14:54:27 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/01/27-rdfa-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/01/27-rdfa-irc ←
14:54:29 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:54:31 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 7332 ←
14:54:31 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes ←
14:54:32 <trackbot> Meeting: RDFa Working Group Teleconference
14:54:32 <trackbot> Date: 27 January 2011
15:00:11 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started ←
15:00:19 <Zakim> + +3539149aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +3539149aaaa ←
15:00:27 <Knud> zakim, I am aaaa
Knud Möller: zakim, I am aaaa ←
15:00:27 <Zakim> +Knud; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Knud; got it ←
15:00:36 <manu1> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jan/0138.html
15:00:38 <manu1> Chair: Manu
15:00:56 <manu1> Present: Ivan, Benjamin, Manu, Knud, MarkB, ShaneM, Nathan, Steven
15:00:59 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
15:00:59 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
15:01:00 <Zakim> -Knud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Knud ←
15:01:00 <Zakim> +Knud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Knud ←
15:01:00 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
15:01:30 <Zakim> +??P54
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P54 ←
15:01:36 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P54
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ??P54 ←
15:01:36 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu1; got it ←
15:02:42 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the call? ←
15:02:42 <Zakim> On the phone I see Knud, Ivan, manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Knud, Ivan, manu1 ←
15:03:29 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
Mark Birbeck: zakim, code? ←
15:03:29 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), markbirbeck
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), markbirbeck ←
15:04:19 <Zakim> + +200000aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +200000aabb ←
15:04:24 <markbirbeck> zakim, i am aabb
Mark Birbeck: zakim, i am aabb ←
15:04:24 <Zakim> +markbirbeck; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +markbirbeck; got it ←
15:04:27 <Zakim> + +1.612.217.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.612.217.aacc ←
15:05:08 <manu1> zakim, mute knud
Manu Sporny: zakim, mute knud ←
15:05:08 <Zakim> Knud should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Knud should now be muted ←
15:05:39 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the call? ←
15:05:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan, manu1, markbirbeck, +1.612.217.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan, manu1, markbirbeck, +1.612.217.aacc ←
15:06:02 <ivan> zakim, aacc is ShaneM
Ivan Herman: zakim, aacc is ShaneM ←
15:06:02 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM; got it ←
15:06:22 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
15:06:22 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←
15:06:39 <ivan> scribenick: ivan
(Scribe set to Ivan Herman)
15:06:58 <ivan> manu1: is it necessary to discuss the issue of default profile
Manu Sporny: is it necessary to discuss the issue of default profile ←
15:07:12 <ivan> ... this may be a good idea in discussing with html5
... this may be a good idea in discussing with html5 ←
15:07:28 <ivan> ... let us do the editorial issues first
... let us do the editorial issues first ←
15:07:46 <ivan> manu1: shane, did you look at steven's editorial issues?
Manu Sporny: shane, did you look at steven's editorial issues? ←
15:07:54 <manu1> Topic: Approving Editorial suggestions?
15:07:57 <manu1> 1) Approve editorial suggestions?
Manu Sporny: 1) Approve editorial suggestions? ←
15:07:58 <ivan> ShaneM: yes I have
Shane McCarron: yes I have ←
15:07:58 <manu1> ISSUE-71: Shelley Power's LC comments
Manu Sporny: ISSUE-71: Shelley Power's LC comments ←
15:08:00 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/71
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/71 ←
15:08:01 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jan/0137.html
Manu Sporny: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jan/0137.html ←
15:08:03 <manu1> ISSUE-79: Integrate CURIE information
Manu Sporny: ISSUE-79: Integrate CURIE information ←
15:08:05 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/79
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/79 ←
15:08:07 <manu1> ISSUE-80: Integrate attribute information
Manu Sporny: ISSUE-80: Integrate attribute information ←
15:08:09 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/80
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/80 ←
15:08:11 <manu1> ISSUE-81: Make declarative definition normative, procedural
Manu Sporny: ISSUE-81: Make declarative definition normative, procedural ←
15:08:11 <ivan> manu1: what do you think are they ok?
Manu Sporny: what do you think are they ok? ←
15:08:12 <manu1> definition informative.
