IRC log of rdfa on 2009-07-16

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:04:00 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
15:04:00 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:04:06 [msporny]
zakim, this will be rdfa
15:04:06 [Zakim]
ok, msporny, I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM already started
15:04:36 [markbirbeck]
zakim, codes?
15:04:36 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, markbirbeck.
15:04:42 [markbirbeck]
zakim, code?
15:04:42 [Zakim]
the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
15:04:54 [Zakim]
15:05:03 [msporny]
Present: Steven_Pemberton, Shane_McCarron, Ben_Adida, Mark_Birbeck
15:05:20 [Steven]
zakim, dial steven-617
15:05:20 [Zakim]
ok, Steven; the call is being made
15:05:21 [Zakim]
15:05:27 [Zakim]
15:05:30 [Zakim]
15:05:37 [markbirbeck]
zakim, i am ??P12
15:05:37 [Zakim]
+markbirbeck; got it
15:05:38 [msporny]
zakim, I am ??P31
15:05:38 [Zakim]
+msporny; got it
15:05:49 [msporny]
Present+ Ralph_Swick
15:06:08 [msporny]
15:06:28 [msporny]
15:07:12 [msporny]
Scribe: Manu_Sporny
15:07:17 [msporny]
scribenick: msporny
15:07:23 [ShaneM]
zakim, who is here?
15:07:23 [Zakim]
On the phone I see McCarron, Ralph, Ben_Adida, Steven, msporny, markbirbeck
15:07:25 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, markbirbeck, benadida, ShaneM, Steven, msporny
15:07:28 [msporny]
Meeting: RDFa in XHTML Task Force
15:07:28 [ShaneM]
zakim, mccarron is ShaneM
15:07:28 [Zakim]
+ShaneM; got it
15:07:38 [msporny]
Chair: Ben_Adida
15:07:46 [msporny]
rrsagent, make log public
15:07:55 [msporny]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:07:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate msporny
15:08:16 [msporny]
ShaneM: What about publishing the RDFa errata from the last meeting?
15:08:20 [msporny]
benadida: Yes, we should talk about that.
15:08:34 [msporny]
benadida: We should have a discussion about xmlns
15:09:18 [msporny]
benadida: It should be a different discussion... keep the topics separated
15:09:29 [Ralph]
Ralph has joined #rdfa
15:09:33 [ShaneM]
<li>Section 4.1. Document Conformance - In the future it is
15:09:33 [ShaneM]
possible that RDFa will also be defined in the context of HTML.
15:09:33 [ShaneM]
Consequently document authors SHOULD use lower-case prefix names
15:09:33 [ShaneM]
in order to be compatible with current and potential future
15:09:33 [ShaneM]
15:09:34 [ShaneM]
15:09:49 [msporny]
Manu: I think we learned something important about xmlns in HTML5 yesterday
15:09:53 [msporny]
benadida: Is that the errata?
15:09:56 [msporny]
ShaneM: Yes
15:10:13 [msporny]
Manu: +1, that looks good.
15:10:13 [Steven]
15:10:15 [benadida]
15:10:17 [markbirbeck]
15:10:19 [Ralph]
15:10:46 [benadida]
RESOLVED: to publish the above errata on lowercase prefix names
15:11:31 [msporny]
benadida: Good that HTML5+RDFa went out
15:11:45 [msporny]
benadida: I think Sam thought we were trying to do something that we weren't with RDFa IG.
15:11:46 [ShaneM]
Errata is updated at
15:11:57 [msporny]
benadida: But it's nice that HTML5+RDFa IG is supported.
15:12:10 [benadida]
15:12:28 [msporny]
Ralph: There were misunderstandings on both sides.
15:13:16 [msporny]
benadida: Still concerned that HTML WG and WHAT WG are seen as two separate entities.
15:14:26 [msporny]
Topic: Action Items
15:14:50 [msporny]
ACTION: Ben to author wiki page with charter template for RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in]
15:14:53 [msporny]
15:15:18 [msporny]
ACTION: Ben to prepare "how to write RDFa" screencast with fragment parser [recorded in]
15:15:20 [msporny]
15:15:34 [msporny]
ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in]
15:15:36 [msporny]
15:16:41 [msporny]
ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in]
15:16:45 [msporny]
15:16:55 [msporny]
markbirbeck: We should create a wishlist on the site
15:17:01 [msporny]
benadida: Yes, sounds good.
15:18:32 [msporny]
ACTION: Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker instance [recorded in]
15:18:57 [msporny]
Ralph: There can only be one tracker instance per WG
15:19:01 [msporny]
benadida: Technical constraint?
