13:56:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/05/13-rdfa-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/05/13-rdfa-irc ←
13:57:10 <manu> trackbot, setup meeting
Manu Sporny: trackbot, setup meeting ←
13:57:10 <trackbot> Sorry, manu, I don't understand 'trackbot, setup meeting'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, manu, I don't understand 'trackbot, setup meeting'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help ←
13:57:26 <manu> trackbot, prepare telecon
Manu Sporny: trackbot, prepare telecon ←
13:57:28 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
13:57:30 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 7332 ←
13:57:30 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes ←
13:57:31 <trackbot> Meeting: RDFa Working Group Teleconference
13:57:31 <trackbot> Date: 13 May 2010
13:57:47 <manu> Chair: Manu Sporny
13:58:46 <manu> Present: Manu, Ivan, Toby, Shane
13:58:53 <manu> Regrets: BenA, Steven, Benjamin, MarkB
13:59:54 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started ←
14:00:01 <Zakim> + +1.734.995.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.734.995.aaaa ←
14:00:13 <manu> zakim, aaaa is manu
Manu Sporny: zakim, aaaa is manu ←
14:00:13 <Zakim> +manu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu; got it ←
14:00:15 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
14:00:15 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
14:00:16 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
14:01:14 <Zakim> + +0785583aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +0785583aabb ←
14:01:24 <tinkster> zakim, aabb is me
Toby Inkster: zakim, aabb is me ←
14:01:24 <Zakim> +tinkster; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +tinkster; got it ←
14:02:14 <Zakim> +ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM ←
14:02:18 <tinkster> zakim, mute me
Toby Inkster: zakim, mute me ←
14:02:18 <Zakim> tinkster should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: tinkster should now be muted ←
14:02:27 <ivan> scribenick: ivan
(Scribe set to Ivan Herman)
14:04:25 <tinkster> zakim, unmute me
Toby Inkster: zakim, unmute me ←
14:04:25 <Zakim> tinkster should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: tinkster should no longer be muted ←
14:08:59 <ivan> Topic: Possible new issues from mailing list
14:09:05 <ivan> manu: ivan contacted me off line
Manu Sporny: ivan contacted me off line ←
14:09:12 <ivan> ... two possible issues
... two possible issues ←
14:09:16 <manu> - not-parsing if @profile cannot be accessed (Jeni's mail)
Manu Sporny: - not-parsing if @profile cannot be accessed (Jeni's mail) ←
14:09:18 <manu> - do we need an error reporting mechanism in rdfa
Manu Sporny: - do we need an error reporting mechanism in rdfa ←
14:09:45 <ivan> manu: anybody who thinks we should not turn these into issues?
Manu Sporny: anybody who thinks we should not turn these into issues? ←
14:09:58 <ivan> manu: any other issues that we missed?
Manu Sporny: any other issues that we missed? ←
14:10:22 <ivan> tinkster: not at the moment
Toby Inkster: not at the moment ←
14:10:31 <ivan> manu: we have to document all these well
Manu Sporny: we have to document all these well ←
14:10:46 <ivan> ... if anybody things of any other issues then send a mail to the mailing list
... if anybody things of any other issues then send a mail to the mailing list ←
14:10:52 <ivan> ... i will add those two after the call
... i will add those two after the call ←
14:15:29 <ivan> Topic: Review RDFa DOM API Progress
14:15:44 <ivan> manu: mark sent a mail to the list that he does not have anything for us yet
Manu Sporny: mark sent a mail to the list that he does not have anything for us yet ←
14:16:03 <ivan> ... toby what are your thoughts on the progress?
... toby what are your thoughts on the progress? ←
14:16:11 <ivan> tinkster: i must admit I did not look at it last week...
