See also: IRC log
MS: guide update not ready yet
CV: hoped it was ready for today morning, but not
ready yet
... most changes already done
... not sure about the comment on section 2 been too verbose
... It is not easy to make it shorter
... lots of contents
MS: don't think is really important, just do your best
MS: there is no Schema update yet
... Shadi has some travelling, so can postpone to the next week
<MikeS> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-HTTP-in-RDF-20090514#abs_pathProperty
<MikeS> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2009May/0009
MS: some remaining issues
JK: first issue related to the body property from
AWWSW
... decided to remove multiple versions of content
... now it is only Base64
... the remaining issue is how to relate other types of content
MS: how can dct:source help to relate other types of content?
<JohannesK> <http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswHttpVocabularyInRdfComments>
CV: can we use same as?
JK: it is not really the same as
<JohannesK> <http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-source>
MS: what are the semantics of dct:source?
... we can go with dct:source by now and add an editor's note for feedback
JK: this should go in the Content in RDF not in HTTP in RDF
RESOLUTION: use dct:source in Content in RDF and add an editor's note for feedback about those resources been equivalent or just derived or related
CV: can also add a note about sameas as possible alternative
JK: next issue about the use of asterisk as wild
card for requestURI property
... comment from AWWSW about this been problematic for OWL
... if we follow their suggestion of using just literals and an additional
property, what happens when the literal is different from an asterisk?
MS: the proposal right now is to use always a literal and if you want the asterisk just use the asterisk as a literla
RESOLUTION: remove the http:asterisk resource and use the asterisk literal when necessary
JK: next issue is a naming one
... need a fancy word for HTTP-in-RDF graph
CV: instance or instances?
MS: data?
... markup?
JK: not necessary RDF in XML, could be n3 for
example
... next issues about conforming producers and consumers been required to
fully support Content-in-RDF
RESOLUTION: we require both producers and consumers to fully support Content-in-RDF
<MikeS> must remove dc namespace in favor of dct namespace
<MikeS> fix usage of <acronym> elements according to note from Shadi
<MikeS> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2009Jun/0001.html
MS: everybody should look for names for that properties
<JohannesK> response, method, statusCode, headerName