15:19:20 [msporny]
Ralph: If we move forward with RDFa IG, there will be a tracker instance there.
15:19:36 [msporny]
Ralph: We can share SWD tracker for now and move data over.
15:19:41 [msporny]
15:19:50 [msporny]
ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in]008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
15:19:53 [msporny]
15:20:05 [Ralph]
-> last week's minutes
15:20:08 [msporny]
NOTE: The action items desperately need to be cleaned up.
15:20:22 [msporny]
Topic: Token @proposal
15:20:53 [msporny]
benadida: I think we agree that the main goal of the @token proposal is to make RDFa markup simpler and more Microformats-like.
15:21:11 [msporny]
markbirbeck: That makes it sound like it makes it more for the beginner author...
15:21:22 [msporny]
ShaneM: Dynamically extending collection of reserved words is also important.
15:21:39 [msporny]
benadida: So you can use unprefixed values easily?
15:22:13 [msporny]
benadida: What you said Shane, would rule out things like rel=":name", with @token we'd be able to do rel="name"
15:22:14 [benadida]
15:22:33 [msporny]
benadida: That wouldn't quite fit your use case... right?
15:22:37 [markbirbeck]
15:22:50 [msporny]
markbirbeck: If you do rel="name:" we already have that facility.
15:23:16 [msporny]
benadida: Just trying to clarify the problem we're trying to solve.
15:23:34 [msporny]
markbirbeck: We can already dynamically assign the prefix tokens...
15:24:16 [msporny]
benadida: If we got the route of "as simple as Microformats", ":name" doesn't necessarily work.
15:24:37 [msporny]
benadida: at least it may not be as simple as we want it.
15:24:56 [msporny]
benadida: Currently, rel="name" isn't supported and could be via a minor tweak.
15:25:07 [msporny]
benadida: Any other points?
15:25:22 [msporny]
benadida: Here's my concern with the @token proposal.
15:25:33 [msporny]
benadida: It's basically saying that there are some tokens you can find at URL X.
15:25:46 [msporny]
benadida: By saying something like this:
15:25:47 [benadida]
<div token="{url}">
15:25:48 [benadida]
15:26:08 [msporny]
benadida: Everything within that DIV have rules that expand tokens.
15:26:17 [msporny]
markbirbeck: @token is merely a new proposed name for xmlns:
15:26:24 [msporny]
markbirbeck: It's exactly the same as @prefix before.
15:26:37 [msporny]
benadida: The bit you're talking about is the @profile attribute.
15:26:47 [msporny]
markbirbeck: I'm not the only one proposing that @profile should be used.
15:27:14 [msporny]
markbirbeck: The concensus seems to be that @profile is the way to get external documents.
15:27:28 [msporny]
benadida: How can I say name is foaf:name?
15:27:38 [markbirbeck]
15:27:38 [markbirbeck]
15:27:38 [markbirbeck]
15:27:39 [markbirbeck]
15:27:39 [markbirbeck]
15:27:41 [markbirbeck]
15:27:43 [markbirbeck]
15:27:45 [markbirbeck]
15:27:47 [markbirbeck]
typeof="Person Agent"
15:27:49 [markbirbeck]
15:27:51 [markbirbeck]
15:27:53 [markbirbeck]
<span property="title">Dr</span>
15:27:55 [markbirbeck]
<span property="fn">Ivan Herman</span>
15:27:57 [markbirbeck]
15:27:59 [markbirbeck]
15:28:01 [markbirbeck]
15:28:16 [msporny]
markbirbeck: That's how you get the Microformats-like markup.
15:28:38 [msporny]
markbirbeck: You can achieve that with @token by making the same mappings.
15:28:58 [msporny]
markbirbeck: Instead of requiring typeof="Person:", you can do typeof="Person"
15:29:06 [msporny]
markbirbeck: That's proposal 1
15:29:26 [msporny]
markbirbeck: Defining them external to the document is the RDFa Profiles discussion.
15:29:37 [msporny]
benadida: The worry I have is with proposal #2
15:29:47 [msporny]
benadida: The idea of pulling these in from a different URL...
15:30:08 [msporny]
benadida: Google with Rich Snippets could be the first customer of this feature - they're concerned about the number of prefix declarations.
15:30:21 [msporny]
markbirbeck: Yes, that's a concern.
15:30:27 [msporny]
benadida: Then let's use them as an example.
15:31:17 [msporny]
benadida: If they were to use @profile - and we think of RDFa as you browsing across websites and collecting triples.
15:31:32 [msporny]
benadida: If the @profile is not available for any reason, you have to delay interpretation into triples until it's available.
