IRC log of rdfa on 2011-05-12

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:56:52 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #rdfa

13:56:52 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/12-rdfa-irc

13:56:54 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

13:56:54 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #rdfa

13:56:56 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be 7332

13:56:56 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes

13:56:57 [trackbot]

Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference

13:56:57 [trackbot]

Date: 12 May 2011

13:58:25 [ShaneM]

I am special stupid. I managed to schedule a customer meeting on top of this meeting. I am so sorry. the whole meeting was for issues I care about!

13:59:40 [manu]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011May/0058.html

13:59:59 [ShaneM]

I will wrap up as soon as I can.

14:00:07 [ShaneM]

(maybe they won't show)

14:00:58 [manu]

zakim, who is on the call?

14:00:58 [Zakim]

SW_RDFa()10:00AM has not yet started, manu

14:00:59 [Zakim]

On IRC I see RRSAgent, ShaneM, tomayac, MacTed, webr3, ivan, manu, manu1, trackbot

14:01:11 [ivan]

zakim, dial ivan-voip

14:01:11 [Zakim]

ok, ivan; the call is being made

14:01:36 [ivan]

zakim, who is here?

14:01:36 [Zakim]

SW_RDFa()10:00AM has not yet started, ivan

14:01:37 [Zakim]

On IRC I see RRSAgent, ShaneM, tomayac, MacTed, webr3, ivan, manu, manu1, trackbot

14:01:52 [manu]

zakim, I am ??manu

14:01:53 [Zakim]

sorry, manu, I do not see a party named '??manu'

14:06:51 [Benjamin]

Benjamin has joined #rdfa

14:07:53 [MacTed]

Zakim, code?

14:07:53 [Zakim]

the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), MacTed

14:08:10 [MacTed]

Zakim, this is 7332

14:08:10 [Zakim]

ok, MacTed; that matches SW_RDFa()10:00AM

14:08:11 [Benjamin]

zakim, who is on the phone

14:08:12 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'who is on the phone', Benjamin

14:08:14 [MacTed]

Zakim, who's here?

14:08:14 [Zakim]

On the phone I see hta, ??P13, Ivan, ??P28, OpenLink_Software

14:08:16 [Zakim]

On IRC I see Benjamin, Zakim, RRSAgent, ShaneM, tomayac, MacTed, webr3, ivan, manu, manu1, trackbot

14:08:22 [MacTed]

Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

14:08:22 [Zakim]

+MacTed; got it

14:08:24 [MacTed]

Zakim, mute me

14:08:24 [Zakim]

MacTed should now be muted

14:09:00 [MacTed]

Zakim, who's noisy?

14:09:11 [Zakim]

MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P28 (91%)

14:09:20 [MacTed]

Zakim, ??p28 is Benjamin

14:09:20 [Zakim]

+Benjamin; got it

14:09:24 [MacTed]

Zakim, mute Benjamin

14:09:25 [manu]

zakim, I am ??P13

14:09:26 [MacTed]

:-)

14:09:26 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:09:28 [Zakim]

+manu; got it

14:10:07 [Benjamin]

zakim, unmute me

14:10:07 [Zakim]

Benjamin should no longer be muted

14:10:15 [Benjamin]

zakim, mute me

14:10:15 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:12:59 [ivan]

scribenick: ivan

14:13:47 [ivan]

topic: congrats

14:14:09 [ivan]

manu: we had a good publication, and also a semanticweb.com piece on the documents

14:14:10 [manu]

http://semanticweb.com/on-various-rdf-api-s%E2%80%A6_b19815

14:14:40 [Benjamin]

Thank you Ivan for writing this article !!!

14:15:45 [ivan]

manu: ivan, you sent an email that there is a publishing moratorium next week

14:16:07 [ivan]

... it gives us a little bit more time to review ben's document on rdf api

14:16:15 [Benjamin]

zakim, unmute me

14:16:15 [Zakim]

Benjamin should no longer be muted

14:16:15 [ivan]

... speaking of...

