IRC log of rdfa on 2009-05-14
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:48:14 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
- 14:48:14 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc
- 14:48:28 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #rdfa
- 14:48:33 [msporny]
- zakim, this will be rdfa
- 14:48:33 [Zakim]
- ok, msporny; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
- 14:48:42 [msporny]
- Scribe: Manu_Sporny
- 14:48:47 [msporny]
- scribenick: msporny
- 14:48:55 [msporny]
- Meeting: RDF in XHTML Task Force
- 14:49:01 [msporny]
- Chair: Ben_Adida
- 14:49:27 [msporny]
- Present: Manu_Sporny, Shane_McCarron, Steven_Pemberton, Ben_Adida, Ralph_Swick
- 14:49:39 [msporny]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 14:49:44 [msporny]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 14:49:44 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-minutes.html msporny
- 14:50:15 [msporny]
- previous: http://www.w3.org/2009/04/30-rdfa-minutes.html
- 14:50:24 [msporny]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0087.html
- 14:50:29 [msporny]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 14:50:29 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-minutes.html msporny
- 15:01:23 [benadida]
- benadida has joined #rdfa
- 15:01:28 [benadida]
- hey folks, running 2-3 minutes late
- 15:02:04 [Zakim]
- SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
- 15:02:11 [Zakim]
- +??P10
- 15:02:18 [msporny]
- zakim, I am ??P10
- 15:02:18 [Zakim]
- +msporny; got it
- 15:02:43 [Steven]
- zakim, dial steven-617
- 15:02:43 [Zakim]
- ok, Steven; the call is being made
- 15:02:44 [Zakim]
- +Steven
- 15:02:54 [Zakim]
- +McCarron
- 15:02:57 [Zakim]
- +Ralph
- 15:03:07 [ShaneM]
- zakim, McCarron is ShaneM
- 15:03:07 [Zakim]
- +ShaneM; got it
- 15:03:16 [Steven]
- zakim, who is here?
- 15:03:29 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see msporny, Steven, ShaneM, Ralph
- 15:03:39 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see benadida, Zakim, RRSAgent, msporny, ShaneM, Steven
- 15:04:26 [Zakim]
- +Ben_Adida
- 15:08:14 [msporny]
- Topic: Action Items
- 15:08:31 [msporny]
- http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-profiles -- RDFa Profiles
- 15:08:40 [msporny]
- ACTION: Manu to define a set of requirements and questions for extending CURIEs in an external document on the RDFa wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
- 15:08:41 [msporny]
- -- done
- 15:08:47 [msporny]
- ACTION: Manu to talk with Ben about recent WHATWG use case activity. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
- 15:08:51 [msporny]
- -- done
- 15:09:01 [msporny]
- 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]
- 15:09:30 [msporny]
- benadida: This may be more important now
- 15:09:41 [msporny]
- benadida: Having a tool that can guide you if you do the wrong thing would be very useful.
- 15:10:12 [msporny]
- benadida: Because of the Google announcement this is important.
- 15:10:15 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:10:21 [msporny]
- 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]
- 15:10:23 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:10:29 [msporny]
- ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
- 15:10:32 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:10:58 [msporny]
- benadida: We should make some simple wizards for Google available.
- 15:11:09 [msporny]
- benadida: should create an open/fun projects for the RDFa community
- 15:11:19 [msporny]
- Ralph: Suggestions for undergraduate paper topics would be good.
- 15:11:30 [msporny]
- ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
- 15:11:32 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:11:36 [msporny]
- ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
- 15:11:38 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:11:48 [msporny]
- ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
- 15:11:52 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:12:18 [msporny]
- Steven: Microformats celebrating Google announcement.
- 15:12:31 [msporny]
- Steven: Bay area meetup dinner to celebrate.
- 15:12:51 [msporny]
- benadida: Good for them
- 15:12:55 [msporny]
- ACTION: Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML namespace [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
- 15:12:58 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:13:03 [msporny]
- ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
- 15:13:23 [msporny]
- -- continues
- 15:13:34 [msporny]
- Steven: RSS is an RDF format, right?
- 15:13:53 [msporny]
- benadida: Yeah, but it has an RDF Sequence/Bag in there - it's a bit wierd/nasty to implement
- 15:14:21 [msporny]
- Steven: If we markup each item, that would strike Ralph's action item.
- 15:14:27 [msporny]
- ShaneM: We already do this.
- 15:15:39 [msporny]
- *Collective celebratory cheers on Google support for RDFa*
- 15:16:00 [msporny]
- benadida: Thanks a bunch to the group and Ralph for his hard work in making that happen.
- 15:20:43 [msporny]
- benadida: We should extend as much support for Google as possible in the coming weeks/months.