Manu Sporny: definition informative. ←
15:08:14 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/81
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/81 ←
15:08:50 <Steven_> zakim, dial steven-617
Steven Pemberton: zakim, dial steven-617 ←
15:08:50 <Zakim> ok, Steven_; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Steven_; the call is being made ←
15:08:51 <ivan> Topic: ISSUE-79: Editorial merging sections on CURIEs
15:08:52 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/79
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/79 ←
15:08:53 <Zakim> +Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: +Steven ←
15:09:10 <ivan> ... take issue 79: to merge some curie information
... take ISSUE-79: to merge some curie information ←
15:09:13 <Steven_> Sorry for being late, I was on another call, and missed the time
Steven Pemberton: Sorry for being late, I was on another call, and missed the time ←
15:09:14 <ivan> ... my reaction is no
... my reaction is no ←
15:09:42 <ivan> ... we need a free standing curie section which is not only rdfa
... we need a free standing curie section which is not only rdfa ←
15:09:52 <ivan> ... merging the sections would be problematic
... merging the sections would be problematic ←
15:10:17 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#compact-uris
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#compact-uris ←
15:10:22 <ivan> ... section 3.8 is a historical section that mark wrote back in the day to justify curie-s
... section 3.8 is a historical section that mark wrote back in the day to justify curie-s ←
15:10:42 <ivan> ... it does not really say anything about them and it is not normative
... it does not really say anything about them and it is not normative ←
15:10:48 <ivan> ... i would prefer to let them alone, too
... i would prefer to let them alone, too ←
15:11:03 <ivan> manu1: essentially, issue 79 suggestion is to leave that as it is
Manu Sporny: essentially, ISSUE-79 suggestion is to leave that as it is ←
15:11:04 <Steven_> Iḿ OK with that
Steven Pemberton: Iḿ OK with that ←
15:11:05 <ivan> ShaneM: yep
Shane McCarron: yep ←
15:11:17 <ivan> (WG accepted)
(WG accepted) ←
15:11:28 <Zakim> -manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu1 ←
15:11:45 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
15:12:02 <ivan> Topic: ISSUE-80: Editorial - Integrate attribute datatype information
15:12:11 <manu1> ISSUE-80 - Integrate attribute information - http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/80
Manu Sporny: ISSUE-80 - Integrate attribute information - http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/80 ←
15:12:11 <trackbot> ISSUE-80 Editorial - Integrate attribute information. Triage of Issue 75 - Part 2 notes added
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-80 Editorial - Integrate attribute information. Triage of ISSUE-75 - Part 2 notes added ←
15:12:23 <ivan> .... the commenter is concerned that normative definitions and datatypes are scattered all over the place
.... the commenter is concerned that normative definitions and datatypes are scattered all over the place ←
15:12:29 <ivan> ... it was not true, but it might be true now
... it was not true, but it might be true now ←
15:12:46 <ivan> ... section 8 has a lot of info, but it does not define any datatype (section 5)
... section 8 has a lot of info, but it does not define any datatype (section 5) ←
15:12:58 <ivan> ... my proposal is to make it so that section 5 is complete
... my proposal is to make it so that section 5 is complete ←
15:13:10 <ivan> ... it defined the attributes and syntax
... it defined the attributes and syntax ←
15:13:54 <ivan> ... section 7.4.4., which is part of a larger section on curie and uri processing, I would be happy to remove
... section 7.4.4., which is part of a larger section on curie and uri processing, I would be happy to remove ←
15:14:03 <ivan> ... it is defined in section (or it should be)
... it is defined in section (or it should be) ←
15:14:15 <manu1> zakim, I am [IPcaller]
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am [IPcaller] ←
15:14:15 <Zakim> ok, manu1, I now associate you with [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, manu1, I now associate you with [IPcaller] ←
15:14:23 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the call? ←
15:14:23 <Zakim> On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan (muted), markbirbeck, ShaneM, Steven, [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan (muted), markbirbeck, ShaneM, Steven, [IPcaller] ←
15:14:24 <ivan> ... mark, is it o.k with you?
... mark, is it o.k with you? ←
15:14:43 <ivan> markbirbeck: it is fine with me; it is a self contained part, though
Mark Birbeck: it is fine with me; it is a self contained part, though ←
15:15:03 <ivan> ... but it is indeed a summary
... but it is indeed a summary ←
15:15:11 <ivan> ... it does not add anything
... it does not add anything ←
15:15:28 <ivan> ShaneM: as it stands now, you have to read it
Shane McCarron: as it stands now, you have to read it ←
15:15:39 <ivan> ... it does not say what that datatype says
... it does not say what that datatype says ←
15:15:44 <ivan> ... it is safe to remove it
... it is safe to remove it ←
15:15:58 <ivan> manu1: agree with that
Manu Sporny: agree with that ←
15:16:06 <ivan> ... any objection to remove that section?
... any objection to remove that section? ←
15:16:17 <ivan> markbirbeck: how do we feel about other sections?
Mark Birbeck: how do we feel about other sections? ←
15:16:27 <ivan> manu1: nobody complained about other sections...
Manu Sporny: nobody complained about other sections... ←
15:16:36 <ivan> ... so, maybe we can look through those
... so, maybe we can look through those ←
15:16:45 <ivan> ... at present we do not have any issues about this
... at present we do not have any issues about this ←
15:17:08 <ivan> ShaneM: mark, if you have a strong objection, my alternative is to fix 7.4.4
Shane McCarron: mark, if you have a strong objection, my alternative is to fix 7.4.4 ←
15:17:21 <ivan> ... right now it is a bit coloquial
... right now it is a bit coloquial ←
15:17:39 <ivan> markbirbeck: I do not have a strong objection, but, eg, 7.4.2 does it look any better?