14:16:18 [manu]

Topic: Update on spec progress

14:17:01 [ivan]

Benjamin: I fixed the examples, changed the environment to 'Data'

14:17:06 [ivan]

... I fixed webidl

14:17:13 [ivan]

... otherwise I did not do much

14:17:14 [manu]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdf-api/

14:17:14 [MacTed]

fwiw, headsets usually work far better than onboard microphones/speakers

14:17:26 [ivan]

... what is left: language has to be fixed,

14:17:37 [ivan]

... we have to discuss the projection, based on the email discussion

14:17:55 [ivan]

Benjamin: I added the set method to the projection

14:18:00 [ivan]

... there are some issues on that

14:18:25 [Benjamin]

oopen issues on projections are:

14:18:32 [ivan]

s/oopen/open/

14:18:37 [Benjamin]

nested projections

14:19:11 [ivan]

q+

14:19:27 [Benjamin]

zakim, mute me

14:19:27 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:19:36 [manu]

ack ivan

14:19:51 [manu]

Manu: The reason we did this was...

14:20:02 [manu]

Ivan: Doing automatic projection generation is not a good idea, for all the reasons that Manu said.

14:20:40 [manu]

Ivan: Niklas wanted one more method where when one looks at a triple w/ a URIRef, then what you get back is a Projection for that object being the subject. It's strictly a one-step indirection.

14:20:55 [manu]

... it may help to get over the situation where you have the duality of string vs. object.

14:21:15 [manu]

... it helps to overcome that and this is a fairly natural thing to do. It's fairly natural when the object in question is a blank node.

14:21:16 [Benjamin]

e.g., ben = ivan.getRel("foaf:knows")

14:21:42 [manu]

Manu: What's the return type?

14:21:47 [manu]

sequence of Projections or Projection?

14:22:02 [Benjamin]

q+ do we really need this?

14:22:47 [Benjamin]

q+

14:22:47 [ivan]

manu: we had a choice on to get the 'first' or all in a sequence

14:22:50 [manu]

ack Benjamin

14:22:51 [ivan]

... maybe that is what we need

14:22:54 [Benjamin]

zakim, unmute me

14:22:54 [Zakim]

Benjamin was not muted, Benjamin

14:23:00 [manu]

get() vs. getAll()

14:23:03 [ivan]

Benjamin: I do not really we need

14:23:16 [ivan]

... it is not a big deal to do it manually

14:23:36 [ivan]

... even in the case of a blank node you get...

14:23:37 [manu]

_:bnode1

14:23:56 [ivan]

manu: uri for a blank node?

14:24:02 [ivan]

... we get only strings

14:24:15 [ivan]

... the projections are not for low level objects

14:24:34 [ivan]

... we cannot get the difference between an iriref and a string

14:24:47 [ivan]

... if we were able to get the difference, then you are right, it does not matter

14:24:58 [ivan]

... the reason we might want to have that

14:25:06 [tomayac]

is it an issue in practice? we had this in the json discussions as well. some serializations cared, most simply didn't...

14:25:08 [ivan]

... is that we cannot make the difference

14:25:23 [manu]

var knows = ivan.get("foaf:knows");

14:25:36 [manu]

knows == "http://manu.sporny.org/webid"

14:26:01 [ivan]

ivan.get( "http://manu.sporny.org/webid") would work

14:26:10 [manu]

data.getProjection("http://manu.sporny.org/webid")

14:26:49 [ivan]

manu: in that case we really do not need it

14:27:06 [manu]

The blank node issue...

14:27:09 [ivan]

manu: for a blank node

14:27:13 [manu]

knows == "_:bnode2"

14:27:26 [manu]

data.getProjection("_:bnode2") ??

14:27:28 [Benjamin]

why not:

14:27:28 [Benjamin]

_:bnode1 = ivan.get("foaf:knows")

14:27:28 [Benjamin]

ben = data.getProjection(_:bnode1)

14:27:36 [ivan]

q+

14:28:01 [ivan]

manu: the reason I am afraid is when you merge multiple graph together then...

14:28:11 [ivan]

... what happens then to the bnodes

14:28:57 [ivan]

... the two graphs that are merged then things may go wrong because _:bnode1 may not point at the data you are thinking about

14:29:03 [manu]

ack ivan

14:29:11 [manu]

Ivan: That's the same issue I have w/ this.

14:29:24 [manu]

Ivan: If we have bnodes, we are going to have to deal with them...

14:29:37 [MacTed]

Zakim, unmute me

14:29:37 [Zakim]

MacTed should no longer be muted

14:29:42 [manu]

Ivan: It's a potentially dangerous thing to do.

14:29:56 [manu]

Ted: It's a guidance question...