- 15:23:34 [ShaneM]
- As an aside - we are updating aptest.com right now to use RDFa and the google annotations for some of our popular pages.
- 15:34:25 [benadida]
- interesting discussion: http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/05/12/Microdata
- 15:35:38 [msporny]
- Topic: Future of RDFa - XG
- 15:35:58 [msporny]
- benadida: Does this make sense?
- 15:36:07 [msporny]
- benadida: What's the point of the incubator group?
- 15:36:20 [msporny]
- Ralph: In this context, the incubator group is somewhere between an IG and a WG.
- 15:36:33 [msporny]
- Ralph: and IG can produce a Note.
- 15:36:40 [msporny]
- benadida: To update the REC we need to be a WG?
- 15:36:54 [msporny]
- benadida: If we want to be able to update RDFa, we need to be a WG?
- 15:36:56 [msporny]
- Ralph: Yes.
- 15:37:04 [msporny]
- benadida: That takes a while to become a WG?
- 15:37:15 [msporny]
- Steven: The REC isn't a product of this task force anyway.
- 15:37:38 [msporny]
- Steven: We already have a WG that support the spec - Semantic Deployment WG, and XHTML2 WG.
- 15:38:02 [msporny]
- Ralph: SWD WG goes away soon, probably don't want to do XHTML2 WG.
- 15:38:21 [msporny]
- Ralph: It would be too much overhead in HTML WG to do this right now.
- 15:38:42 [msporny]
- Ralph: Goal is to produce a proposal specification.
- 15:39:00 [msporny]
- Ralph: The next step after that would be to produce a REC.
- 15:39:38 [msporny]
- Ralph: The best path is an IG to get RDFa in HTML proposed specification completed.
- 15:40:35 [msporny]
- Ralph: The IG would get all of the resources that we currently get in RDFa TF to keep minutes, telecon time, etc.
- 15:40:59 [msporny]
- Ralph: If SWIG was being run as a group that holds meetings, but they don't run that way, so it would be a bad fit.
- 15:41:25 [msporny]
- Ralph: We want to meet and get the technical work done - IG Note would be the best mechanism to do that.
- 15:41:39 [msporny]
- benadida: But we do want this to become a REC.
- 15:41:59 [msporny]
- Ralph: Yes, so the charter for the IG should be clear that the next step is to get the proposals to REC.
- 15:42:26 [msporny]
- benadida: I think the XG makes sense.
- 15:42:36 [msporny]
- Ralph: We need 3 W3C members sponsoring it.
- 15:44:11 [msporny]
- +1 for XG
- 15:45:25 [msporny]
- Ralph: HTML WG charter lists extension mechanism that allows RDF to be done - that is RDFa.
- 15:45:48 [msporny]
- benadida: Ralph can you talk about this at W3C?
- 15:45:52 [msporny]
- Ralph: yes.
- 15:46:09 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has left #rdfa
- 15:46:14 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has joined #rdfa
- 15:46:21 [msporny]
- Ralph: We could also do it as a Task Force in SWIG, but it may not be a good fit.
- 15:47:40 [msporny]
- Topic: RDFa in HTML
- 15:47:45 [msporny]
- benadida: Shane?
- 15:48:00 [msporny]
- ShaneM: I put together a draft so that we had something to poke at.
- 15:48:09 [msporny]
- ShaneM: URL is in the IRC channel.
- 15:48:16 [msporny]
- ShaneM: A couple of issues that may be good to review.
- 15:48:50 [msporny]
- ShaneM: We could say that RDFa just works in HTML4 (because it does).
- 15:49:15 [msporny]
- ShaneM: The first issue is about announcement - How does a conforming RDFa processor know that the document contains RDFa?
- 15:49:40 [msporny]
- ShaneM: I talked with Manu a bit about this - DOCTYPE, or @version attribute, or @profile attribute with a specific value.
- 15:50:03 [msporny]
- Ralph: You actually don't need to do any of those things because of GRDDL...
- 15:50:15 [msporny]
- ShaneM: I don't think the GRDDL spec does what we want.
- 15:50:22 [msporny]
- benadida: It works for XML documents, not for HTML4.
- 15:50:39 [msporny]
- ShaneM: No requirement that there should be a DOCTYPE, but it may be okay for us to say that there should be a DOCTYPE.
- 15:51:22 [msporny]
- ShaneM: We should have pushed for DOCTYPE in XHTML1.1+RDFa more - that's how most user agents figure out which standards mode to enter.
- 15:51:45 [msporny]
- ShaneM: So, we might want to think about requring a DOCTYPE
- 15:52:02 [msporny]
- benadida: We should review that and in fairly short order, send it to the HTML WG.
- 15:52:36 [msporny]
- benadida: We should have HTML4 examples with RDFa in them.