Toby Inkster: i must admit I did not look at it last week... ←
14:16:17 <ivan> manu: nothing changed
Manu Sporny: nothing changed ←
14:16:33 <ivan> tinkster: it is fragmented between a triple space and a resource space apis
Toby Inkster: it is fragmented between a triple space and a resource space apis ←
14:16:44 <ivan> ... would be good to have a combined version of those two
... would be good to have a combined version of those two ←
14:16:57 <ivan> manu: in an extended call last week this is the direction we have decided to go to
Manu Sporny: in an extended call last week this is the direction we have decided to go to ←
14:17:08 <ivan> ... my concern is that the document has not progressed in the past few weeks
... my concern is that the document has not progressed in the past few weeks ←
14:17:22 <ivan> ... i will volunteer to integerate mark's changes into the dom api
... i will volunteer to integerate mark's changes into the dom api ←
14:17:29 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:17:34 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:17:37 <ivan> ivan: i agree,
Ivan Herman: i agree, ←
14:17:53 <manu> Ivan: We have to move on - the writing needs to be in one document, they need to be merged
Ivan Herman: We have to move on - the writing needs to be in one document, they need to be merged [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:17:56 <Zakim> +[MIT528]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[MIT528] ←
14:18:00 <manu> Ivan: This has been dragging on for way too long.
Ivan Herman: This has been dragging on for way too long. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:19:12 <ivan> ShaneM: I am abstaining on that
Shane McCarron: I am abstaining on that ←
14:19:25 <ivan> manu: meaning we should really move forwards?
Manu Sporny: meaning we should really move forwards? ←
14:20:35 <ivan> manu: I will go ahead
Manu Sporny: I will go ahead ←
14:20:58 <ivan> tinkster: if you look at triples, the different views are not that disconnected
Toby Inkster: if you look at triples, the different views are not that disconnected ←
14:21:12 <ivan> manu: everyone agrees that this is a good thing to have
Manu Sporny: everyone agrees that this is a good thing to have ←
14:21:17 <ivan> ... i will start this
... i will start this ←
14:21:25 <ivan> topic: ISSUE-22: Case-sensitive prefixes
14:21:49 <manu> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/22
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/22 ←
14:22:31 <ivan> manu: the problem is that in rdfa1.0 we say that prefixes are case sensitive
Manu Sporny: the problem is that in rdfa1.0 we say that prefixes are case sensitive ←
14:22:38 <ivan> ShaneM: we just defer to xmlns
Shane McCarron: we just defer to xmlns ←
14:22:44 <ivan> ... and xmlns is case sensitive
... and xmlns is case sensitive ←
14:23:04 <ivan> manu: in rdfa1.1 i think what we want to say that prefixes must be converted to lowercase
Manu Sporny: in rdfa1.1 i think what we want to say that prefixes must be converted to lowercase ←
14:23:09 <ivan> ShaneM: and it says that
Shane McCarron: and it says that ←
14:23:19 <ivan> ... and we put it in the errata
... and we put it in the errata ←
14:23:36 <ivan> manu: previously we said use lower case
Manu Sporny: previously we said use lower case ←
14:23:45 <ivan> ... now we say convert it
... now we say convert it ←
14:23:56 <ShaneM> Section 4.1. Document Conformance - In the future it is possible that RDFa will also be defined in the context of HTML. Consequently document authors SHOULD use lower-case prefix names in order to be compatible with current and potential future processors.
Shane McCarron: Section 4.1. Document Conformance - In the future it is possible that RDFa will also be defined in the context of HTML. Consequently document authors SHOULD use lower-case prefix names in order to be compatible with current and potential future processors. ←
14:24:02 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:24:12 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:24:23 <manu> Ivan: We're still talking about prefixes and not terms, correct?
Ivan Herman: We're still talking about prefixes and not terms, correct? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:24:51 <manu> Ivan: Do we have a separate issue with terms?
Ivan Herman: Do we have a separate issue with terms? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:24:56 <manu> Manu: I don't think this would apply to terms.
Manu Sporny: I don't think this would apply to terms. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:25:43 <ivan> ivan: what about HTML5?
Ivan Herman: what about HTML5? ←
14:26:24 <tinkster> in html5, rel and rev values are case-insensitive, unless they contain a colon.
Toby Inkster: in html5, rel and rev values are case-insensitive, unless they contain a colon. ←
14:26:44 <ivan> manu: why is that?
