:01 [Ralph]
- ... a graph that helps you parse itself is a bit Goedel-esque :)
- 16:37:28 [Ralph]
- ... it feels to me that things that help you parse the current document should be a bit out-of-band
- 16:37:42 [Ralph]
- ... I definitely don't think <meta @rel='profile'> is a good idea
- 16:38:19 [Ralph]
- Manu: restricting ourselves to tokens and namespaces is good but bad to go beyond that
- 16:38:27 [markbirbeck]
- Ralph: <meta property="prefix" ...
- 16:38:34 [Ralph]
- ... what else do we have in RDFa that applies to the body when it appears in the head?
- 16:38:38 [Ralph]
- Shane: nothing else
- 16:38:49 [Ralph]
- ... the head section gives the properties of this document
- 16:38:58 [Ralph]
- s/Ralph:/Mark:
- 16:39:08 [Ralph]
- Shane: <title> a good example
- 16:39:23 [Ralph]
- Manu: so @prefix in the HEAD applies to the body
- 16:39:42 [Ralph]
- ... what about <html @prefix> ? would this work exactly like @xmlns?
- 16:39:44 [Ralph]
- Shane: sure
- 16:40:07 [Ralph]
- ... if either @prefix or @xmlns appears on <html> and we _also_ load a profile, what is the processing order?
- 16:40:29 [Ralph]
- Manu: I'd expect @prefix to always override an external document
- 16:40:44 [Ralph]
- ... same as @xmlns; it's a local override
- 16:40:57 [Ralph]
- ... so profile is loaded first, then you apply the prefixes
- 16:41:18 [Ralph]
- Shane: sounds logical but thinking in terms of the XML processing model you effectively have to process the document in the order you're given it
- 16:41:44 [Ralph]
- ... so how would we deal with <html prefix><head prefix= profile="> ... ?
- 16:41:51 [Ralph]
- Mark: could just mirror what CSS does
- 16:42:11 [Ralph]
- ... not necessarily right or wrong but it's a pattern people are already familiar with
- 16:42:32 [Ralph]
- Manu: we do have a precedent for saying some elements are processed before others
- 16:43:01 [Ralph]
- ... our processing rules would effectively say to load @profile first then process @prefix and @xmlns
- 16:43:37 [Ralph]
- Ralph: what if @profile appears lower in the tree?
- 16:44:04 [Ralph]
- Mark: when you have finished processing HEAD, don't undo everything you've set when you start to process BODY
- 16:44:21 [Ralph]
- ... @xmlns is all about the hierarchy but we want HEAD to be special
- 16:45:16 [Ralph]
- ... two choices; retain HEAD settings in the BODY or
- 16:45:51 [Ralph]
- ... but after finishing HEAD, when starting BODY do you go back to HTML or not?
- 16:46:21 [Ralph]
- Shane: an explicit declaration on <HTML> should not be overridden in the BODY by anything on <HEAD>
- 16:46:35 [Ralph]
- ... these rules can be discussed
- 16:46:47 [Ralph]
- ... we need to decide what's at the URI that appears in @profile?
- 16:46:51 [Ralph]
- Manu: should be an RDFa document
- 16:47:15 [Ralph]
- ... that makes the most sense; otherwise we'd be inventing another mechanism for doing the same thing RDFa already does
- 16:47:42 [Ralph]
- ... for example, you should be able to copy and paste the content of that profile document into the top of your current document and get the same result
- 16:47:55 [Ralph]
- Mark: but I think the profile declarations should go into a separate graph
- 16:48:05 [Ralph]
- Manu: that could also make sense
- 16:48:24 [Ralph]
- Shane: I would never suggest that resolving the profile URI should add triples to the document graph
- 16:48:31 [Ralph]
- ... all I want is the prefix bindings
- 16:48:44 [Ralph]
- Mark: take a look at OWL's import mechanism too
- 16:49:09 [Ralph]
- ... so a document could use owl:import if the processor allows
- 16:49:22 [Ralph]
- ... agree that the triples from a profile should be kept separate
- 16:49:31 [Ralph]
- Manu: we seem to have consensus to use @prefix
- 16:49:45 [Ralph]
- ... acts just like @xmlns except that if used on HEAD it applies to the entire document
- 16:50:05 [Ralph]
- ... remaining issue is the separator in the value of @prefix
- 16:50:17 [Ralph]
- Mark: do we need @prefix in HEAD?