- 15:53:08 [msporny]
- benadida: This document looks like it's taking the right approach.
- 15:53:20 [Ralph]
- Ralph has joined #rdfa
- 15:53:29 [msporny]
- benadida: We should have a complete example, top to bottom.
- 15:53:48 [msporny]
- ShaneM: Didn't want to duplicate too much.
- 15:53:56 [msporny]
- ShaneM: Also, there is an issue about XML Literals.
- 15:54:11 [ShaneM]
- XMLLiterals: If the object of a triple would be an XMLLiteral, but the resulting object would not be well-formed [XML], then the processor MUST NOT generate the triple.
- 15:56:17 [msporny]
- Manu: We don't require this in the RDFa spec.
- 15:56:35 [msporny]
- ShaneM: No, it's implied since it is in XHTML spec.
- 15:56:54 [msporny]
- Manu: Well it's a problem in HTML4.
- 15:57:33 [msporny]
- Ralph: We don't say what processors should do.
- 15:57:47 [msporny]
- ShaneM: It's up to the processor to make it well-formed.
- 15:57:59 [msporny]
- Steven: This would be an interoperability issue...
- 15:58:08 [msporny]
- ShaneM: One processor may generate it, another may not.
- 15:58:23 [msporny]
- ShaneM: We could say the input must be well-formed... or the output must be well-formed... or
- 15:58:38 [msporny]
- ShaneM: When the input is well formed, you can output an XML Literal, whent he input is not well-formed, you must output something else.
- 15:59:22 [msporny]
- benadida: To do RDFa, you have to have a DOM-based model.
- 15:59:27 [msporny]
- benadida: We assume a tree of nodes.
- 15:59:31 [msporny]
- ShaneM: I disagree.
- 16:00:23 [msporny]
- benadida: The fact that it is a tree, at some point you have some child nodes.
- 16:00:43 [msporny]
- benadida: You're going down some tree structure... you must have some well-formed representation of your child nodes. Not well-formed in the XML sense.
- 16:00:53 [msporny]
- ShaneM: The processing model isn't written that way.
- 16:01:11 [msporny]
- ShaneM: It says that the next thing coming is an XML Literal.
- 16:01:48 [msporny]
- benadida: Maybe I'm biased by my implementation?
- 16:02:08 [msporny]
- ShaneM: If you have a tree, you can generate well-formed output (by definition).
- 16:02:28 [msporny]
- Steven: HTML processors process HTML as a tree - the output is a serialization of that tree.
- 16:02:50 [msporny]
- ShaneM: We're talking about extracting triples from HTML...
- 16:03:22 [msporny]
- Ralph: Sounds like you're objective would be to state that "you should only generate well-formed XML literals".
- 16:03:33 [msporny]
- benadida: When you put it that way, I don't like it.
- 16:04:07 [msporny]
- ShaneM: Also, this doesn't have anything to do with HTML5 - it has to do with HTML4.
- 16:04:18 [msporny]
- benadida: What's the other option? To not generate the triple?
- 16:04:27 [msporny]
- ShaneM: In terms of inter-operability - that is /the/ option.
- 16:04:34 [msporny]
- ShaneM: Every processor should generate the same triples.
- 16:04:44 [Ralph]
- s/you're/your
- 16:04:46 [msporny]
- ShaneM: If the input is not well-formed, then don't generate the triple.
- 16:04:55 [msporny]
- thanks ralph :)
- 16:05:20 [Ralph]
- s/only generate well-formed XML literals"./only generate well-formed XML literals and may do that even if the input is not well-formed".".
- 16:06:07 [msporny]
- ShaneM: If you're able to make the input well-formed, then do so.
- 16:06:16 [msporny]
- Ralph: Not comfortable with that approach.
- 16:06:32 [msporny]
- Ralph: We should depend on adopting the solutions that give us the greatest amount of interoperability.
- 16:06:50 [msporny]
- benadida: Is there anything close to an "HTMLLiteral"?
- 16:07:15 [msporny]
- ShaneM: We could say "if the input is well-formed, then you can produce an XML Literal"
- 16:07:26 [msporny]
- ShaneM: If the input is not well-formed, output an RDF string.
- 16:07:42 [msporny]
- benadida: as long as we can round-trip it.
- 16:07:54 [msporny]
- Ralph: That choice is attractive, except for one thing.
- 16:08:07 [msporny]
- Ralph: There may be an algorithm for XML serialization of tag soup.
- 16:08:22 [msporny]
- Ralph: If we require that non-well-formed things be anything, it makes it difficult to adopt that algorithm in the future.
- 16:08:32 [msporny]
- Ralph: I'd rather not generate the triples today.