Manu Sporny: why is that? ←
14:27:11 <ivan> manu: from what I remember, browsers preserve case for @rel and @rev
Manu Sporny: from what I remember, browsers preserve case for @rel and @rev ←
14:27:36 <ivan> ... we could say that terms that are not in the reserved list (license, etc) are case sensitive
... we could say that terms that are not in the reserved list (license, etc) are case sensitive ←
14:28:20 <manu> trackbot, create issue Case-sensitive terms in HTML5
Manu Sporny: trackbot, create issue Case-sensitive terms in HTML5 ←
14:28:20 <trackbot> Sorry, manu, I don't understand 'trackbot, create issue Case-sensitive terms in HTML5'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, manu, I don't understand 'trackbot, create issue Case-sensitive terms in HTML5'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help ←
14:28:41 <manu> trackbot, ISSUE: Case-sensitive terms in HTML5
Manu Sporny: trackbot, ISSUE: Case-sensitive terms in HTML5 ←
14:28:41 <trackbot> Sorry, manu, I don't understand 'trackbot, ISSUE: Case-sensitive terms in HTML5'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, manu, I don't understand 'trackbot, ISSUE: Case-sensitive terms in HTML5'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help ←
14:28:51 <manu> ISSUE: Case-sensitive terms in HTML5
ISSUE: Case-sensitive terms in HTML5 ←
14:28:51 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-24 - Case-sensitive terms in HTML5 ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/24/edit .
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-24 - Case-sensitive terms in HTML5 ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/24/edit . ←
14:29:18 <ivan> manu: for xmlns we should have case sensitivity
Manu Sporny: for xmlns we should have case sensitivity ←
14:29:26 <ivan> ... as well as for @prefix
... as well as for @prefix ←
14:29:53 <manu> PROPOSAL: For prefixes defined via xmlns: and @prefix, the prefix text should be converted to lowercase by the RDFa Processor.
PROPOSED: For prefixes defined via xmlns: and @prefix, the prefix text should be converted to lowercase by the RDFa Processor. ←
14:30:04 <ivan> +1
+1 ←
14:30:04 <manu> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
14:30:06 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
14:30:08 <tinkster> +0
Toby Inkster: +0 ←
14:30:31 <ivan> RESOLVED: For prefixes defined via xmlns: and @prefix, the prefix text should be converted to lowercase by the RDFa Processor.
RESOLVED: For prefixes defined via xmlns: and @prefix, the prefix text should be converted to lowercase by the RDFa Processor. ←
14:30:34 <ShaneM> Here is what the spec says now: Mappings are defined via @prefix. For backward compatibility, some Host Languages may also permit the definition of mappings via @xmlns. In this case, the value to be mapped is set by the XML namespace prefix, and the value to map is the value of the attribute — a URI. Regardless of how the mapping is declared, the value to be mapped must be converted to l
Shane McCarron: Here is what the spec says now: Mappings are defined via @prefix. For backward compatibility, some Host Languages may also permit the definition of mappings via @xmlns. In this case, the value to be mapped is set by the XML namespace prefix, and the value to map is the value of the attribute — a URI. Regardless of how the mapping is declared, the value to be mapped must be converted to l ←
14:31:18 <ShaneM> lower case, and the URI is not processed in any way; in particular if it is a relative path it is not resolved against the current base. Authors should not use relative paths as the URI.
Shane McCarron: lower case, and the URI is not processed in any way; in particular if it is a relative path it is not resolved against the current base. Authors should not use relative paths as the URI. ←
14:31:27 <ivan> manu: note on the vote that toby is concerned about backward compatibility issue
Manu Sporny: note on the vote that toby is concerned about backward compatibility issue ←
14:31:32 <manu> Toby: I'm concerned about the backwards incompatible change, but could go either way on it.
