01:30:05 <rubys1> rubys1 has left #html-wg
01:39:01 <inimino> inimino has joined #html-wg
01:54:29 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #html-wg
02:53:03 <karl> karl has joined #html-wg
06:23:22 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #html-wg
06:41:15 <karl> karl has joined #html-wg
07:23:51 <DanC> DanC has joined #html-wg
07:45:22 <myakura> myakura has joined #html-wg
09:35:23 <ROBOd> ROBOd has joined #html-wg
09:49:25 <gavin_> gavin_ has joined #html-wg
10:06:59 <annevk> annevk has joined #html-wg
10:39:51 <maddiin> maddiin has joined #html-wg
11:13:26 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #html-wg
12:48:00 <Sander> Sander has joined #html-wg
13:09:15 <gavin_> gavin_ has joined #html-wg
13:31:01 <maddiin> maddiin has joined #html-wg
13:34:52 <asbjornu> asbjornu has left #html-wg
14:34:11 <asbjornu> asbjornu has joined #html-wg
14:42:38 <MikeSmith> MikeSmith has joined #html-wg
15:24:53 <tH> tH has joined #html-wg
15:26:14 <karl> >I suggest changing RDFa to use full IRIs instead of CURIEs. Then, suggest making it a conformance requirement for rel in both text/html and application/xhtml+xml that a rel token MUST NOT contain a colon or MUST be an absolute IRI and MUST NOT start with the string "http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/". Authors SHOULD NOT mint relation IRIs that differ only in case.
15:26:30 <karl> http://www.w3.org/mid/EFD8164E-31AA-4BD7-8127-F5E0E434DB32@iki.fi
15:27:10 <hsivonen> karl: the use of colon would be the disambiguator between full-URI rel tokens and tokens that need "http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/" prepended to them for RDF processing
15:27:39 <hsivonen> karl: note the "or" in there
15:27:49 <karl> yes I have seen the or
15:28:30 <karl> are you referring to the possible conflicts with future schemes?
15:29:02 <hsivonen> karl: I'm saying that if a token doesn't have a colon, it's a traditional-style token
15:29:33 <hsivonen> karl: and if it has one, it's must be a URI (if it isn't, tough luck for anyone trying to process such a token as an URI)
15:29:49 <karl> but if you say ":" is forbidden, you suddenly give magic to ":" which is not desirable either
15:30:09 <hsivonen> no, I say, either must not have a colon or must be a full IRI
15:30:19 <karl> understood that
15:30:33 <hsivonen> that is, strings with colons but that aren't full IRIs would be authoring errors
15:31:01 <hsivonen> karl: this is the same trick that XForms inputmode adopted
15:31:03 <karl> still it gives magic to ":", because I see developers jumping on the "oh there is a :, this is a URI" in their code
15:31:51 <hsivonen> karl: right. if a string with a colon isn't an IRI, you'd use whatever error handling RDF software uses when given a predicate that doesn't look like a URI
15:33:05 <karl> hmmm a lot of pages will be broken, and a lot of processing software to be rewritten… not good :/
15:33:37 <hsivonen> karl: what would the proposal break expect RDFa-in-text/html pages that have been deployed without REC backing?
15:33:41 <gsnedders> Teh @rel wars@
15:33:43 <gsnedders> *@
15:33:45 <gsnedders> *!
15:34:29 <karl> hsivonen: I can't change the past. I can try to evolve it in a better direction. 
15:34:58 <gsnedders> You can't time travel? Peh. You're no good.
15:35:07 <karl> When RDFa was in development, I asked to consider html too.
15:35:22 <gsnedders> But XHTML is the future!
15:35:24 <karl> gsnedders: memories can ;)
15:35:52 <karl> gsnedders: nope :) XHTML is present. It's a daily reality for me. :) I'm using it
15:36:14 <gsnedders> s/is the future/will replace HTML/
15:36:33 <hsivonen> karl: it seems that various people have expressed concernes about various things to the specifiers of RDFa...
15:36:46 <karl> hsivonen: the fact that RDFa processors in the "real world" (ahaha boomerang) are deployed to process tag soup served with text/html.
15:37:23 <karl> hsivonen: "various people have expressed concerns about html5." This argument type doesn't fly. 
15:37:33 <karl> hsivonen: and note that I understand it is messy
15:37:40 <gsnedders> So it lands?
15:37:50 <karl> hsivonen: and that I wish it would be better
15:37:51 <gsnedders> Or floats?
15:37:59 <hsivonen> karl: it wasn't an argument. it was an observation acknowledging what you said 
15:38:18 <karl> gsnedders: crash ;)
15:39:05 <hsivonen> karl: it's one thing to clean up past real world messes and to keep launching new ones
15:39:16 <hsivonen> s/and/and another/
15:40:25 <karl> rdfa in text/html is already part of the past. Or if you take this line, there will be a lot of things to remove from html 5 in the spirit :) variable geometry.
15:41:24 <karl> rel="dc:title" which issue do you have with this kind of value? aka which kind of breakage it introduces in deployed softwares?
15:41:39 <karl> aka does it break something?