Mark Birbeck: I do not have a strong objection, but, eg, 7.4.2 does it look any better? ←
15:17:49 <ivan> ... jenni would like to have everything in one place
... jenni would like to have everything in one place ←
15:17:54 <ivan> ... which makes sense
... which makes sense ←
15:18:07 <ivan> ... if it is possible to fix 7.4.4 rather, I would prefer this a bit
... if it is possible to fix 7.4.4 rather, I would prefer this a bit ←
15:18:23 <ivan> ... I am happy either way, I let shane decide
... I am happy either way, I let shane decide ←
15:18:40 <ivan> ShaneM: mark, I agree that 7.2.2 has the same problem as 7.2.4 has, it is imprecise
Shane McCarron: mark, I agree that 7.2.2 has the same problem as 7.2.4 has, it is imprecise ←
15:19:00 <ivan> ... fixing it would mean referencing the datatypes back to the absolute definitions
... fixing it would mean referencing the datatypes back to the absolute definitions ←
15:19:26 <ivan> ... we are not referencing it here, there is no tie
... we are not referencing it here, there is no tie ←
15:20:04 <ivan> manu: there is also something here that says to make 7.4.4. non normative and the other normative
Manu Sporny: there is also something here that says to make 7.4.4. non normative and the other normative ←
15:20:14 <ivan> ... that approach goes into the next issue we are talking about
... that approach goes into the next issue we are talking about ←
15:20:49 <ivan> ... shane, do you agree making these explanatory section non-normative? This ties in into the next section
... shane, do you agree making these explanatory section non-normative? This ties in into the next section ←
15:20:58 <ivan> ShaneM: she wanted section 8 to be non-normative
Shane McCarron: she wanted section 8 to be non-normative ←
15:21:14 <ivan> ... section 7 there is no section I would make non-normative, it is important for implementers
... section 7 there is no section I would make non-normative, it is important for implementers ←
15:21:25 <ivan> .... section 8 is more something like a test suite
.... section 8 is more something like a test suite ←
15:21:36 <ivan> ... it gave me a bunch of examples
... it gave me a bunch of examples ←
15:21:56 <ivan> ... I would defer to mark on whether section 8 should be non-normative
... I would defer to mark on whether section 8 should be non-normative ←
15:22:16 <ivan> manu: I trust you, shane, to make the right decision
Manu Sporny: I trust you, shane, to make the right decision ←
15:22:52 <ivan> ... talking about issue 80, shane offers to point back to the datatypes from the prose
... talking about ISSUE-80, shane offers to point back to the datatypes from the prose ←
15:23:08 <ivan> ShaneM: the same for 7.4.4
Shane McCarron: the same for 7.4.4 ←
15:23:14 <ivan> ... they both need those tie-back
... they both need those tie-back ←
15:23:21 <ivan> manu: any objection?
Manu Sporny: any objection? ←
15:23:23 <ivan> ...
... ←
15:23:26 <ivan> (WG agreed)
(WG agreed) ←
15:23:27 <ivan> Topic: ISSUE-81: Make section 7 normative, section 8 non-normative
15:23:29 <manu1> ISSUE-81 Make declarative definition normative, procedural definition informative, http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/81
Manu Sporny: ISSUE-81 Make declarative definition normative, procedural definition informative, http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/81 ←
15:23:46 <ivan> Steven_: I agree with her about this
Steven Pemberton: I agree with her about this ←
15:24:09 <ivan> ... if we agree that 7.5 and 8 are overlapping, I agree making one normative and the other informative, advise for implementations
... if we agree that 7.5 and 8 are overlapping, I agree making one normative and the other informative, advise for implementations ←
15:24:20 <ivan> ShaneM: I said I would defer to mark...
Shane McCarron: I said I would defer to mark... ←
15:24:34 <ivan> markbirbeck: ... but you hinted it is a good idea:-)
Mark Birbeck: ... but you hinted it is a good idea:-) ←
15:24:40 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_rdfaindetail
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_rdfaindetail ←
15:24:55 <ivan> ... the original idea was that one was a friendly explanation of section 7
... the original idea was that one was a friendly explanation of section 7 ←
15:25:03 <ivan> ... if we are sure that everything is covered
... if we are sure that everything is covered ←
15:25:23 <ivan> ... then shane's suggestion (section 8 is informative, section 7 normative) is fine
... then shane's suggestion (section 8 is informative, section 7 normative) is fine ←
15:25:58 <ivan> manu: when I did my implementation than I just implemented the process
Manu Sporny: when I did my implementation than I just implemented the process ←
15:26:05 <ivan> ... and then looking at the examples
... and then looking at the examples ←
15:26:33 <ivan> ShaneM: we are making so many changes that we will have a 2nd last call:-)
Shane McCarron: we are making so many changes that we will have a 2nd last call:-) ←
15:26:47 <ivan> ... I am not worried about the change
... I am not worried about the change ←
15:27:03 <ivan> ... I will have to make a cleaner implementation before 2nd last call
... I will have to make a cleaner implementation before 2nd last call ←
15:27:14 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
15:28:06 <ivan> manu: from a design standpoint this is the right thing to do, if we find an issue
Manu Sporny: from a design standpoint this is the right thing to do, if we find an issue ←
15:28:08 <manu1> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
15:28:09 <ivan> ack ivan
ack ivan ←
15:28:31 <manu1> Ivan: I used Section 7 almost exclusively for my implementation.