15:31:46 [msporny]
benadida: You can't just use a plain RDF store...
15:31:56 [msporny]
benadida: You /could/ do it via vocabulary equivalencies.
15:32:08 [msporny]
benadida: You could say google:title is the same thing as dc:title...
15:32:26 [msporny]
benadida: Then maybe the only thing we need is the ability to redefine the base prefix.
15:32:27 [benadida]
15:32:54 [markbirbeck]
15:32:59 [markbirbeck]
I think...
15:33:02 [msporny]
benadida: The matching of terms could be done via an RDF vocabulary
15:33:45 [msporny]
benadida: only when it's an unreserved term does it use the default prefix.
15:34:01 [msporny]
benadida: Is my concern clear?
15:34:20 [msporny]
markbirbeck: Yes, but in terms of the definition of @profile, the concern isn't as great as you might think.
15:34:32 [msporny]
markbirbeck: As with schemas, you're allowed to not dereference the document.
15:34:50 [msporny]
markbirbeck: an RDFa parser would be entitled to know the prefix mappings by derefercing the URI
15:35:08 [msporny]
markbirbeck: It's not that you don't dereference, it's that things won't break as often as you think.
15:35:21 [msporny]
markbirbeck: We could argue that we should /never/ dereference.
15:35:33 [msporny]
ack Ralph
15:35:33 [Zakim]
Ralph, you wanted to support Ben's concern and proposal
15:35:59 [msporny]
Ralph: This is a potential interaction that we haven't really discussed.
15:36:06 [msporny]
Ralph: We don't depend on @profile now.
15:36:36 [msporny]
Ralph: Up to this point, without derefercing namespace URIs we can't construct the named graph without dereferencing.
15:36:54 [msporny]
Ralph: The ability to parse the document and get the triples out of it is important.
15:37:15 [msporny]
Ralph: If we find a mechanism that allows us to minimize the prefix bindings to just one, we can always parse the document.
15:37:32 [msporny]
Ralph: We may not be able to dereference the URI, but we can at least put the triple into our graph.
15:37:51 [msporny]
benadida: Yes, that's a better way to say it. I think we can cache these things.
15:38:20 [msporny]
benadida: Don't know if /requiring/ another layer of indirection is a good thing.
15:38:33 [msporny]
markbirbeck: If you know what a URI means, you don't have to dereference it.
15:39:30 [msporny]
Ralph: Sure, but we're creating a mechanism that allows us to encounter completely unknown @profile URIs...
15:40:17 [msporny]
Ralph: If we create a mechanism where we don't know how to expand the "Person" token without dereferncing another URI.
15:40:27 [msporny]
Ralph: Today, we can always expand the URI and put it in the triple store.
15:40:45 [msporny]
markbirbeck: Sure, let's put that to one side... I don't think we get all of the features that we want from what Ben is suggesting.
15:40:59 [msporny]
markbirbeck: One of the big things is the number of namespaces. Ben's proposal gives us 1.
15:41:28 [msporny]
markbirbeck: We're resurrecting the [default prefix mapping]
15:41:52 [msporny]
markbirbeck: The thing that keeps coming up with SearchMonkey is that they have a ton of namespaces up top.
15:42:10 [msporny]
markbirbeck: We created "vocabularies" that are built from other vocabularies.
15:42:17 [msporny]
markbirbeck: We end up with quite a few namespaces.
15:42:28 [msporny]
markbirbeck: If we don't want to go @profile, then that's fine.
15:43:09 [msporny]
markbirbeck: Let's stop thinking about explicit vocabularies, and more about mixing vocabularies.
15:43:28 [msporny]
markbirbeck: You need a more subtle and flexible vocabulary term declaration mechanism.
15:44:03 [msporny]
Ralph: By taking a bunch of terms I want to use from different vocabularies, I can give them names in my "ralph" namespace.
15:44:18 [msporny]
Ralph: My "ralph" namespace has a URI - I can parse triples out of them.
15:45:23 [ShaneM]
let's call that a "hybrid vocabulary"
15:45:28 [msporny]
Ralph: The one dereference of the Ralph namespace gives me the meaning of all of the names (mapping to dublin core, foaf, etc.)
15:45:50 [msporny]
Ralph: Dublin Core had this sort of approach in the past.
15:46:02 [msporny]
Ralph: It's a question of how the indirection happens...
15:46:09 [msporny]
Ralph: Where does the indirection go?
15:46:32 [msporny]
Ralph: In your proposal, you must dereference @profile.
15:46:37 [msporny]
markbirbeck: No, it doesn't.
15:46:53 [msporny]
Ralph: minutes are wrong...