Toby Inkster: I'm concerned about the backwards incompatible change, but could go either way on it. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:31:42 <ivan> topic: ISSUE-19: Default generation of XMLLiterals
14:31:59 <manu> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/19
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/19 ←
14:32:09 <ivan> manu: this is another backward incompatible changes
Manu Sporny: this is another backward incompatible changes ←
14:32:33 <ivan> ... by default rdfa1.0 generates xml literal if there is an element within the element being processed
... by default rdfa1.0 generates xml literal if there is an element within the element being processed ←
14:33:02 <ivan> ... based on the markup that we have seen lots of people are generating xml literals when they intend plain literal
... based on the markup that we have seen lots of people are generating xml literals when they intend plain literal ←
14:33:51 <ivan> tinkster: there are two related issues (1) do we want to generate xml literals by default (2) do we recursively go down
Toby Inkster: there are two related issues (1) do we want to generate xml literals by default (2) do we recursively go down ←
14:34:01 <ivan> manu: we have split those into two issues
Manu Sporny: we have split those into two issues ←
14:34:10 <ivan> tinkster: i do not have any strong opinion,
Toby Inkster: i do not have any strong opinion, ←
14:34:18 <ivan> ... it is one thing we should consider
... it is one thing we should consider ←
14:35:16 <manu> Ivan: This is the one thing that we listed in the charter, so there seems to be consensus that we wanted to address this.
Ivan Herman: This is the one thing that we listed in the charter, so there seems to be consensus that we wanted to address this. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:35:41 <ivan> ShaneM: i do not have a problem with this, we should have fixed it in the errata
Shane McCarron: i do not have a problem with this, we should have fixed it in the errata ←
14:36:21 <ivan> manu: the general idea is that then people are adding datatypes they generally do not mark up markup
Manu Sporny: the general idea is that then people are adding datatypes they generally do not mark up markup ←
14:36:34 <ivan> .... i do not think the vast majority of people will try to expose markup on their pages
.... i do not think the vast majority of people will try to expose markup on their pages ←
14:36:46 <ivan> ... and that is where people would use xml literal in their markup
... and that is where people would use xml literal in their markup ←
14:36:56 <ivan> ... there is stuff like mathml
... there is stuff like mathml ←
14:36:59 <ivan> ... or svg
... or svg ←
14:37:03 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:37:13 <ivan> ... chemical compounds, etc
... chemical compounds, etc ←
14:37:15 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:37:47 <manu> Ivan: Just to be fair - I see one area where people might want to do that, and that might be multi-lingual things.
Ivan Herman: Just to be fair - I see one area where people might want to do that, and that might be multi-lingual things. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:37:57 <manu> Ivan: That being said, that's not a majority use case.
Ivan Herman: That being said, that's not a majority use case. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:38:18 <manu> Manu: So, Ruby markup?
Manu Sporny: So, Ruby markup? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:38:55 <manu> Manu: and what we're saying is you can still do that, but you have to do it explicitly datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral"
Manu Sporny: and what we're saying is you can still do that, but you have to do it explicitly datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral" [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:39:09 <manu> Toby: There are plenty of use cases, just not as common as Plain Literals.
Toby Inkster: There are plenty of use cases, just not as common as Plain Literals. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:39:15 <ivan> tinkster: there are use cases, but just not as common
Toby Inkster: there are use cases, but just not as common ←
14:40:05 <manu> PROPOSAL: By default RDFa 1.1 should generate Plain Literals even when there are elements in a subtree, unless datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral" is specified.
PROPOSED: By default RDFa 1.1 should generate Plain Literals even when there are elements in a subtree, unless datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral" is specified. ←
14:40:25 <manu> Toby: What about datatype="xml"
Toby Inkster: What about datatype="xml" [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:40:56 <ivan> +1
+1 ←
14:40:57 <manu> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
14:41:01 <tinkster> +1
Toby Inkster: +1 ←
14:41:12 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
14:41:14 <ivan> RESOLVED: By default RDFa 1.1 should generate Plain Literals even when there are elements in a subtree, unless datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral" is specified.
RESOLVED: By default RDFa 1.1 should generate Plain Literals even when there are elements in a subtree, unless datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral" is specified. ←
14:41:26 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:41:34 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:41:52 <manu> Ivan: There is a more general thing that we started to discuss - do we have an open issue on default vocabularies and terms?