- 16:50:41 [Ralph]
- ... if we agree that whatever bindings exist at the end of processing HEAD are preserved ...
- 16:51:02 [Ralph]
- ... we only need to process the profile document first
- 16:51:19 [Ralph]
- ... ah, but you could have <meta property='dc:title' prefix=
- 16:51:22 [Ralph]
- ...'>
- 16:51:40 [Ralph]
- ... but I think best practice would be to declare prefix on the html element
- 16:51:53 [Ralph]
- ... so the remaining question is about processing external documents
- 16:52:31 [Ralph]
- ... agree that @prefix on HEAD applies to the entire document but our examples should show best practice as using @prefix on <HTML>
- 16:52:48 [Ralph]
- Manu: the downside is that @prefix is then slightly different from @xmlns
- 16:53:25 [Ralph]
- Mark: and we'll also specify the value syntax for @prefix to be very different from @xmlns
- 16:53:41 [Ralph]
- ... I recommend that we _not_ explain the @prefix mechanism by reference to @xmlns
- 16:54:13 [Ralph]
- ... we're saying here's another way of declaring _prefixes_, *not* another way of declaring _namespaces_
- 16:54:35 [Ralph]
- ... if the only reason for declaring a namespace is to get a prefix for, e.g., a CURIE, @prefix is a nicer way to do this
- 16:55:11 [Ralph]
- Shane: in a separate context, someone submitted a commment noting a complaint from a validator on an xmlns declaration for XSI that was totally independent of RDFa
- 16:55:40 [Ralph]
- ... the commentor conflated namespace declaration issues with RDFa
- 16:56:01 [Ralph]
- Mark: I'd like to see this called 'token' and move further away from the xmlns area
- 16:56:17 [Ralph]
- Manu: do we have enough now to start writing some test cases?
- 16:57:22 [Ralph]
- Ralph: please create a notation for our test suite to distinguish these design tests from the approved RDFa-REC tests
- 16:57:24 [Ralph]
- Manu: sure
- 16:58:02 [Ralph]
- ... also need a way to talk about the two graphs; the document graph and the prefix binding graph
- 16:58:19 [Ralph]
- Mark: and consider whether there is a well-known identifier for this separate graph
- 16:58:24 [Ralph]
- ... should we define a name fo rit?
- 16:58:28 [Ralph]
- s/fo r/for /
- 16:58:43 [Ralph]
- Shane: I think we can just say the triples do not go into the document graph
- 16:59:04 [Ralph]
- ... we don't have to require that the triples do go into some other graph
- 16:59:17 [Ralph]
- ... e.g. some processor might not create an explicit graph
- 16:59:51 [Ralph]
- Mark: discussions of who [author, publisher, ...] adds metadata to documents
- 17:00:08 [Ralph]
- Shane: perhaps the graph could be named by the URI of the source?
- 17:00:12 [Ralph]
- Mark: yeah, something like that
- 17:01:04 [msporny]
- ACTION: Manu to create design tests for @prefix and @profile.
- 17:01:31 [Ralph]
- Manu: regrets for 5 Feb telecon
- 17:01:46 [Ralph]
- [adjourned]
- 17:01:49 [Zakim]
- -markbirbeck
- 17:01:51 [Zakim]
- -[IPcaller]
- 17:01:52 [Zakim]
- -ShaneM
- 17:01:57 [Zakim]
- -Ralph
- 17:01:59 [Zakim]
- SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
- 17:02:03 [Zakim]
- Attendees were ShaneM, Ralph, [IPcaller], markbirbeck
- 17:02:03 [msporny]
- Thanks for scribing, Ralph :)
- 17:02:05 [Ralph]
- +Manu
- 17:02:07 [Ralph]
- zakim, bye
- 17:02:14 [Ralph]
- rrsagent, please draft minutes
- 17:02:14 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/22-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
- 17:02:15 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #rdfa
- 17:03:53 [Ralph]
- rrsagent, bye
- 17:03:53 [RRSAgent]
- I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/22-rdfa-actions.rdf :
- 17:03:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Manu to create design tests for @prefix and @profile. [1]
- 17:03:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/22-rdfa-irc#T17-01-04