15:54:36 RRSAgent has joined #rdfa 15:54:36 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/22-rdfa-irc 15:54:41 zakim, this will be rdfa 15:54:41 ok, Ralph; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes 15:55:11 Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML Task Force 15:55:14 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jan/0088.html 15:55:18 Chair: Manu 15:55:39 -> http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html previous 2009-01-08 15:55:47 rrsagent, please make record public 15:56:05 Regrets: Ben 15:56:40 ShaneM has joined #rdfa 15:57:28 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 there's always a way ... 15:58:23 :) 15:59:10 heh 15:59:13 removed. 15:59:18 thanks! 15:59:38 SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started 15:59:44 +ShaneM 16:00:08 +Ralph 16:00:37 +[IPcaller] 16:00:44 zakim, I am +IPcaller 16:00:49 sorry, msporny, I do not see a party named '+IPcaller' 16:00:50 zakim, I am +[IPcaller] 16:00:59 sorry, msporny, I do not see a party named '+[IPcaller]' 16:01:15 zakim, I am [IPcaller] 16:01:19 ok, msporny, I now associate you with [IPcaller] 16:03:09 markbirbeck has joined #rdfa 16:03:20 Topic: Action Review 16:03:28 scribenick: ralph 16:03:39 zakim, code? 16:03:56 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 [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 [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 [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 Manu: first part of the comment was a misunderstanding of the test 16:04:46 ... I explained how we do negative results in the test suite 16:05:10 ... second part of the comment came from use of old saxon parser 16:05:54 ... there is a choice of which RFC to follow and they result in different xpath URIs 16:06:23 ... it's a strange issue with XSLT-based implementations 16:06:34 Shane: does the XSLT spec reference the wrong thing? 16:06:46 Manu: no, it gives a choice of RFCs 16:06:56 ... I need to check the XSLT spec more closely 16:07:22 ... Sergey said he'd talked with the implementor and there isn't yet an updated implementation that he could use 16:07:43 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jan/0092.html 16:08:09 ^Re: Problematic test cases in the RDFa test suite [Manu 2009-01-22] 16:08:16 [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 [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 [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 [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 Manu: I've written to Jamie 16:09:11 ... he hasn't responded, so I propose to close it for now 16:09:49 s/[DONE] ACTION: Manu to look/[CONTINUES] ACTION: Manu to look/ 16:10:04 [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 [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 Manu: I've spent some time on this and it looks like a lot of work 16:10:38 ... Slashdot doesn't generate clean HTML4 16:10:44 +markbirbeck 16:10:56 sorry I'm late....! 16:10:56 ... 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 ... I won't have the time to generate this massive patch 16:11:32 ... would need more buy-in from Slashdot 16:11:42 ... I think I've done as much as I can 16:12:04 s/[PENDING]/[WITHDRAWN] 16:12:20 Shane: Slashdot is an interesting community but it doesn't really affect the broader community 16:12:38 ... Drupal on the other hand would affect a broader community and makes more sense for our attention 16:12:47 Manu: Wordpress would be another likely candidate 16:13:04 [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 [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 [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 [PENDING] ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13] 16:13:44 [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 [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] 16:14:14 Topic: Feedback on RDFa from WHATWG/HTML5 16:14:45 -> 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 -> 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 Manu: there was less opposition than I'd expected 16:15:26 ... but demonstrated use cases are important 16:15:43 ... may need to assume less familiarity with RDF when describing the use cases 16:17:13 ... details of RDFa aren't familiar to most folk I've talked with; CURIE seemed to trigger most concerns 16:17:41 ... Henri Sivonen said he'd be willing to accept RDFa if it dropped CURIEs 16:18:05 ... other concerns about @rel and @rev unrelated to RDFa 16:18:08 http://webbackplane.com/mark-birbeck/blog/2009/01/rdfa-means-extensibility 16:18:23 ... @rev historically misused so some feeling that it should be removed from HTML5 