14:56:07 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
14:56:07 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-irc
14:56:16 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfa
14:56:31 <msporny> zakim, this will be RDFa in XHTML Task Force
14:56:31 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, msporny
14:56:35 <msporny> zakim, this will be rdfa
14:56:35 <Zakim> ok, msporny; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
14:56:52 <msporny> Meeting: RDFa in XHTML Task Force
14:57:12 <msporny> Present: Manu_Sporny, Ralph_Swick
14:57:38 <msporny> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0284.html
14:57:53 <msporny> previous: http://www.w3.org/2009/05/14-rdfa-minutes.html
14:58:16 <msporny> rrsagent, make log public
14:58:23 <msporny> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:58:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html msporny
15:00:13 <Zakim> SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
15:00:20 <Zakim> +Ralph
15:00:49 <markbirbeck> on my way...
15:01:11 <Ralph> regrets+ Michael_Hausenblas
15:01:47 <Steven> Steven has joined #rdfa
15:01:53 <Steven> zakim, who is here?
15:01:53 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ralph
15:01:54 <Zakim> On IRC I see Steven, Zakim, RRSAgent, Ralph, msporny, markbirbeck
15:01:59 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
15:02:00 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
15:02:04 <Zakim> -Ralph
15:02:06 <Zakim> +Ralph
15:02:08 <Zakim> +Steven
15:03:12 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
15:03:12 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
15:03:49 <Zakim> + +0208761aaaa
15:03:50 <msporny> wierd... zakim's not letting me in...
15:03:55 <markbirbeck> zakim, i am aaaa
15:03:55 <Zakim> +markbirbeck; got it
15:04:23 <Zakim> +ShaneM
15:04:31 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
15:04:32 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:04:35 <benadida> benadida has joined #rdfa
15:04:37 <msporny> zakim, I am +IPcaller
15:04:44 <Zakim> sorry, msporny, I do not see a party named '+IPcaller'
15:04:56 <msporny> zakim, I am IPcaller
15:04:56 <Zakim> ok, msporny, I now associate you with [IPcaller]
15:05:41 <Zakim> +Ben_Adida
15:08:54 <msporny> scribe: msporny
15:09:04 <msporny> Chair: Ben_Adida, Manu_Sporny
15:09:08 <Ralph> agenda+ issue-214
15:09:10 <msporny> Ralph: I have an addition to the agenda
15:09:32 <msporny> Ralph: May not need a lot of discussion...
15:10:08 <Ralph> s/.../today
15:10:11 <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]
15:10:19 <Ralph> s/discussiontoday/discussion in today's telecon
15:10:30 <msporny> -- continues
15:10:39 <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]
15:10:47 <msporny> -- continues
15:10:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
15:11:03 <msporny> ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
15:11:06 <msporny> -- continues
15:11:17 <msporny> ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
15:11:26 <Ralph> present+ Steven_Pemberton, Mark_Birbeck, Shane_McCarron
15:11:34 <Ralph> Chair: Ben
15:12:03 <msporny> -- continues
15:12:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
15:12:54 <msporny> Ben: It would be very useful to have ways to drop in RDFa on their pages.
15:13:13 <msporny> ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
15:13:15 <msporny> -- continues
15:13:22 <msporny> I don't know if that just broke something, Ralph...
15:13:31 <msporny> ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
15:13:37 <Ralph> i/ACTION: Ben/Topic: Action Review
15:13:50 <msporny> -- continues
15:13:59 <msporny> ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minuACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]tes.html#action14]
15:14:01 <msporny> -- continues
15:14:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
15:14:27 <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]
15:15:44 <Ralph> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01 discussion
15:15:52 <msporny> -- continues
15:16:32 <msporny> ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
15:16:42 <msporny> -- continues
15:17:02 <markbirbeck> http://rdfa.info/wiki/RDFa_Recipes
15:17:47 <msporny> http://rdfa.info/wiki/Tutorials
15:18:12 <Steven> http://rdfa.info/wiki/RSS1-tutorial
15:20:30 <msporny> http://rdfa.info/wiki/Audio-tutorial
15:21:22 <Ralph> Mark: some of these tutorials look more like recipes to me
15:21:32 <Ralph> Manu: yes, I agree
15:22:19 <Ralph> Mark: I do think recipes are a great resource; lots of snippets for people to grab
15:22:51 <Ralph> Manu: could move snippets to a recipes section and link to Mark's blog
15:23:20 <Ralph> ... might be nice for the RDFa wiki to have [copies of] everything
15:24:26 <Ralph> Mark: we could create some stub pages ala Wikipedia too, to enlist community help
15:26:53 <msporny> Ralph: Not ready to accept defeat on RSS+RDFa action item.
15:26:54 <Ralph> Ralph: I'm not yet prepared to admit defeat on my RSS+RDFa action :)
15:26:56 <msporny> :)
15:27:20 <msporny> Topic: RDFa IG status update from Ralph
15:27:28 <msporny> Ralph: I said I'd talk with Ivan about an IG.