Ivan Herman: I used Section 7 almost exclusively for my implementation. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:28:38 <manu1> Ivan: I used section 8 for checking my understanding.
Ivan Herman: I used section 8 for checking my understanding. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:28:57 <ivan> manu: any objection to follow shane's offer, section 8 non-normative?
Manu Sporny: any objection to follow shane's offer, section 8 non-normative? ←
15:28:58 <ivan> ....
.... ←
15:29:02 <ivan> (WG accepted)
(WG accepted) ←
15:29:05 <ivan> zakim, mute me
zakim, mute me ←
15:29:05 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←
15:29:15 <ivan> Topic: ISSUE-71: Last Call Comments from Shelley Powers
15:29:15 <ivan> manu1: last issue is Shelley's comments
Manu Sporny: last issue is Shelley's comments ←
15:29:20 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jan/0137.html
Manu Sporny: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jan/0137.html ←
15:29:24 <ivan> ... everything that she had was editorial
... everything that she had was editorial ←
15:29:32 <manu1> ISSUE-71
15:29:35 <ivan> ... and they were not as heavy as Jeni's
... and they were not as heavy as Jeni's ←
15:29:46 <ivan> ISSUE-71?
15:29:46 <trackbot> ISSUE-71 -- RDFa Core 1.1 LC comments from Shelley Powers -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-71 -- RDFa Core 1.1 LC comments from Shelley Powers -- open ←
15:29:46 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/71
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/71 ←
15:30:02 <ivan> ShaneM: sorry, I did not have time to look at those, let us skip those
Shane McCarron: sorry, I did not have time to look at those, let us skip those ←
15:30:14 <ivan> Topic: ISSUE-78: Prefixes and terms in one default RDFa Profile for all Host languages
15:30:14 <ivan> ISSUE-78?
15:30:14 <trackbot> ISSUE-78 -- Should we have default prefixes and terms for host languages -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-78 -- Should we have default prefixes and terms for host languages -- open ←
15:30:14 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/78
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/78 ←
15:30:29 <ShaneM> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/78
Shane McCarron: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/78 ←
15:31:10 <manu1> ISSUE-73?
15:31:10 <trackbot> ISSUE-73 -- The RDFa WG needs to determine how each RDFa Profile document is managed -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-73 -- The RDFa WG needs to determine how each RDFa Profile document is managed -- open ←
15:31:10 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/73
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/73 ←
15:31:15 <ivan> manu1: it is the whole issue of the default profile, what goes there, etc
Manu Sporny: it is the whole issue of the default profile, what goes there, etc ←
15:31:20 <ivan> zakim, unmute me
zakim, unmute me ←
15:31:20 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should no longer be muted ←
15:31:31 <manu1> Ivan: There are several sub-issues here
Ivan Herman: There are several sub-issues here [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:31:45 <manu1> Ivan: Do we want a default profile in the first place?
Ivan Herman: Do we want a default profile in the first place? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:32:01 <manu1> Ivan: Is the content of the default profile frozen at the time of REC?
Ivan Herman: Is the content of the default profile frozen at the time of REC? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:32:21 <manu1> Ivan: Is there a community-driven mechanism that allows people to add to the default profile over time?
Ivan Herman: Is there a community-driven mechanism that allows people to add to the default profile over time? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:32:32 <manu1> Ivan: In case we have a community-driven mechanism, what is it?
Ivan Herman: In case we have a community-driven mechanism, what is it? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:32:38 <Steven_> q+
Steven Pemberton: q+ ←
15:32:42 <manu1> Ivan: These are all related
Ivan Herman: These are all related [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:34:20 <manu1> Ivan: Do we want to have Dublin Core, FOAF, prefixes defined in the default profile for RDFa?
Ivan Herman: Do we want to have Dublin Core, FOAF, prefixes defined in the default profile for RDFa? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:34:55 <manu1> Manu: Do we want to have a single RDFa default profile for all languages?
Manu Sporny: Do we want to have a single RDFa default profile for all languages? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:35:35 <manu1> Ivan: Do prefixes defined in the default profile scale? What about UAs that can't cache the profiles?
Ivan Herman: Do prefixes defined in the default profile scale? What about UAs that can't cache the profiles? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:35:56 <manu1> ack Steven_
Manu Sporny: ack Steven_ ←
15:37:30 <manu1> Steven: I think RDFa does the right thing - we allow caching... registries are problematic.
Steven Pemberton: I think RDFa does the right thing - we allow caching... registries are problematic. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:37:40 <manu1> Ivan: Authors sometimes don't put in the namespace declarations.