15:41:56 <hsivonen> karl: it doesn't seem like a good collaboration model that the WG in charge of the future keeps creating more and more past for the HTML WG to deal with
15:41:59 <karl> hmmmm I see a possibility though
15:42:02 <karl> oooooh
15:42:10 <karl> urn:dc:title
15:42:18 <karl> this is a uri
15:42:22 <gsnedders> But dc:title is already deployed in large numbers
15:42:40 <hsivonen> karl: one could register a URI scheme for dc :-)
15:42:45 <karl> yes
15:42:55 <karl> good!
15:43:02 <karl> and creative commons could do 
15:43:03 <hsivonen> karl: and owl:sameAs it to the http DC URIs
15:43:08 <karl> yep yep
15:43:23 <karl> *This* is a technical solution
15:43:30 <karl> with minor modifications
15:43:55 <karl> plus it avoids long ugly uris in the markup
15:56:41 <karl> http://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/
15:56:59 <karl> Note: This is the Official IANA Registry of URN Namespaces
17:32:31 <bs> bs has joined #html-wg
18:10:33 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #html-wg
18:10:33 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/03/01-html-wg-irc
18:10:40 <Ralph> rrsagent, please make record public
18:10:56 <Ralph> Ralph has left #html-wg
18:18:33 <Lachy> Lachy has joined #html-wg
18:33:36 <Philip> karl: http://philip.html5.org/misc/most-common-rdf-namespaces.html
18:34:27 <Philip> (That's really quite ugly markup)
18:37:50 <karl> Philip: what is ugly?
18:38:17 <karl> oh cool the data. thanks. 
18:38:45 <karl> ah the uglyness of the html source :)))
18:38:52 <karl> Maybe a bit of tidy could help
18:38:53 <karl> not sure
18:38:55 <gavitron> gavitron has joined #html-wg
18:39:43 <gavitron> gavitron has left #html-wg
18:39:54 <gavitron> gavitron has joined #html-wg
18:40:00 <karl> ah interesting
18:40:10 <karl> xhtml is around the 1% cut
18:44:58 <gavitron> so how is that whole HTML5 thing going?
18:45:56 <Philip> We've pretty much given up on it
18:46:00 <Philip> We're all switching to Flash now
18:46:04 <gavitron> haha
18:46:19 <gavitron> I had no idea it was so hopeless.
18:46:28 <gavitron> All hail actionscript
18:47:57 <karl> flash is soooo 90s.
18:48:08 <karl> We moved to silverlight and Adobe Air.
18:48:54 <gavitron> I've designed an entire cloud-based OS using JavaFX
18:48:54 <gsnedders> http://backend.userland.com/RSS2# doesn't really even exist
18:48:58 <pimpbot> Title: RSS 2.0 Specification (RSS 2.0 at Harvard Law) (at backend.userland.com)
18:49:46 <gavitron> and it runs duke nukem forever..
18:50:23 <Philip> gsnedders: http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed doesn't even exist as a domain name
18:50:26 <pimpbot> Title: InfoWeb - A World Wide Web of Information (at schemas.google.com)
18:50:30 <Philip> Oh
18:50:42 <Philip> Uh, how does pimpbot resolve that URL?
18:50:45 <gsnedders> Philip: But does it appear in any spec?
18:50:56 <Philip> I very definitely get "schemas.google.com does not exist, try again"
18:51:02 <gsnedders> Me too
18:51:06 <Philip> pimpbot must be lying
18:51:07 <pimpbot> Philip: Huh?
18:51:16 <Philip> pimpbot: Stop playing dumb
18:51:17 <pimpbot> Philip: Huh?
18:54:41 <gavitron> What is the most likely end scenario for the HTML5 video codec issue?
18:54:53 <gavitron> in terms of interoperability
18:55:53 <gsnedders> All out war occurs, and the whole world dies.
18:56:12 <Philip> The most likely end scenario is that everyone will keep using Flash for videos
18:56:43 <gavitron> I see
18:57:14 <gavitron> I'll take the former.
18:57:57 <gsnedders> Or, um, I guess we have a video codec war and Flash wins.
19:03:12 <gavitron> I think there's still a chance to kill flash in mobile
19:04:10 <gsnedders> In mobile I expect MPEG-4 will succeed no matter what the spec says
19:04:26 <Philip> Based on my approximately zero knowledge of the situation, it seems unlikely that anything except H.264 will win on mobiles, because video needs dedicated decoding hardware and the hardware exists for H.264
19:04:47 <gsnedders> It is more or less the case that most devices with real web browsers have hardware-level decoding for it
19:05:05 <Philip> You're not going to send the same video content to mobiles and desktop machines anyway, so it's not much of a pain to use different codecs
19:05:23 <Philip> (You're probably not going to send the same video content to mobiles and to other slightly different mobiles either)
19:06:22 <Philip> (hence e.g. http://beebhack.wikia.com/wiki/IPlayer_TV#Comparison_Table having loads of mobile varieties)
19:06:24 <pimpbot> Title: IPlayer TV - Beebhack (at beebhack.wikia.com)
19:51:30 <xover_> xover_ has joined #html-wg
20:55:55 <gavitron> gavitron has left #html-wg
21:57:41 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #html-wg
22:11:08 <krijnh> krijnh has joined #html-wg
22:28:34 <besbes> besbes has joined #html-wg
22:36:16 <heycam> heycam has joined #html-wg
23:26:30 <karl> karl has joined #html-wg
23:27:20 <heycam> heycam has joined #html-wg
23:39:11 <MikeSmith> MikeSmith has joined #html-wg