15:27:55 <msporny> Ralph: My sense of the discussion is that Ivan concurs that an XG is fine.
15:28:05 <Steven> q+
15:28:31 <msporny> Ralph: A difference between an IG and XG for what they can publish is that an XG does not publish Working Drafts, whereas an IG can.
15:28:48 <msporny> Ralph: There is no prohibition from an XG publishing something - it can publish an XG report.
15:29:00 <msporny> Ralph: It's usually in the form of a straw-man proposal.
15:29:30 <msporny> Ralph: There's no precedent for publishing multiple proposals that I can think of, but nothing should stop that from happening.
15:29:41 <msporny> Ralph: IG takes a formal proposal to AC.
15:30:07 <msporny> Steven: I'm worried that people will get the wrong idea, XG is meant to incubate and be a starter.
15:30:36 <msporny> Steven: an IG is meant to continue work... it's more process to get started and it seems to fit better with what we're doing.
15:31:04 <msporny> Steven: I don't see the AC not agreeing to IG.
15:31:41 <msporny> Ben: Yes, seems like IG would be a good way to go.
15:32:27 <msporny> Ralph: To specifically carry forward the design discussions, I'd characterize that as RDFa in HTML and that's a well-scoped task that we can give to any group.
15:32:57 <msporny> Ralph: I do think that an IG is beneficial and would be fairly easy to make happen.
15:33:00 <msporny> +1 for IG
15:33:44 <msporny> Ralph: IG expect team contact resources - which is both good and bad. Depends on if we have extra people to put on it that is interested.
15:34:11 <msporny> Ralph: I'm certainly interested, but I'm afraid that I may not have the time.
15:34:46 <msporny> Steven: I may have the time for the team contact role.
15:35:02 <msporny> Ben: Sounds like IG, even with the overhead, is the more appropriate direction.
15:35:23 <msporny> Ben: anybody else prefer XG?
15:36:16 <msporny> Steven: We should make it clear that RDFa is a W3C technology and it should get resources from W3C going forward.
15:37:07 <msporny> Manu: Where does the IG charter proposal have to come from?
15:37:47 <msporny> Ralph: usually comes from the activity lead, Ivan in this case, to W3C management, which approves and sends to AC to discuss.
15:37:54 <msporny> Ralph: Anybody can draft it.
15:38:10 <msporny> Ben: I'm happy to put some time into that... would be high on my priority list.
15:38:23 <msporny> Ben: We could do this on the wiki - draft the charter on the wiki.
15:38:26 <ShaneM> Note that our current structure continues under the XHTML 2 working group until the end of 2009.
15:38:40 <msporny> Ralph: There is a charter template that we can put on the wiki.
15:39:41 <msporny> ACTION: Ben to author wiki page with charter template for RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed.
15:39:42 <Ralph> -> http://www.w3.org/Guide/Charter.html How to Creat an Interest Group
15:40:14 <msporny> Ralph: Charter aggregator/generator is on that page.
15:41:14 <msporny> Topic: Sorting priorities - @token, RDFa Profiles, HTML+RDFa
15:41:52 <Ralph> Manu: the order in the agenda is just random, not necessarily reflecting my preferences
15:42:07 <Ralph> ... @token and profiles interact
15:42:35 <Ralph> ... HTML+RDFa has gotten interest from others who want to see it pushed forward
15:42:49 <Ralph> i/Manu: the or/scribenick: ralph
15:43:16 <Ralph> ... my preference would be to focus primarily on HTML+RDFa discussion
15:43:43 <Ralph> ... @token and profiles discussion *may* help solve problems with HTML+RDFa but otherwise are secondary
15:44:03 <Ralph> Ben: different TF participants might work in parallel
15:44:57 <ShaneM> FWIW I feel the "issues" related to RDFa in HTML (4) are basically the same as any issues related to RDFa in HTML 5.
15:45:57 <Ralph> Mark: here's how I work out what the priorities should be
15:46:15 <Ralph> ... adoption does not seem to be hampered by the fact that we've written XHTML+RDFa, not HTML+RDFa
15:46:39 <Ralph> ... there some subtleties such as nsprefixes not all in the same case, XML literals
15:46:53 <Ralph> ... but this doesn't appear to be stopping people from using RDFa
15:47:41 <Ralph> ... we're going in the right direction; HTML5 aside, what would we be doing next?
15:47:52 <Ralph> ... I'd pay attention to avoiding fragmentation
15:48:15 <Ralph> ... perhaps discussion on a core document that's neither HTML nor XHTML
15:48:36 <Ralph> ... use that core document as a mechanism to address XML literals
15:48:37 <Steven> +1 to promulgation being a priority
15:49:00 <ShaneM> +1
15:50:04 <Ralph> Ben: is there a conflict between what we're promulgating right now in our examples with what's going on in the HTML WG?