Ivan Herman: Authors sometimes don't put in the namespace declarations. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:37:50 <manu1> I have a proposal:
Manu Sporny: I have a proposal: ←
15:38:02 <manu1> We have 1 RDFa default profile for all languages.
Manu Sporny: We have 1 RDFa default profile for all languages. ←
15:38:19 <manu1> We allow new prefixes to be registered up until RDFa Core 1.1 goes to REC.
Manu Sporny: We allow new prefixes to be registered up until RDFa Core 1.1 goes to REC. ←
15:38:23 <manu1> same with terms.
Manu Sporny: same with terms. ←
15:38:41 <manu1> We don't allow new prefixes to be added to the RDFa default profile document after REC.
Manu Sporny: We don't allow new prefixes to be added to the RDFa default profile document after REC. ←
15:38:57 <manu1> but we do allow items to be suggested for the next revision of RDFa Core.
Manu Sporny: but we do allow items to be suggested for the next revision of RDFa Core. ←
15:39:31 <manu1> q+
Manu Sporny: q+ ←
15:39:42 <manu1> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Manu Sporny: zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
15:39:42 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu1; got it ←
15:39:45 <manu1> q?
Manu Sporny: q? ←
15:40:46 <manu1> For a vocabulary to be included in the default profile, it must exhibit
Manu Sporny: For a vocabulary to be included in the default profile, it must exhibit ←
15:40:48 <manu1> at least the following:
Manu Sporny: at least the following: ←
15:40:49 <manu1> 1. Be long-lived, use a URL redirecting service, or be controlled by an
Manu Sporny: 1. Be long-lived, use a URL redirecting service, or be controlled by an ←
15:40:51 <manu1> organization that could ensure that the vocabulary stay reachable
Manu Sporny: organization that could ensure that the vocabulary stay reachable ←
15:40:52 <manu1> for 10+ years or more.
Manu Sporny: for 10+ years or more. ←
15:40:54 <manu1> 2. Be of general use to web developers (so, rdf, rdfa, xsd, foaf, dc
Manu Sporny: 2. Be of general use to web developers (so, rdf, rdfa, xsd, foaf, dc ←
15:40:55 <manu1> would make the cut... unsure about skos and owl).
Manu Sporny: would make the cut... unsure about skos and owl). ←
15:40:57 <manu1> 3. Be well documented, designed well and in use by a community that
Manu Sporny: 3. Be well documented, designed well and in use by a community that ←
15:40:58 <manu1> can demonstrate that the vocabulary will be maintained for 10+ years.
Manu Sporny: can demonstrate that the vocabulary will be maintained for 10+ years. ←
15:41:19 <ShaneM> q+ to discuss profile evolution
Shane McCarron: q+ to discuss profile evolution ←
15:41:42 <ivan> manu1: these are all issues, high level thoughts from everybody?
Manu Sporny: these are all issues, high level thoughts from everybody? ←
15:42:02 <ivan> Manu: I have put in irc my own approach
Manu Sporny: I have put in irc my own approach ←
15:42:11 <ivan> ... we used to talk about xml, svg, etc profiles
... we used to talk about xml, svg, etc profiles ←
15:42:30 <ivan> ... but what ivan put in on the mailing list to have only one default profile
... but what ivan put in on the mailing list to have only one default profile ←
15:42:42 <ivan> ... that would simplify things, only one profile is relevant
... that would simplify things, only one profile is relevant ←
15:42:50 <ivan> ... I think that is a good idea
... I think that is a good idea ←
15:43:10 <ivan> ... as far as community managed registry: I think it would be a massive headache to have something that works for everyone
... as far as community managed registry: I think it would be a massive headache to have something that works for everyone ←
15:43:30 <ivan> ... if we agree to have that, we have to talk to the players
... if we agree to have that, we have to talk to the players ←
15:43:42 <ivan> ... this should be fixed
... this should be fixed ←
15:43:56 <ivan> ... when the rec are published
... when the rec are published ←
15:43:59 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
15:44:11 <ivan> ... and have some sort of a mechanism to update?