Ivan Herman: There is a more general thing that we started to discuss - do we have an open issue on default vocabularies and terms? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:42:31 <manu> Manu: This one http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/11 ?
Manu Sporny: This one http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/11 ? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:42:52 <manu> Ivan: Not the same issue - Should we have default terms in RDFa Core?
Ivan Herman: Not the same issue - Should we have default terms in RDFa Core? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:43:52 <manu> We also need to consider whether or not there would be default terms in RDFa Core. Things like datatype="xml" instead of needing to specify datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral".
Manu Sporny: We also need to consider whether or not there would be default terms in RDFa Core. Things like datatype="xml" instead of needing to specify datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral". ←
14:44:10 <ivan> (added to issue 11)
14:44:14 <ivan> topic: ISSUE-10: @lang and @xml:lang Processing
14:44:16 <manu> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/10
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/10 ←
14:44:31 <ivan> ShaneM: why is this an issue
Shane McCarron: why is this an issue ←
14:44:42 <ivan> manu: it is in our queue
Manu Sporny: it is in our queue ←
14:44:43 <ShaneM> This specification also adds the lang attribute to the I18N attribute collection as defined in [XHTML-MODULARIZATION11-2e]. The lang attribute is defined in [HTML401]. When this attribute and the xml:lang attribute are specified on the same element, the xml:lang attribute takes precedence. When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they should have the same value.
Shane McCarron: This specification also adds the lang attribute to the I18N attribute collection as defined in [XHTML-MODULARIZATION11-2e]. The lang attribute is defined in [HTML401]. When this attribute and the xml:lang attribute are specified on the same element, the xml:lang attribute takes precedence. When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they should have the same value. ←
14:45:10 <ivan> ShaneM: this is already in xhtml+rdfa
Shane McCarron: this is already in xhtml+rdfa ←
14:45:21 <ivan> ... and we should be sure that this is the same as in html5
... and we should be sure that this is the same as in html5 ←
14:45:23 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:45:50 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:46:16 <ivan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Feb/0092.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Feb/0092.html ←
14:46:58 <manu> http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-lang-and-xml:lang-attributes
Manu Sporny: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-lang-and-xml:lang-attributes ←
14:48:47 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:49:02 <manu> Manu: I don't think the HTML5 spec says this... it says ignore xml:lang
Manu Sporny: I don't think the HTML5 spec says this... it says ignore xml:lang [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:50:47 <ivan> manu: the problem is when somebody uses both xml:lang and lang with different values, if run as xhtml and in html5 the generated triples will be different
Manu Sporny: the problem is when somebody uses both xml:lang and lang with different values, if run as xhtml and in html5 the generated triples will be different ←
14:50:54 <ivan> ... is this a problem?
... is this a problem? ←
14:51:03 <ivan> ... it is a corner corner case
... it is a corner corner case ←
14:51:24 <ivan> ... one way is to put a strong warning in the xhtml+rdfa text about the dangers
... one way is to put a strong warning in the xhtml+rdfa text about the dangers ←
14:51:47 <ivan> ... ie, a proposed way forward is to defer to the language
... ie, a proposed way forward is to defer to the language ←
14:51:56 <ivan> ... in xml and xhtml what counts is xml:lang
... in xml and xhtml what counts is xml:lang ←
14:52:01 <ivan> ... in html5 it is lang
... in html5 it is lang ←
14:52:02 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:52:06 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:52:34 <ivan> ShaneM: we do not know what mode we are in
Shane McCarron: we do not know what mode we are in ←
14:52:41 <ivan> manu: we have version
Manu Sporny: we have version ←
14:52:47 <ivan> ... but people do not want version
... but people do not want version ←
14:52:53 <ivan> ... it is a should
... it is a should ←
14:52:58 <ivan> q_
q_ ←
14:52:59 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
14:53:17 <manu> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
14:53:20 <ivan> ShaneM: in the absence of an announcement mechanism I would object
Shane McCarron: in the absence of an announcement mechanism I would object ←
14:53:28 <tinkster> q+
Toby Inkster: q+ ←
14:55:00 <manu> Ivan: My parser figures out what mode to be in by looking at the document type - text/html means HTML5 mode
Ivan Herman: My parser figures out what mode to be in by looking at the document type - text/html means HTML5 mode [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
14:55:12 <manu> ack tinkster
Manu Sporny: ack tinkster ←
14:55:14 <ShaneM> q+ to talk about media type
Shane McCarron: q+ to talk about media type ←
14:55:25 <ShaneM> q-
Shane McCarron: q- ←
14:55:27 <ivan> tinkster: the annoucement mechanism might be media type
Toby Inkster: the annoucement mechanism might be media type ←
14:55:39 <ivan> ShaneM: not all processors have access to the document type
Shane McCarron: not all processors have access to the document type ←
14:56:31 <ivan> tinkster: is there a way for javascript to find out the content type?