16:18:27 Shane: next step? 16:18:38 Manu: I thought I'd add "Why" to each use case 16:19:02 ... present the use cases with Why to WHATWG 16:19:13 ... Ian H said he'd take a thorough look at this 16:19:38 ... I have already started adding Whys to the wiki 16:19:59 Mark: I wrote a blog post about some of these topics 16:20:24 ... I mention a few bits of history, back to an event in 2004 16:20:45 ... crossing-over with Accessibility and device independence/content adaptation 16:21:01 ... I did a presentation on behalf of the XHTML WG talking about @role 16:21:31 ... other presenters proposed extensions to HTML for content adaptation 16:21:51 ... they liked the direction the XHTML WG was taking 16:22:16 ... these supporters haven't been writing to the HTML WG list 16:23:51 ... but the fundamental philosophical difference over extensibility between the two communities may be the overriding factor 16:24:14 Manu: we had the same discussion in Microformats about RDFa 16:24:37 ... some, like Toby, have moved to RDFa; not all are yet posting 16:24:55 ... discussion allows people to see the arguments and make up their own minds 16:25:10 Mark: thanks for continuing to pursue this 16:26:03 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 Topic: Finalize behavior of @prefix 16:27:16 Manu: we've talked about splitting @prefix from the token specification mechanism 16:27:25 ... Ivan says he sees @prefix as an analog to @xmlns 16:27:47 ... Mark has suggested that where @prefix is used (HEAD or BODY) could be significant 16:28:14 Mark: one of the problems with the simple analog is that this forces us into the simple hierarchical model 16:28:30 ... a long time ago there were discussions with (Reuters?) about using RDFa 16:29:02 ... one of their use cases was documents, especially small ones -- consider a twitter post -- that may require lots of namespace declarations 16:29:11 ... would like an xinclude-like mechanism 16:29:24 ... there's currently no way to use xinclude for this 16:29:34 ... so simple analogue doesn't offer a solution 16:30:20 ... I suggest that people may consider documents to be like programming languages; HEAD is an initialization section 16:30:48 ... an alternative is to say that prefix declarations _only_ are done externally; @profile works like this 16:30:58 ... so the declarations apply to the entire document 16:31:04 Shane: with local overrides if you want 16:31:13 ... a hybrid of @xmlns and @prefix 16:31:27 Mark: but if we insist on @profile then we don't have local overrides 16:31:44 ... and if we say @profile is equivalent to @xmlns then we're locked-in to a strict hierarchy 16:31:55 Shane: I think we can divorce @prefix from this other problem 16:32:21 ... we could have another set of rules, independent of @prefix and @xmlns, for loading a set of declarations 16:32:41 Manu: I think we can separate these issues 16:33:10 ... if we were to permit @profile on any element, we'd get the ability to pull in from anywhere 16:33:37 Shane: so could apply to the entire document and @profile on any other element applies only locally? 16:33:55 Manu: makes sense to me that HEAD applies to the whole document but I haven't really thought about this deeply 16:34:07 Mark: I think we can make this backwards compatible 16:34:41 ... although @profile is not currently well-defined in HTML, it _does_ say the URI is used with the values of @rel and @rev 16:35:10 ... this implies that the profile does apply to the body as well as the head 16:35:27 ... consider CSS rules; the stylesheet is loaded in the head and applies throughout the body 16:35:47 ... we can also consider the form of the external document; my preference is for it to be an RDFa document 16:36:08 ... it could be just a collection of XMLNS declarations 16:36:25 ... could propose that the triples loaded from @profile go into a separate graph 16:36:46 ... so there's the triples from the base document and a separate graph that helps you interpret the base document 16:37:01 ... a graph that helps you parse itself is a bit Goedel-esque :) 16:37:28 ... it feels to me that things that help you parse the current document should be a bit out-of-band 16:37:42 ... I definitely don't think is a good idea 16:38:19 Manu: restricting ourselves to tokens and namespaces is good but bad to go beyond that 16:38:27 Ralph: ... what else do we have in RDFa that applies to the body when it appears in the head? 16:38:38 Shane: nothing else 16:38:49 ... the head section gives the properties of this document 16:38:58 s/Ralph:/Mark: 16:39:08 Shane: 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? 16:46:35 <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