... and have some sort of a mechanism to update? ←
15:44:31 <manu1> ack [IPcaller]
Manu Sporny: ack [IPcaller] ←
15:44:35 <markbirbeck> q+
Mark Birbeck: q+ ←
15:45:42 <ivan> manu1: proposal would be to take one registry, update it every X years, but not absolutely dynamic
Manu Sporny: proposal would be to take one registry, update it every X years, but not absolutely dynamic ←
15:45:43 <manu1> ack shaneM
Manu Sporny: ack shaneM ←
15:45:43 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to discuss profile evolution
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to discuss profile evolution ←
15:46:04 <ivan> ShaneM: you suggest that host languages would not have a default profiles
Shane McCarron: you suggest that host languages would not have a default profiles ←
15:46:24 <ivan> manu1: we would have one default profile for all our languages
Manu Sporny: we would have one default profile for all our languages ←
15:46:37 <ivan> ShaneM: that would not solve things
Shane McCarron: that would not solve things ←
15:46:46 <ivan> ... we have no announcement mechanism
... we have no announcement mechanism ←
15:46:59 <ivan> ... I would modify your proposal to say that host languages cannot define their own profile
... I would modify your proposal to say that host languages cannot define their own profile ←
15:47:02 <manu1> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
15:47:40 <manu1> ack markbirbeck
Manu Sporny: ack markbirbeck ←
15:48:14 <ivan> markbirbeck: one problem is to have a uri to profile that keeps changing
Mark Birbeck: one problem is to have a uri to profile that keeps changing ←
15:48:26 <ivan> ... one step would be to freeze a profile but also freeze the uri
... one step would be to freeze a profile but also freeze the uri ←
15:48:27 <manu1> http://w3.org/rdfa-1.1-default-profile
Manu Sporny: http://w3.org/rdfa-1.1-default-profile ←
15:48:31 <manu1> http://w3.org/rdfa-2.0-default-profile
Manu Sporny: http://w3.org/rdfa-2.0-default-profile ←
15:48:40 <ivan> ... based on a date
... based on a date ←
15:48:44 <ivan> ... which could then be changed
... which could then be changed ←
15:48:49 <manu1> http://w3.org/2011/05/15/rdfa-default-profile
Manu Sporny: http://w3.org/2011/05/15/rdfa-default-profile ←
15:48:57 <ivan> ... what people want is that the profile attribute would not be specified
... what people want is that the profile attribute would not be specified ←
15:49:18 <ivan> ... you then allow people to refer to a profile specificly
... you then allow people to refer to a profile specificly ←
15:49:22 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
15:49:38 <manu1> I like that suggestion, Mark
Manu Sporny: I like that suggestion, Mark ←
15:49:46 <ivan> ... but we have the possibility to have a default profile for a language
... but we have the possibility to have a default profile for a language ←
15:49:59 <ivan> ... or default value for the profile attribute is XXX
... or default value for the profile attribute is XXX ←
15:50:21 <ivan> ... that gets round the moving thing
... that gets round the moving thing ←
15:50:31 <ivan> ... but we talk about caching
... but we talk about caching ←
15:50:51 <manu1> I agree that we need to hardcode profiles into processors...
Manu Sporny: I agree that we need to hardcode profiles into processors... ←
15:50:56 <ivan> ... but always thoughts is that much more likely scenario is that people will hard code profiles
... but always thoughts is that much more likely scenario is that people will hard code profiles ←
15:51:07 <ivan> ... and then if you take that in context
... and then if you take that in context ←
15:51:12 <manu1> you don't need to, but I think that's what most implementations are going to do.
Manu Sporny: you don't need to, but I think that's what most implementations are going to do. ←
15:51:27 <ivan> ... in the original version we had the idea of profiles referring to other profiles
... in the original version we had the idea of profiles referring to other profiles ←
15:51:44 <ivan> ... that would give a much more dynamic features
... that would give a much more dynamic features ←
15:52:02 <ivan> ... drupal could create a profile that would aggregate another profile
... drupal could create a profile that would aggregate another profile ←
15:52:04 <ivan> ... etc
... etc ←
15:52:09 <ivan> q+
q+ ←
15:52:26 <manu1> I have issues w/ recursively sucking in profiles.
Manu Sporny: I have issues w/ recursively sucking in profiles. ←
15:52:28 <manu1> ack ivan
Manu Sporny: ack ivan ←
15:53:21 <manu1> Ivan: What this means is that every 2 years, W3C would open a new group to revise profiles.
Ivan Herman: What this means is that every 2 years, W3C would open a new group to revise profiles. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:53:28 <manu1> Ivan: I don't think that's feasible.
Ivan Herman: I don't think that's feasible. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:53:53 <markbirbeck> @manu: I would say that's because you're seeing profiles� as something to be loaded on the fly. :)
Mark Birbeck: @manu: I would say that's because you're seeing profiles� as something to be loaded on the fly. :) ←
15:54:44 <manu1> Ivan: If we can issue a new profile every 2 years, we make noise about it, implementers will have to update their implementations (hardcoded or not)
Ivan Herman: If we can issue a new profile every 2 years, we make noise about it, implementers will have to update their implementations (hardcoded or not) [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:55:04 <manu1> Ivan: I don't think we should bind these two things together - profiles having a dated URI vs. non-dated URI is a good idea.
Ivan Herman: I don't think we should bind these two things together - profiles having a dated URI vs. non-dated URI is a good idea. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:55:16 <manu1> Ivan: That's slightly orthogonal, though.
Ivan Herman: That's slightly orthogonal, though. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:55:26 <manu1> q?