14:30:14 [ivan]

MacTed: blank nodes exist, but if we say if you can avoid using bnodes, do so

14:30:15 [ivan]

q+

14:30:21 [manu]

ack Ivan

14:30:28 [manu]

Ivan: I don't disagree with that, Ted

14:30:43 [Benjamin]

q+ to ask if getRel and getRev really solve this?

14:31:03 [manu]

Ivan: However, if we keep to the example of FOAF, the semantic web is full of bnodes... it's an issue that will be widespread - we should try to be as fool-proof as we can.

14:31:07 [manu]

ack Benjamin

14:31:07 [Zakim]

Benjamin, you wanted to ask if getRel and getRev really solve this?

14:31:37 [ivan]

Benjamin: if we have a subject and an object as bnodes

14:31:43 [ivan]

... it is just the same...

14:31:45 [ivan]

q+

14:31:50 [manu]

ack ivan

14:31:51 [tomayac]

maybe stupid idea: if we have a bnode, serialize it as a JSON-LD object, run a hash function over the JSON.stringified version of it, and give the bnode a uri at fixed.example.org/.well-known/{hash_result}

14:32:05 [manu]

q+ to wonder whether or not "it's the same problem w/ JavaScript"

14:32:27 [tomayac]

this would allow us to compare bnodes easily

14:33:06 [manu]

Ivan: Maybe everything will be renumbered at runtime... you can never rely on a bnode ID after a graph merge, etc.

14:33:21 [manu]

Ivan: The only thing you can ask is "is this a bnode" and "are these two bnodes the same"?

14:34:17 [ivan]

Benjamin: the only time this is an issue is at the parse,

14:34:28 [Benjamin]

zakim, mute me

14:34:28 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:34:36 [ivan]

manu: but at the lower level we do a bunch of graph merge

14:34:57 [manu]

Benjamin: I think we can put a warning in the document on the .parse() method because that's when this becomes an issue.

14:35:55 [manu]

Ivan: I can see that if we put a warning in the document working... this may be something we learn more about in implementations.

14:35:57 [manu]

ack manu

14:35:57 [Zakim]

manu, you wanted to wonder whether or not "it's the same problem w/ JavaScript"

14:36:26 [ivan]

manu: getRel mechanism could solve this problem, even if you do a graph merge

14:36:36 [ivan]

... if you had a programming language that was operated on references

14:37:07 [ivan]

... if you do a graph merge, the references will still be fine

14:37:13 [ivan]

q+

14:37:47 [manu]

Manu: .getRel() could work across graph merges if we deal with languages that operate on references.

14:38:10 [manu]

Ivan: Forget about blank nodes for a while - if I have a graph and ask for a Projection, that projection is all the triples that have a common subject.

14:38:48 [manu]

... I have a reference... then I do a merge. Will the projection have to be updated? Does it give me a current snapshot into the graph, or does it give me an auto-updated item.

14:39:25 [manu]

Manu: If we deal w/ reference-based languages - we get an auto-updated item.

14:39:35 [manu]

Ivan: When we deal with things that aren't just snapshots, that's when we get in trouble.

14:40:00 [manu]

Ivan: If it is a snapshot, an implementation can optimize for it. If it's not a snapshot, every request on a projection has to go down to the graph and do a query.

14:41:27 [ivan]

manu: there is a middle ground, (a) snapshot, nothing changes (b) snapshot, number triples do not change, but the values do (c) it is not a snapshot, everything can change

14:41:27 [Benjamin]

q+ to say it has to be a snapshot.

14:41:58 [ivan]

manu: third option may become very complicated

14:42:17 [manu]

ack ivan

14:42:54 [Benjamin]

zakim, unmute me

14:42:54 [Zakim]

Benjamin should no longer be muted

14:42:58 [manu]

Ivan: We agree on option #3 and option #1, not on option #2

14:43:13 [ivan]

Benjamin: if it is not a snapshot, then we have to solve racing conditions

14:43:14 [manu]

Benjamin: if it is not a snapshot, we will have to deal with any sort of "waiting" condition.

14:43:26 [ivan]

ivan: yes, good point

14:43:45 [manu]

Ivan: This has to be very clearly documented...