15:50:30 <Ralph> Manu: I don't think any of us here think there's a conflict but that opinion isn't shared by some others
15:50:52 <Ralph> Ben: Shane's HTML4+RDFa document shows a mechanism that works with HTML5
15:51:06 <Ralph> Manu: some good issues -- mostly corner cases -- are being brought up though
15:51:21 <ShaneM> q+ to talk about examples
15:51:32 <Steven> q-
15:51:34 <Ralph> Ben: yes, we should resolve the edge cases but that need not stop us from continuing to promulgate the examples
15:51:48 <Ralph> Manu: we haven't run a lot of our tests against HTML4 and HTML5 documents
15:52:05 <Ralph> Ben: I run all my tests in Firefox with javascript
15:52:35 <Ralph> ... maybe there's no conflict between fixing edge cases and further promulgation of examples
15:52:43 <Ralph> Manu: not sure we currently have enough data to say
15:53:22 <Ralph> ... not sure we can safely say there will be no issues
15:54:08 <Ralph> Ben: if folk are doing wierd things such as not paying attention to case sensitivity, that would be a conflict
15:54:38 <Ralph> ... but new @rel values do not present hard conflicts
15:55:26 <Ralph> Shane: we should avoid use cases where prefix names are anything other than lowercase and examples that use XML literals
15:55:42 <Ralph> ... it's OK for us to promote our Recommendation
15:56:03 <msporny> scribenick: msporny
15:56:06 <Ralph> ... just avoid things we know are problems and we're fine
15:56:33 <msporny> Ben: We're going to have different priorities, some are going to focus on HTML+RDFa, some are going to focus on @token, others RDFa Profile.
15:56:46 <msporny> Ben: Immediate priority is helping Sam Ruby help us with HTML+RDFa
15:57:00 <Ralph> scribenick: ralph
15:57:15 <msporny> http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues
15:57:16 <Ralph> Manu: my suggested priorities ...
15:57:41 <Ralph> ... issues page documents everything raised in the long thread
15:58:04 <Ralph> ... case sensitivity and @xmlns are the two biggest issues
15:58:21 <Ralph> ... several issues related to @xmlns; empty prefixes, underscores, etc.
15:58:33 <Ralph> Ben: those related issues I'd characterize as edge cases
15:58:58 <msporny> http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-requirements
15:59:03 <Ralph> Manu: regarding requirements, there are quite a number of conflicting requirements
15:59:18 <Ralph> ... I have not yet sorted through all of this
16:00:03 <Ralph> ... Sam Ruby's request asking us to address his comments is reasonable
16:01:32 <Ralph> ... we're slower to respond than some people prefer which is apparently interpreted as lack of transparency, even though we're being open
16:01:57 <ShaneM> FWIW Philip has said that we are responsive - it was Sam who said we were not responding to Philip
16:03:06 <Ralph> Ben: case sensitivity is more important to address than some other comments
16:03:38 <Zakim> -ShaneM
16:03:52 <Ralph> ... some things that have been raised as comments are really non-issues
16:04:05 <Ralph> ... I'll put some time into helping with these responses
16:04:50 <Ralph> Manu: I created the wiki page because people were complaining that we hadn't acknowledged some messages after 2 days
16:05:30 <msporny> Ben: Can we set up an issue tracker for this stuff?
16:05:42 <Ralph> ACTION: Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker instance
16:05:49 <Ralph> scribenick: msporny
16:05:51 <msporny> Ben: We are going to be extremely transparent about this, as we have always been.
16:06:58 <msporny> ACTION: Manu to go through and categorize issues and requirements that we should address going forward.
16:07:20 <msporny> Steven: Should we go back to weekly meetings?
16:07:25 <msporny> Manu: +1 for weekly meetings.
16:07:33 <msporny> Ben: Is that okay to go back to weekly meetings?
16:07:34 <markbirbeck> zakim, mute me
16:07:34 <Zakim> markbirbeck should now be muted
16:07:52 <markbirbeck> zakim, unmute me
16:07:52 <Zakim> markbirbeck should no longer be muted
16:08:03 <msporny> Steven: If people are thinking that we're slow about this stuff, we should step it up and meet weekly.
16:08:20 <msporny> Mark: Yes, weekly sounds good.
16:08:46 <msporny> Ben: Let's go to weekly meetings then.
16:09:44 <Zakim> -Ralph
16:11:24 <Ralph> [I'll send mail about issue-214]
16:21:09 <Ralph> MUST => PAG
16:21:33 <Ralph> s/MUST => PAG//
16:24:33 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
16:24:38 <Zakim> -Ben_Adida
16:24:59 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
16:25:37 <Zakim> -Steven
16:25:38 <Zakim> SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
16:25:40 <Zakim> Attendees were Ralph, Steven, +0208761aaaa, markbirbeck, ShaneM, [IPcaller], Ben_Adida
16:26:05 <msporny> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:26:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html msporny
16:26:26 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has joined #rdfa