Manu Sporny: q? ←
15:55:44 <ivan> markbirbeck: I think that we should not use the latest URI, we should always require an explicit URI
Mark Birbeck: I think that we should not use the latest URI, we should always require an explicit URI ←
15:55:53 <ivan> ... you do not gain the latest
... you do not gain the latest ←
15:56:26 <manu1> zakim, who is on the phone?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
15:56:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan, markbirbeck, ShaneM, Steven, manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan, markbirbeck, ShaneM, Steven, manu1 ←
15:56:45 <ivan> ShaneM: mark, to expand on someting you said
Shane McCarron: mark, to expand on someting you said ←
15:56:56 <ivan> ... assuming we had dated URI-s as profiles as they evolve
... assuming we had dated URI-s as profiles as they evolve ←
15:57:21 <ivan> ... would you expect implementation to hardcode all of those, so that pages that have explicit references to one would get it
... would you expect implementation to hardcode all of those, so that pages that have explicit references to one would get it ←
15:57:45 <ivan> markbirbeck: well... I am picturing that there is a new release of a new ontology
Mark Birbeck: well... I am picturing that there is a new release of a new ontology ←
15:57:57 <ivan> ... then w3c creates a new profile with the new ontology
... then w3c creates a new profile with the new ontology ←
15:58:08 <ivan> ... the only reason an implementer might hard code it
... the only reason an implementer might hard code it ←
15:58:23 <ivan> ... it is only for if somebody uses that explicitly
... it is only for if somebody uses that explicitly ←
15:58:37 <ivan> ... whether this finds its way into an rdfa language
... whether this finds its way into an rdfa language ←
15:58:45 <ivan> ... so we would just refer to the latest
... so we would just refer to the latest ←
15:58:57 <ivan> ... in the rdfa document
... in the rdfa document ←
15:59:05 <ivan> ... implementers may choose how they do it
... implementers may choose how they do it ←
15:59:37 <ivan> manu1: we should have a super session of LC
Manu Sporny: we should have a super session of LC ←
15:59:49 <ivan> .. our list is growing and we shall fill up the whole of february
.. our list is growing and we shall fill up the whole of february ←
15:59:53 <manu1> http://www.doodle.com/4kztvct2gd3wqvs8
Manu Sporny: http://www.doodle.com/4kztvct2gd3wqvs8 ←
16:00:07 <ivan> ... please put up your availability
... please put up your availability ←
16:00:13 <ivan> ... hopefully close a lot of them
... hopefully close a lot of them ←
16:01:23 <manu1> Should we have one default profile for all RDFa languages? Any objections?
Manu Sporny: Should we have one default profile for all RDFa languages? Any objections? ←
16:03:09 <manu1> Shane: No objection, do you think it will work for HTML WG?
Shane McCarron: No objection, do you think it will work for HTML WG? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
16:04:46 <manu1> PROPOSAL: RDFa 1.1 will have one default profile for all Host languages.
PROPOSED: RDFa 1.1 will have one default profile for all Host languages. ←
16:05:10 <ShaneM> +1 - NOTE that it might be a 'default default profile'
Shane McCarron: +1 - NOTE that it might be a 'default default profile' ←
16:05:15 <manu1> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
16:05:24 <Knud> +1
Knud Möller: +1 ←
16:05:24 <ivan> Ivan: +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
16:05:25 <Steven_> +0
Steven Pemberton: +0 ←
16:05:31 <markbirbeck> +1
Mark Birbeck: +1 ←
16:05:39 <manu1> RESOLVED: RDFa 1.1 will have one default profile for all Host languages.
RESOLVED: RDFa 1.1 will have one default profile for all Host languages. ←
16:08:40 <manu1> PROPOSAL: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile, those prefixes/terms will be frozen at REC (a mechanism will be setup to update the default profile before RDFa Core goes to REC)
PROPOSED: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile, those prefixes/terms will be frozen at REC (a mechanism will be setup to update the default profile before RDFa Core goes to REC) ←
16:09:33 <ivan> PROPOSAL: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile; a mechanism will be setup to update the default profile before RDFa Core goes to REC
PROPOSED: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile; a mechanism will be setup to update the default profile before RDFa Core goes to REC ←
16:10:26 <ivan> PROPOSAL: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile; a mechanism will be proposed to update the default profile
PROPOSED: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile; a mechanism will be proposed to update the default profile ←
16:10:41 <markbirbeck> +1
Mark Birbeck: +1 ←
16:10:46 <ivan> Ivan: +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
16:10:49 <manu1> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
16:11:50 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the call? ←
16:11:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan, markbirbeck, ShaneM, Steven, manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Knud (muted), Ivan, markbirbeck, ShaneM, Steven, manu1 ←
16:11:51 <Knud> +1
Knud Möller: +1 ←
16:11:57 <ShaneM> +1.....
Shane McCarron: +1..... ←
16:13:02 <manu1> RESOLVED: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile; a mechanism will be proposed to update the default profile
RESOLVED: RDFa WG will define a set of prefixes and terms for the default profile; a mechanism will be proposed to update the default profile ←
16:14:18 <markbirbeck> What about: PROPOSAL: RDFa WG will define a profile with a set of prefixes and terms, and this profile will be referenced as the default profile. A mechanism will also be proposed for creating additional profiles which can be referenced as the default profile for future versions of RDFa.
