RDF in XHTML Task Force -- 22 Oct 2009

Action Items

<scribe> ACTION: Manu change test suite to use Exclusive Canonical XMLLiteral tests [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]

Ivan: I raised some questions on mailing list -- what's the view of future RDFa plans.
... What do we want to do/publish?
... I'd like to know the plan.

<scribe> ACTION: Manu speak with Andy Seaborne about SPARQL.org implementation re: c14n [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action06] [CONTINUES]

<ShaneM> harness at http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/rdfa-test-harness/

<ShaneM> oh. no. not that one!

Manu: bug with Jena, working with Andy Seaborne to figure out what's wrong

http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/test-suite/

Manu: That's the new test harness with XHTML1, HTML4, HTML5

<scribe> ACTION: Shane to re-draft XMLLiteral errata text [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]

<scribe> ACTION: Ben to update JS xmlns getter code on implementors' guide for xhtml mime type support [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/17-rdfa-minutes.html#action02] [CONTINUES]

Next steps for RDFa

Mark: A couple of different things
... The basic question of prioritization...
... Javascript/DOM API, @profile, etc.
... What are our motivations?
... and where will this work be done?
... A bit of frustration because we don't know where we're putting the work.
... Hampering new ideas and innovation because we don't know where to put the work.
... Could we put a couple of new things into the HTML+RDFa draft without damaging anything?
... Should we try to address HTML+RDFa issues?

Shane: Read through the thread - I think that there are some procedural issues...
... From a publication perspective, we wanted existing REC to remain relevant as a base spec.
... Possible to introduce things in HTML+RDFa level, we don't want XHTML+RDFa to get out of step with HTML version
... Don't know if we can do radical changes to CURIE processing.

Ivan: Procedural issues - putting on my admin hat...
... WG charter stops at end of the year, for the time being we don't know what would replace it.
... We have discussed an IG or a WG for RDFa.
... There are two major stumbling blocks to address with RDFa WG..
... If the work this group would do is exclusively HTML... then there will be push-back to make this group as purely under HTML WG.
... Other stumbling block is that this TF is mostly Invited Experts... will be difficult for W3C management to accept a WG filled with mostly Invited Experts.
... We could issue edited REC of RDFa - where we try to fold in all the errata.
... I don't think that this group will have the time to do much more than that.

Ben: Who should we submit this feedback to?
... A bit concerned about the difficulty in creating a WG for technology that has been clearly adopted by Google/Yahoo.
... How do we ensure that W3C is reflecting actual usage.

Ivan: You should raise that point as an AC rep.
... We should try to see which W3C members would be interested in joining the RDFa WG.
... Yahoo! is back as a member now, so I would hope that Peter might want to join.
... Who else?
... I won't be at TPAC, unfortunately - Thomas Roessler will be there, so he will talk with Raman and Peter, maybe.
... If we have enough momentum, we can come up with a charter for an RDFa WG.

Manu: Why don't we commit to going forward with an RDFa WG?

Ivan: We need at least one more member to be interested.
... We have to be careful in the charter - we are not doing this as HTML - work items must be included that are not HTML-specific.
... The RDFa attribute set can be used in non-HTML/XML dialects as well.
... Perhaps, RDFa Core 1.1 should be a charter item.

<scribe> ACTION: Ben, Ivan and Manu to draft an RDFa WG and move that initiative forward. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/22-rdfa-minutes.html#action05]

<scribe> ACTION: Ivan to talk with Peter Mika at ISWC2009 about RDFa WG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/22-rdfa-minutes.html#action06]

<scribe> ACTION: Ben to finish authoring RDFa WG charter. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/22-rdfa-minutes.html#action07]

<scribe> ACTION: Manu to try and find other interested parties in RDFa WG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/22-rdfa-minutes.html#action08]

Ivan: We should mark up the RDFa WG charter in HTML

Mark: quick suggestions for new members of RDFa WG - Linked Data community
... OpenLink - Virtuoso
... Gov2 stuff - maybe they would be interested in joining.

Discuss and approve Shane's errata text

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Oct/0010.html

Manu: Any objections to approving this erratum?

Ivan: What does the current XHTML spec say about attribute values?

Shane: It defers to HTM4, which is case insensitive.

Ivan: Ah, yes.

Manu: Any objections?

Ivan: +1

<ShaneM> +1

<markbirbeck> +1

<benadida> +1

RESOLUTION: Include XHTML+RDFa erratum on case insensitivity for attribute values: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Oct/0010.html

Test Cases

http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/test-suite/

Manu: TC 134
... This is affected by the resolution we just made... upper-case attribute values for things like rel="NEXT" should generate a triple.

Ivan: Looks okay to me

Manu: +1

Shane: +1

<benadida> +1

Mark: We might want to change the URL to something that makes more sense like, http://example.org/next

<ShaneM> Looks good to me

RESOLUTION: TC 134 approved

Manu: Moving on to TC 140
... Do all of us agree that this markup shouldn't generate a triple
... This should be a negative test and should have documentation stating that it is negative.

Mark: Should we make this use BOUND?
... or NOT BOUND?

Manu: Rather not change the way we do negative tests right now, could change it in the future.

<ShaneM> +1

<ivan> +1

Manu: Any objections to passing TC 140?

<markbirbeck> +1

Manu: +1

<benadida> +1

RESOLUTION: TC 140 approved

Manu: TC 142

Shane: This is a bit pathological, but that's fine...

Mark: If you wanted to make statements about XML, this would be fine.
... Can you have an element that has <xml:test>... in RDF/XML?