- 16:08:44 [msporny]
- Steven: gotta go
- 16:08:55 [msporny]
- benadida: The options we have on the table
- 16:09:01 [msporny]
- benadida: 1) Don't generate the triple.
- 16:09:07 [msporny]
- benadida: 2) Find an XML Serialization for it.
- 16:09:16 [msporny]
- 3) If it's not well-formed, make it an RDF escaped string.
- 16:09:33 [msporny]
- s/3) If it's not well-formed, make it an RDF escaped string./Ben: 3) If it's not well-formed, make it an RDF escaped string./
- 16:09:48 [msporny]
- Ralph: Some people will treat strings equivalent to XML Literals.
- 16:10:11 [msporny]
- Ralph: The real-world doesn't like it when you punt on first-error... browsers don't punt on first-error.
- 16:10:20 [msporny]
- Ralph: People get unhappy when their page doesn't display.
- 16:10:36 [msporny]
- benadida: Maybe this is a way to coerce people into writing well-formed XML :) (joke)
- 16:10:56 [msporny]
- Ralph: We should make it easier for them to write the correct markup.
- 16:11:09 [msporny]
- ShaneM: This is a very niche thing...
- 16:11:39 [msporny]
- ShaneM: The data that gets encoded isn't a web page, it's a title of a book that has markup.
- 16:12:59 [msporny]
- benadida: It is a niche case.
- 16:13:25 [benadida]
- <span property="dc:title" datatype="">foo<em>bar</span>
- 16:13:36 [benadida]
- foobar
- 16:14:30 [benadida]
- <span property="dc:title" datatype="">foo<br>bar</span>
- 16:14:34 [Zakim]
- -Steven
- 16:15:35 [Ralph]
- alternatively "foo<br>bar"
- 16:16:55 [Ralph]
- Ben: no, if the author used @datatype="" they clearly meant the embedded tag to be dropped
- 16:16:59 [Ralph]
- Ralph: OK, I see your reasoning
- 16:17:21 [benadida]
- <br> --> <br />
- 16:17:35 [msporny]
- benadida: that would be an XML Literal if you did the transform.
- 16:18:03 [msporny]
- ShaneM: If the author wants to preserve content that is not well-formed, there is an alternative.
- 16:18:25 [msporny]
- benadida: if it's anything other than XMLLiteral, we strip the non-text nodes for everything other than XMLLiteral.
- 16:18:35 [ShaneM]
- If the object of a triple would be an XMLLiteral, but the input to the processor is not well-formed [XML], then the processor MUST NOT generate the triple.
- 16:18:38 [msporny]
- benadida: The only option I think I support is no triple generation.
- 16:19:22 [msporny]
- Ralph: you can force a triple to be generated with mal-formed input.
- 16:19:33 [msporny]
- benadida: Generally, we don't support non-well-formed markup in a literal.
- 16:19:56 [msporny]
- benadida: We should review the document that Shane's put together. Send comments on the list ASAP.
- 16:20:47 [msporny]
- Ralph: Maybe the IG should work on this document. Does it make a difference if we publish an early version of the document.
- 16:20:54 [msporny]
- Ralph: I don't think it makes a difference.
- 16:21:00 [msporny]
- benadida: Okay, discuss on the mailing list.
- 16:22:41 [msporny]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:22:41 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-minutes.html msporny
- 16:22:58 [msporny]
- Regrets: Mark_Birbeck, Michael_Hausenblas
- 16:23:02 [msporny]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:23:02 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-minutes.html msporny
- 16:23:43 [Zakim]
- -ShaneM
- 16:23:48 [Zakim]
- -msporny
- 16:23:49 [Zakim]
- -Ralph
- 16:23:51 [Zakim]
- -Ben_Adida
- 16:23:52 [Zakim]
- SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
- 16:23:54 [Zakim]
- Attendees were msporny, Steven, Ralph, ShaneM, Ben_Adida
- 16:23:59 [Ralph]
- zakim, bye
- 16:23:59 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #rdfa
- 16:26:22 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has left #rdfa
- 16:30:30 [Ralph]
- [I'm fixing several references to IG in the scribing of my comments, as I was not on-line to correct in realtime.]
- 16:34:08 [Ralph]
- rrsagent, bye
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- I see 10 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-actions.rdf :
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Manu to define a set of requirements and questions for extending CURIEs in an external document on the RDFa wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [1]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-08-40
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Manu to talk with Ben about recent WHATWG use case activity. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action10] [2]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-08-47
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [3]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-09-01
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [4]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-10-21
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [5]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-10-29
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [6]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-11-30
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13] [7]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-11-36
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] [8]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-11-48
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML namespace [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01] [9]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-12-55
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] [10]
- 16:34:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-irc#T15-13-03