Mark Birbeck: What about: PROPOSAL: RDFa WG will define a profile with a set of prefixes and terms, and this profile will be referenced as the default profile. A mechanism will also be proposed for creating additional profiles which can be referenced as the default profile for future versions of RDFa. ←
16:16:12 <Steven_> +1
Steven Pemberton: +1 ←
16:18:01 <Zakim> -Knud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Knud ←
16:18:54 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
Zakim IRC Bot: -markbirbeck ←
16:19:15 <markbirbeck> @Ivan: What you seek is simply not possible.
Mark Birbeck: @Ivan: What you seek is simply not possible. ←
16:19:46 <markbirbeck> And it would be a major mistake to try to achieve it by having a profile that can change at any time.
Mark Birbeck: And it would be a major mistake to try to achieve it by having a profile that can change at any time. ←
16:19:55 <webr3> just fyi, js3 has over 100 prefixes defined by default, and in the past two weeks I've had 4 requests to add more to the default profile, including one two seconds ago to add bibo
Nathan Rixham: just fyi, js3 has over 100 prefixes defined by default, and in the past two weeks I've had 4 requests to add more to the default profile, including one two seconds ago to add bibo ←
16:20:05 <manu1> http://w3.org/profiles/rdfa-default
Manu Sporny: http://w3.org/profiles/rdfa-default ←
16:20:20 <markbirbeck> It makes caching "meaningless", since you can't reliably cache.
Mark Birbeck: It makes caching "meaningless", since you can't reliably cache. ←
16:20:40 <manu1> http://w3.org/profiles/2010/05/14/rdfa-default
Manu Sporny: http://w3.org/profiles/2010/05/14/rdfa-default ←
16:20:59 <markbirbeck> It makes hard-coding into phones and small devices meaningless, too.
Mark Birbeck: It makes hard-coding into phones and small devices meaningless, too. ←
16:21:00 <manu1> RDFa 1.1 => default profile => http://w3.org/profiles/2010/05/14/rdfa-default
Manu Sporny: RDFa 1.1 => default profile => http://w3.org/profiles/2010/05/14/rdfa-default ←
16:21:22 <markbirbeck> (BTW, not sure why I got dropped...the phone went dead on me.)
Mark Birbeck: (BTW, not sure why I got dropped...the phone went dead on me.) ←
16:21:28 <manu1> RDFa 2.0 => default profile => http://w3.org/profiles/2015/05/14/rdfa-default
Manu Sporny: RDFa 2.0 => default profile => http://w3.org/profiles/2015/05/14/rdfa-default ←
16:21:39 <ShaneM> q+ to discuss process
Shane McCarron: q+ to discuss process ←
16:21:46 <manu1> ack shanem
Manu Sporny: ack shanem ←
16:21:46 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to discuss process
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to discuss process ←
16:24:09 <manu1> q+
Manu Sporny: q+ ←
16:25:13 <webr3> RDFa 1.1 processors must recognise the following prefixes: x,y,z - this list is also available as an RDFa Profile here: http://..... (then repeat for each new spec)
Nathan Rixham: RDFa 1.1 processors must recognise the following prefixes: x,y,z - this list is also available as an RDFa Profile here: http://..... (then repeat for each new spec) ←
16:26:34 <manu1> ack
Manu Sporny: ack ←
16:26:39 <manu1> ack manu1
Manu Sporny: ack manu1 ←
16:27:10 <manu1> we seem to be coming to some sort of consensus:
Manu Sporny: we seem to be coming to some sort of consensus: ←
16:29:27 <manu1> We bind RDFa 1.1 profile to a dated URL.
Manu Sporny: We bind RDFa 1.1 profile to a dated URL. ←
16:30:59 <manu1> For example: http://w3c.org/profiles/2010/05/15/rdfa-default
Manu Sporny: For example: http://w3c.org/profiles/2010/05/15/rdfa-default ←
16:31:12 <manu1> That profile could be updated every 2+ years
Manu Sporny: That profile could be updated every 2+ years ←
16:31:27 <manu1> RDFa 1.1 is bound to that URL as the default profile
Manu Sporny: RDFa 1.1 is bound to that URL as the default profile ←
16:32:40 <manu1> http://w3c.org/profiles/rdfa/1.1
Manu Sporny: http://w3c.org/profiles/rdfa/1.1 ←
16:34:23 <Zakim> -manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu1 ←
16:34:24 <ivan> zakim, drop me
zakim, drop me ←
16:34:24 <Zakim> -ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: -ShaneM ←
16:34:24 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan is being disconnected ←
16:34:28 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
16:34:32 <Zakim> -Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: -Steven ←
16:34:34 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended ←
16:34:38 <Zakim> Attendees were +3539149aaaa, Knud, Ivan, manu1, +200000aabb, markbirbeck, +1.612.217.aacc, ShaneM, Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were +3539149aaaa, Knud, Ivan, manu1, +200000aabb, markbirbeck, +1.612.217.aacc, ShaneM, Steven ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2011-01-27 17:00:10 UTC by 'msporny', comments: 'Minor changes to the minutes and formatting updates.'