Toby Inkster: is there a way for javascript to find out the content type? ←
14:56:39 <ivan> ShaneM: not in a portable way :-(
Shane McCarron: not in a portable way :-( ←
14:57:43 <ivan> ShaneM: there is a hack, I create an element in the dom in lower case then I retrieve and if this is lower case
Shane McCarron: there is a hack, I create an element in the dom in lower case then I retrieve and if this is lower case ←
14:58:05 <ivan> ShaneM: i am not against the resolution, but we do have a problem
Shane McCarron: i am not against the resolution, but we do have a problem ←
14:58:10 <ShaneM> How about requiring that the values are the same if both are specified?
Shane McCarron: How about requiring that the values are the same if both are specified? ←
14:58:12 <ivan> manu: this is really really a corner case
Manu Sporny: this is really really a corner case ←
14:58:41 <tinkster> ShaneM, html5 already does.
Toby Inkster: ShaneM, html5 already does. ←
14:58:51 <ivan> ... we can say that if you want portability, use both cases and really really not use different
... we can say that if you want portability, use both cases and really really not use different ←
14:59:32 <ivan> ShaneM: I have always said we do not define the processing rules for invalid content
Shane McCarron: I have always said we do not define the processing rules for invalid content ←
14:59:46 <manu> PROPOSAL: RDFa 1.1 defers to the Host Language to determine the language of the node.
PROPOSED: RDFa 1.1 defers to the Host Language to determine the language of the node. ←
14:59:57 <tinkster> +1
Toby Inkster: +1 ←
14:59:58 <manu> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
15:00:03 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
15:00:19 <manu> PROPOSAL: RDFa Core 1.1 defers to the Host Language to determine the language of the node.
PROPOSED: RDFa Core 1.1 defers to the Host Language to determine the language of the node. ←
15:00:22 <ivan> +1
+1 ←
15:00:22 <manu> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
15:00:24 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
15:00:24 <tinkster> +1
Toby Inkster: +1 ←
15:00:36 <manu> RESOLVED: RDFa Core 1.1 defers to the Host Language to determine the language of the node.
RESOLVED: RDFa Core 1.1 defers to the Host Language to determine the language of the node. ←
15:01:16 <ShaneM> When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they MUST have the same value.
Shane McCarron: When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they MUST have the same value. ←
15:01:27 <manu> PROPOSAL: When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they MUST have the same value.
PROPOSED: When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they MUST have the same value. ←
15:01:32 <manu> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
15:01:34 <ivan> +1
+1 ←
15:01:40 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
15:01:46 <manu> Manu: That means that it is a validation error if they are not the same.
Manu Sporny: That means that it is a validation error if they are not the same. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:01:48 <tinkster> +0 : this should not be our responsibility
Toby Inkster: +0 : this should not be our responsibility ←
15:01:48 <ivan> RESOLVED: When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they MUST have the same value
RESOLVED: When both lang and xml:lang are specified on the same element, they MUST have the same value ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2010-05-13 15:17:00 UTC by 'msporny', comments: 'Minor changes to text'