14:43:58 [Zakim]

+??P36

14:44:11 [ivan]

zakim, ??P36 is ShaneM

14:44:11 [Zakim]

+ShaneM; got it

14:44:13 [Benjamin]

zakim, mute me

14:44:13 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:44:19 [Benjamin]

zakim, unmute me

14:44:19 [Zakim]

Benjamin should no longer be muted

14:44:38 [Benjamin]

zakim, mute me

14:44:38 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:44:45 [Benjamin]

zakim, unmute me

14:44:45 [Zakim]

Benjamin should no longer be muted

14:44:47 [ivan]

Result of the discussion: projections are snapshots, and we do not need getRels

14:45:00 [webr3]

webr3 has joined #rdfa

14:45:06 [Benjamin]

zakim, mute me

14:45:06 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:45:11 [manu]

Topic: Term vs. Alias

14:45:14 [ivan]

q+

14:45:17 [ivan]

ack Benjamin

14:45:18 [manu]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/89

14:45:18 [Zakim]

Benjamin, you wanted to say it has to be a snapshot.

14:45:31 [MacTed]

Zakim, mute Benjamin

14:45:31 [Zakim]

Benjamin should now be muted

14:45:37 [MacTed]

:-)

14:46:43 [ivan]

Topic: term vs. alias ?

14:46:47 [manu]

Topic: Term vs. Alias

14:46:53 [manu]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/89

14:47:00 [ivan]

issue-89?

14:47:02 [trackbot]

ISSUE-89 -- Decide what word we want to use to refer to the concept of RDFa terms - 'term' or 'alias' -- open

14:47:02 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/89

14:47:27 [ivan]

manu: this came up because nathan used 'alias' in the last interface

14:47:50 [ivan]

... as ivan said we would have to change lots of documents if we wanted to use alias

14:48:04 [ivan]

... and, if we decide to change, how to do that

14:48:06 [ivan]

q+

14:48:15 [MacTed]

+1 term

14:48:22 [ivan]

ShaneM: we should continue to use terms

14:48:48 [ivan]

... it has a mind share, it is already in use in the area activity as well, i do not want to reeducate them, i do no see the advantage

14:49:04 [ivan]

... alias is computer science, and term is more linguistic

14:49:10 [tomayac]

+1 for term, fwiw

14:49:11 [ivan]

... term seesm to fit in that

14:49:20 [ivan]

s/seesm/seems/

14:49:25 [manu]

ack ivan

14:49:53 [manu]

Ivan: I am a bit afraid that we're going to have to change all the docs/implementations/blog posts...

14:49:59 [ShaneM]

Oh yeah! And datatypes, XHTML M12N, etc. ick

14:50:07 [manu]

Ivan: There doesn't seem to be a very big advantage for making the change... it's a bit too late to make this change.

14:50:09 [manu]

q+

14:50:23 [manu]

Ivan: Keep terms.

14:50:32 [manu]

ack ivan

14:50:37 [ivan]

manu: I had a different view on this

14:50:46 [ivan]

... last time I felt strongly to move to alias

14:51:10 [ivan]

... people would understand what alias is for, better than a term

14:51:16 [ivan]

... after all this is what we do

14:51:30 [ivan]

... it invokes more an alias than a term

14:51:33 [ivan]

q+

14:51:36 [ivan]

ack manu

14:51:47 [ShaneM]

q+ to discuss what a term really is

14:51:48 [ivan]

manu: this is the strongest argument I have

14:52:03 [manu]

ack ivan

14:52:07 [ivan]

ack ivan

14:52:26 [manu]

Ivan: If we had this discussion a year ago, I would fully agree with you.

14:52:45 [manu]

Ivan: The argument resonates with me - it's a bit too late. We need a stronger argument now.

14:52:48 [manu]

ack ShaneM

14:52:48 [Zakim]

ShaneM, you wanted to discuss what a term really is

14:53:02 [ivan]

ShaneM: you said something I may not agree with

14:53:22 [ivan]

... it is true internally that we have a mechanism to take a string and map it to a uri

14:53:34 [ivan]

... but that is not how I explain things to people

14:53:45 [ivan]

.. it is a component of a vocabulary

14:54:07 [ivan]

... it is a term. it expands to a uri, but for our audience 'you can use this word, and means _this_'

14:54:21 [ivan]

... we would like to attract the microformat community with this

14:54:28 [ivan]

... they not care about uris

14:54:36 [ivan]

PROPOSAL: keep terms

14:54:45 [ivan]

+1

14:54:50 [MacTed]

+1

14:54:51 [tomayac]

+1

14:54:58 [manu]

+1

14:55:02 [Benjamin]

+1

14:55:16 [manu]

RESOLVED: Keep the word 'term' - do not use the word 'alias'.