15:47:05 [msporny]
Ralph: My understanding of the @token proposal is that you have to dereference.
15:47:20 [msporny]
markbirbeck: That doesn't have anything to do with the @token proposal.
15:47:31 [msporny]
ShaneM: It has to do with the @profile proposal.
15:48:10 [Ralph]
[I stand (sit) corrected. Sorry for misunderstanding]
15:48:15 [msporny]
benadida: Dereferencing for @profile proposal is happening at the parser level.
15:48:57 [msporny]
benadida: It's not an issue of how many dereferencings are happening, it's at what level does it happen?
15:49:04 [msporny]
benadida: It's not a syntax issue, it's a vocabulary issue.
15:49:14 [msporny]
benadida: Maybe it should sit at the vocabulary layer of the stack.
15:49:25 [msporny]
markbirbeck: I'm confused about this...
15:49:43 [msporny]
markbirbeck: Proposal 1 is simply saying, instead of doing "Agent:", we allow "Agent"
15:49:54 [Ralph]
[indeed, my concern is about _requiring_ URIs in @profile to be dereferenced before a string such as "Agent" can be expanded to a full URI]
15:50:31 [msporny]
markbirbeck: We haven't said anything about @profile in the @token proposal.
15:51:02 [msporny]
markbirbeck: You have more indirection and it's a bit more complicated.
15:51:13 [msporny]
benadida: Let's take a step back and look at the goal..
15:51:14 [benadida]
15:51:33 [benadida]
My name is <span property="name">Ben</span>
15:51:34 [benadida]
15:51:35 [benadida]
15:52:02 [msporny]
benadida: We want that markup to be simple and non-prefixed.
15:52:07 [msporny]
benadida: We want that to be do-able in RDFa.
15:52:13 [msporny]
benadida: What is the enabler of that technology.
15:52:33 [msporny]
benadida: If you try to do it incrementally, you end up with the @token proposal.
15:52:40 [msporny]
benadida: maybe that mapping belongs at the vocabulary level.
15:53:04 [msporny]
markbirbeck: You're saying you can use owl:sameas at the vocabulary level.
15:53:19 [msporny]
markbirbeck: I'm saying that we can solve it at the CURIE level.
15:53:26 [markbirbeck]
a:b a x:y .
15:53:51 [msporny]
ack Ralph
15:54:08 [msporny]
Ralph: I stand corrected with my earlier response.
15:54:20 [msporny]
Ralph: I could view @token syntax as a step beyond CURIEs.
15:54:50 [msporny]
Ralph: People are going to be frustrated with the list of items they have to use in their document.
15:55:06 [msporny]
Ralph: They're going to be annoyed by having to cut/paste entire chunks of @token attributes.
15:55:11 [msporny]
Ralph: @profile is a way to do that.
15:55:31 [ShaneM]
q+ to discuss profiles vs vocabs
15:55:32 [msporny]
Ralph: Now we're at the point of having an external document that provides a list of external mappings.
15:55:57 [msporny]
Ralph: When I look at the token proposal, I see a slippery progression to the point that we need something like @profile.
15:56:10 [msporny]
Ralph: I want to try to avoid that temptation.
15:56:12 [msporny]
ack Shane
15:56:12 [Zakim]
ShaneM, you wanted to discuss profiles vs vocabs
15:56:29 [msporny]
ShaneM: Ben, owl:sameas ...
15:56:50 [msporny]
ShaneM: Hybrid vocabularies are fine, go ahead and do it, we already enable that (more or less).
15:57:14 [msporny]
benadida: No, we need to modify CURIE processing for that to happen.
15:57:31 [msporny]
ShaneM: Creating those external collections that you can use is an external issue
15:58:14 [msporny]
benadida: What do you think we're not focusing on enough.
15:58:31 [msporny]
ShaneM: We keep talking about the @token proposal, and others keep talking about external vocabularies.
15:58:59 [msporny]
Ralph: We can't look at either in isolation, we need to look at it from both ends.
15:59:08 [msporny]
Ralph: I don't think we can answer them in isolation.
15:59:20 [msporny]
markbirbeck: My prime goal is a Microformats look-alike.
15:59:38 [msporny]
markbirbeck: If we don't have an external document solution, then I'm not concerned with "Agent:"
15:59:39 [ShaneM]
remember that xmlms:shane="" works today
16:00:51 [ShaneM]
We had a straw horse proposal for external definitions at
16:00:51 [msporny]
markbirbeck: I'm not concerned with @token in-so-much as I'm concerned with Microformats simplicity.
16:01:03 [msporny]
benadida: We should try and simulate that the right way.