14:55:17 [ShaneM]

+1

14:55:55 [manu]

Topic: Formulation on fragid in RDFa Core

14:56:06 [manu]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/94

14:56:10 [ivan]

manu: this boils down removing 2 words from the spec

14:56:35 [ivan]

... the issue the tag / j rees had with the spec is that we say the word 'at present', and we should not say it

14:56:50 [ivan]

... if we do that, they are happy

14:58:17 [manu]

PROPOSAL: Remove the words "at present" when discussing fragment identifiers. The editor will create language that is in line with the TAG's request.

14:58:20 [manu]

+1

14:58:22 [ivan]

+1

14:58:25 [tomayac]

+1

14:58:26 [Benjamin]

+1

14:58:34 [ShaneM]

+1

14:58:40 [ivan]

RESOLVED: Remove the words "at present" when discussing fragment identifiers. The editor will create language that is in line with the TAG's request.

14:59:32 [MacTed]

+1 :-)

14:59:55 [manu]

ACTION: Manu to do official 2nd LC response to ISSUE-94.

15:00:03 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-77 - Do official 2nd LC response to ISSUE-94. [on Manu Sporny - due 2011-05-19].

15:00:05 [manu]

Topic: IRI vs. URI References

15:00:33 [manu]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/87

15:00:37 [ivan]

ISSUE-87?

15:00:38 [trackbot]

ISSUE-87 -- IRIs vs URI References -- open

15:00:38 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/87

15:00:54 [ivan]

manu: misha asked us to use the same terminology than the rest of the document

15:01:05 [ivan]

... ShaneM explained the reasoning on the mailing list

15:03:11 [MacTed]

I have to jump to another call... so make good decisions! :-)

15:03:14 [Zakim]

-MacTed

15:04:17 [ShaneM]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Mar/0069.html

15:05:58 [ivan]

http://www.résumé.org

15:06:13 [manu]

Shane responded: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Mar/0067.html

15:06:25 [manu]

Mischa's response to Shane's response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Mar/0069.html

15:06:40 [ivan]

xsn--????

15:07:18 [tomayac]

xn--rsum-bpad.org

15:07:56 [tomayac]

manu, depends on your browser

15:08:00 [tomayac]

some show it, some hide it

15:08:10 [tomayac]

in the background they punicode it

15:08:43 [manu]

So for: www.zürich.com does RDFa output that? Or does it output: www.xn--zrich-kva.com

15:10:21 [manu]

Can RDFa output the following: <www.сделат картинки.com> ? for a subject?

15:13:15 [tomayac]

we have problems with e.g. ntriples, which only allow ascii, rdfa has no problem with it

15:14:24 [ShaneM]

tomayac: ahh

15:15:53 [manu]

ACTION: Manu to write e-mail to RDF WG chairs about ISSUE-87 - we can't go to CR without this being resolved.

15:15:53 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-78 - Write e-mail to RDF WG chairs about ISSUE-87 - we can't go to CR without this being resolved. [on Manu Sporny - due 2011-05-19].

15:17:15 [ivan]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0469.html

15:18:16 [tomayac]

shouldn't we default to punycoding all IRIs, so treat them always the same. least common multiple...

15:23:29 [ShaneM]

Section 6 says "The lexical space of a CURIE is as defined in curie below. The value space is the set of URIs."

15:24:00 [Zakim]

-Benjamin

15:24:19 [Benjamin]

bye

15:27:40 [ShaneM]

href="http://www.сделат картинки.com/example" is what in the DOM within a browser?

15:27:56 [manu]

ShaneM: No, that's not in the DOM

15:28:29 [tomayac]

http://www.xn--zrich-kva.de/

15:30:12 [tomayac]

<a href="http://www.xn--schweizer-kche-qsb.de/">Schweizer Küche</a>

15:34:16 [tomayac]

<a href="http://www.xn--schweizer-kche-qsb.de/">Schweizer Küche</a>

15:34:39 [ShaneM]

check this: http://www.aptest.com/iri.html

15:34:44 [tomayac]

my irc client punycodes... the 2nd link had a ü in it

15:35:48 [manu]

RDFa processors should allow: <a href="http://www.schweizer-küche.de/">Schweizer Küche</a>

15:36:48 [tomayac]

hmmm, personally i expect the rdfa processors to punycode. just sayin'...

15:45:04 [Zakim]

-Ivan

15:45:05 [Zakim]

-ShaneM

15:45:05 [Zakim]

-hta

15:45:07 [Zakim]

SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended

15:45:10 [Zakim]

Attendees were hta, Ivan, MacTed, Benjamin, manu, ShaneM

15:48:06 [tomayac]

we kinda have this issue already: http://dbpedia.org/page/Tie_%28draw%29 is NOT the same as http://dbpedia.org/page/Tie_(draw), where http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tie_(draw) is the same as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tie_%28draw%29

16:10:12 [manu]

tomayac, true - but I'm wondering if the decision we make would make that case even worse? or better?

16:10:39 [tomayac]

better imho, as we define a rule everyone has to accept

16:10:42 [manu]

and for that matter - what is "worse" or "better"

16:10:58 [tomayac]

we can also make the rule that everyone has to uplift (de-punycodify) their uris

16:11:17 [tomayac]

i dont really care, however, tend to downlift, as this is what browsers do

16:11:18 [manu]

does that mean punycoding? How do you think people in Japan, China, Middle East will feel if all of their domain names can't be expressed in the natural language?

16:11:44 [manu]

meaning, non-ascii is a second-class citizen in RDF?

16:11:51 [tomayac]

i agree! fair argument

16:12:06 [manu]

I do agree w/ you that it would be good to have one rule that everyone follows.

16:12:21 [tomayac]

but i'd say: it's mainly a perception thing. just as people dont look at the bits in http...

16:12:27 [manu]

I do also think that N-Triples is wrong, and so are the way that Internationalized Domain Name identifiers were done.

16:12:29 [tomayac]

...people dont directly look at triples

16:13:04 [manu]

sure, /some/ people don't look at triples... but I'm concerned about the developers that do look at triples.

16:13:10 [tomayac]

whatever way we choose, let's choose one and make it a rule everyone has to obey to

16:13:40 [tomayac]

devs will write an abstraction layer on top that allows them to see nice triples

16:13:45 [manu]

my other concern is that we can tell people to "obey this rule", but if it doesn't affect implementations (de-punycoding values)... then I don't think people will listen.

16:13:52 [tomayac]

or they think binary anyways ;-)

16:13:59 [manu]

heh

16:14:06 [manu]

I think some developers will and some developers won't

16:14:09 [tomayac]

how about a SHOULD

16:14:23 [manu]

I'm fine w/ a MUST

16:14:27 [manu]

but I don't think people will listen

16:14:43 [tomayac]

and rdfa distillers (de)punycode silently (up or downlift, whatever we decide for)

16:14:49 [manu]

(or rather, 80% will listen, but others will not)

16:15:01 [tomayac]

^^

16:15:12 [manu]

and that will lead to diverging implementations...

16:15:30 [manu]

so, are you saying that RDFa Processors, if upon seeing a punycoded value, will de-punycode the value?

16:15:45 [manu]

before emitting the triple?

16:15:56 [tomayac]

or the other way round, yepp. so "incorrect" triples would be auto-corrected

16:16:18 [manu]

ok, so what happens when the author intended to have the value 'punycoded' due to a reason that we cannot forsee.

16:16:38 [manu]

Their systems team has some strange requirement that "all IDNs must be punycoded" and they end up creating identifiers w/ punycoded values?

16:16:59 [manu]

(my underlying argument is that whether or not to punycode should be a decision made by the developers - not us.)

16:17:29 [tomayac]

ok, but then we live with uncertainty whether people are talking about the same, or not

16:17:37 [tomayac]

but fair point of course!

16:17:40 [manu]

yes, but it's their mistake to make :)

16:18:02 [manu]

I don't see how we could do either, without screwing someone up somewhere in the world.

16:18:17 [manu]

and ultimately, we've always settled on: Give the power to the authors.

16:18:25 [tomayac]

the best compromises are those where no one is happy

16:18:32 [tomayac]

but everyone can live with ;-)

16:18:33 [manu]

haha :)

16:18:49 [tomayac]

maybe the problem isnt that big

16:19:02 [tomayac]

a couple of owl:sameAsses here and there

16:19:06 [manu]

sure, if it were up to me I'd go back to the IDN people and tell them that they should've fixed their broken-ass system instead of introducing punycoded values.