16:02:01 [Ralph]
Manu: I think we need to be able to support external vocabularies
16:02:21 [Ralph]
... I don't yet understand Mark's proposal to see how to combine audio & media vocabularies with microformat vocabularies
16:02:27 [Ralph]
... this is a use case we have right now
16:02:44 [Ralph]
... I'll explain in email
16:02:51 [markbirbeck]
16:04:01 [Ralph]
... if Ben's proposal is to allow a CURIE without a ':', I don't see how to do this in a way that works like Mark's proposal
16:04:49 [Ralph]
... it falls back to the vocabulary layer so the RDFa processing rules and parser don't need to say much
16:05:12 [Ralph]
... but it creates a big burden on users to create these 'bundled' vocabularies
16:05:32 [Ralph]
Ben: we have a technology to map vocabulary terms and it worries me to create more layers of mapping
16:06:41 [Ralph]
Mark: my model is to have tokens that map to [full] URIs
16:07:17 [Ralph]
... vocabulary mapping with owl:sameAs has been observed to require a higher level of RDF processor
16:09:45 [Ralph]
Manu: this inferencing mechanism may not belong in the RDFa specification
16:10:11 [Ralph]
... where would we advise document authors of how owl:sameAs works? Best practices?
16:10:29 [Ralph]
Ben: I'm suggesting we leverage more of the existing RDF mechanism
16:10:36 [Ralph]
... yes, it's present at a different layer
16:11:08 [Ralph]
Mark: I'm only talking about an additional mechanism for abbreviating URIs
16:11:33 [Ralph]
... owl:sameAs is a very different kind of mechanism
16:12:03 [Ralph]
... it requires a higher level of [semantic] processing
16:12:08 [msporny]
s/I don't yet understand Mark's proposal/I don't yet understand Ben's proposal/
16:13:02 [msporny]
Ralph: We can't process triples if we can't dereference in Mark's @profile proposal
16:13:11 [msporny]
Ralph: It's not clear-cut how we externalize token mappings.
16:13:22 [msporny]
ShaneM: Yes, but those are two separate issues.
16:13:42 [msporny]
ShaneM: They're orthogonal issues.
16:14:04 [msporny]
Ralph: They come from an objective that Mark's proposing - making the syntax look as close to Microformats as we can.
16:14:22 [msporny]
ShaneM: I don't think it's a lookup step.
16:14:40 [msporny]
markbirbeck: I think that Mark's understanding of expanding the definition of CURIEs is correct.
16:14:48 [msporny]
benadida: I don't think that's the issue
16:14:58 [msporny]
benadida: It doesn't include the definition of @profile.
16:15:16 [msporny]
benadida: Don't have an issue with augmenting the way CURIEs are parsed.
16:15:38 [msporny]
16:15:45 [msporny]
16:16:21 [msporny]
benadida: Clearly and edge case we'd need to hash out.
16:17:53 [msporny]
benadida: My proposal is only intended to highlight this particular architectural issue.
16:19:05 [Steven]
16:19:17 [msporny]
ack steven
16:19:47 [msporny]
Steven: On vacation for 3 weeks.
16:20:03 [markbirbeck]
+1 :)
16:20:10 [Steven]
16:22:10 [Zakim]
16:22:12 [Zakim]
16:22:12 [Zakim]
16:22:14 [Zakim]
16:22:23 [Zakim]
16:23:10 [ShaneM]
ShaneM has left #rdfa
16:27:24 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, msporny, in SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM
16:27:38 [msporny]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:27:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate msporny
16:27:59 [msporny]
Regrets+ Michael_Hausenblas
16:40:58 [msporny]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:40:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate msporny
17:00:06 [msporny]
Present+ Manu_Sporny
17:00:09 [msporny]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:00:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate msporny
17:03:12 [msporny]
RESOLVED: to publish the above errata on lowercase prefix names
17:03:15 [msporny]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:03:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate msporny
17:46:12 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
17:46:14 [Zakim]
Attendees were Ralph, Ben_Adida, Steven, markbirbeck, msporny, ShaneM
17:51:44 [msporny]
zakim, bye
17:51:44 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rdfa
17:51:48 [msporny]
rrsagent, byte
17:51:48 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'byte', msporny. Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:51:51 [msporny]
rrsagent, bye
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
I see 6 open action items saved in :
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to author wiki page with charter template for RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in] [1]
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to prepare "how to write RDFa" screencast with fragment parser [recorded in] [2]
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in] [3]
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in] [4]
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker instance [recorded in] [5]
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in]008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] [6]
17:51:51 [RRSAgent]
recorded in