16:19:33 [manu]

the IDN punycoded stuff is a non-solution.

16:19:52 [manu]

... and I'd tell the N-Triples people to upgrade their spec to support UTF-8

16:20:00 [tomayac]

well, we call this legacy ;-)

16:20:10 [manu]

Down with legacy!

16:21:33 [manu]

More seriously - I think the decisions that we make with RDFa should be forward-looking... not attempting to shoe-horn some badly designed legacy hack into RDFa.

16:21:58 [tomayac]

as i said, i can live with the up-lifting rule

16:22:05 [tomayac]

we just need to make it

16:22:41 [manu]

What I'd be happy with is "don't touch the sequence of characters, except when canonicalizing."

16:26:04 [MacTed]

"be liberal in what you accept, be conservative in what you generate..."

16:26:35 [MacTed]

(I think this is the first time I've encountered "punycode" ... what's that mean?)

16:27:25 [manu]

A legacy hack: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punycode

16:27:59 [manu]

The only reason the hack was put in there was so that DNS could express Internationalized names.

16:28:12 [manu]

so, rather than requiring that DNS systems upgrade to allow UTF-8

16:28:43 [manu]

they put a hack in there that is now generating these awful URLs that nobody can read

16:29:05 [manu]

it's also lead to a number of phishing attacks in browsers that don't de-punycode values before putting them in the address bar.

16:29:43 [MacTed]

well... URLs *are* supposed to be considered opaque -- so readability *should* be a null argument

16:29:54 [tomayac]

wrt to phising: this still is a problem if utf-8 were supported directly

16:30:14 [manu]

tomayac: true - but now we have 2 phising vectors instead of just 1

16:30:40 [MacTed]

ok, so punycode is not so different from percent-encoding/URL-encoding ...

16:30:41 [tomayac]

we see this in ads as well where people try to re-write iPhone with look-alike chars to trick the trademark filters...

16:31:00 [manu]

MacTed: Yes, it's just another way to do percent-encoding/URL-encoding

16:31:04 [tomayac]

it's an rfc actually: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3492

16:31:48 [MacTed]

and we're down again to lexic vs syntactic vs semantic equivalence

16:32:52 [tomayac]

1 == true

16:32:52 [tomayac]

true

16:32:52 [tomayac]

1 === true

16:32:53 [tomayac]

false

16:33:14 [tomayac]

we need owl:reallySameAs ;-)

16:33:28 [MacTed]

*supposedly* there is only one valid string for each URI, which includes all required percent encoding and no more ... but because tools have been badly behaved for a long time, nobody's really quite sure what that string is for any complex URI

16:33:59 [MacTed]

owl:sameAs is perfectly fine as it is -- even when used incorrectly

16:34:33 [tomayac]

ask harry halpin this question

16:34:47 [MacTed]

nameA owl:sameAs nameB

16:34:48 [tomayac]

well, you didn't ask a question

16:34:56 [MacTed]

two names for same thing

16:35:25 [tomayac]

yeah, this is what i was saying above. maybe a couple of owl:sameAs between punycode uri and non-punycode uri can fix the world

16:35:28 [MacTed]

like "Ted" and "Theodore" and "Teddy" ... within a namespace

16:36:18 [MacTed]

such would help fix the world, for sure ... given good reasoning engines

16:36:39 [tomayac]

+1

16:36:54 [manu]

"given good reasoning engines" being the operative phrase.

16:36:59 [manu]

Know of any good ones :P

16:37:31 [manu]

where good == performant, open source, good documentation

16:37:41 [tomayac]

hooray for the web of data as one, single database ;-)

16:39:38 [MacTed]

I like Virtuoso.... ;-)

16:39:57 [manu]

hehe :)

16:45:38 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has left #rdfa

17:00:46 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #rdfa

18:37:53 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa

18:37:55 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has left #rdfa

18:59:54 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa

19:09:41 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa

19:09:45 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has left #rdfa

19:49:49 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa

20:00:35 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has left #rdfa

20:19:19 [webr3]

webr3 has joined #rdfa

21:03:18 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa

22:09:40 [webr3]

webr3 has joined #rdfa

22:49:08 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa

23:20:03 [webr3]

webr3 has joined #rdfa

23:24:54 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa

23:28:53 [ShaneM]

ShaneM has joined #rdfa