13:42:14 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
13:42:14 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/08/25-rdfa-irc
13:42:16 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:42:16 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfa
13:42:18 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
13:42:18 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes
13:42:19 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference
13:42:19 <trackbot> Date: 25 August 2011
13:46:58 <Benjamin> Benjamin has joined #rdfa
13:50:19 <manu1> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Aug/0048.html
13:50:24 <manu1> Chair: Manu
13:52:10 <scor> scor has joined #rdfa
13:52:32 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Aug/0048.html
13:53:41 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
13:53:49 <Zakim> + +358.405.25aaaa
13:53:59 <bergie> Zakim, aaaa is me
13:53:59 <Zakim> +bergie; got it
13:54:00 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
13:54:00 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
13:54:01 <Zakim> +Ivan
13:54:06 <bergie> Zakim, mute me
13:54:06 <Zakim> bergie should now be muted
13:54:36 <ivan> zakim, drp me
13:54:37 <Zakim> I don't understand 'drp me', ivan
13:54:39 <ivan> zakim, drop me
13:54:39 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
13:54:41 <Zakim> -Ivan
13:54:50 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
13:54:50 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
13:54:51 <Zakim> +Ivan
13:55:04 <bergie> Zakim, unmute me
13:55:04 <Zakim> bergie should no longer be muted
13:55:19 <bergie> Zakim, mute me
13:55:19 <Zakim> bergie should now be muted
13:55:28 <bergie> Zakim, unmute me
13:55:28 <Zakim> bergie should no longer be muted
13:57:11 <Zakim> +??P8
13:57:15 <lindstream> lindstream has joined #rdfa
13:57:30 <Zakim> +scor
13:57:36 <ivan> zakim, ??P8 is Benjamin 
13:57:37 <Zakim> +Benjamin; got it
13:57:39 <Benjamin> zakim, +??P8 is me
13:57:40 <Zakim> sorry, Benjamin, I do not recognize a party named '+??P8'
13:57:45 <manu1> Guest: Stéphane (scor) Corlosquet
13:57:52 <bergie> Zakim, mute me
13:57:52 <Zakim> bergie should now be muted
13:57:53 <manu1> Guest: Henri (bergie) Bergius
13:58:03 <manu1> Guest: Niklas (lindstream) LindströmGuest: Niklas (lindstream) Lindström
13:58:11 <manu1> Guest: Niklas (lindstream) Lindström
13:58:26 <Zakim> +??P13
13:58:37 <gkellogg> zakim ??P13 is me
13:58:50 <gkellogg> zakim, ??P13 is me
13:58:50 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
14:00:16 <Zakim> +??P25
14:00:17 <Zakim> +??P26
14:00:21 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P25
14:00:21 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
14:00:29 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
14:00:32 <lindstream> zakim, I am ??P26
14:00:32 <Zakim> +lindstream; got it
14:00:49 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
14:00:49 <Knud> Knud has joined #rdfa
14:00:53 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
14:00:53 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
14:00:55 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
14:00:55 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
14:01:43 <Zakim> +??P30
14:01:43 <Zakim> +Knud
14:01:46 <ShaneM> zakim, I am ??P30
14:01:46 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it
14:01:50 <Knud> zakim, mute me
14:01:50 <Zakim> Knud should now be muted
14:02:20 <Benjamin> scribenick: Benjamin
14:02:53 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:02:53 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
14:03:19 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
14:03:19 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
14:03:21 <Zakim> -lindstream
14:03:44 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
14:03:44 <Zakim> On the phone I see bergie (muted), Ivan, Benjamin, scor, gkellogg, manu1, MacTed (muted), ShaneM, Knud (muted)
14:03:44 <Zakim> On IRC I see Knud, ShaneM, lindstream, scor, Benjamin, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, ivan, bergie, manu1, gkellogg, trackbot, manu
14:04:20 <manu1> zakim, manu1 is lindstream
14:04:21 <Zakim> +lindstream; got it
14:04:54 <Knud> \me "grabbed each other's extension" - what a wonderful quote
14:05:00 <Knud> duh
14:05:12 <Zakim> +??P26
14:05:28 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P26
14:05:31 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
14:05:46 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Aug/0048.html
14:06:02 <manu1> Topic: Jeni's Write-up / formalize issues
14:06:12 <manu1> http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/165
14:06:38 <Benjamin> manu: Let's summarize Jeni's proposals on merging RDFa and Microdata
14:07:38 <Benjamin> ivan: first issue is the interpretation of time
14:07:45 <manu1> q+ on datetime issue
14:08:19 <Benjamin> ... next issue is about microdata allowing link and meta elements to be used in content
14:08:40 <Benjamin> ... Jeni proposes RDFa to also allow these elements
14:09:22 <manu1> q?
14:09:26 <Benjamin> ... consequently HTML+RDFa would include parts of the HTML5 content module, which is tricky
14:09:28 <manu1> ack manu1
14:09:28 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to comment on datetime issue
14:10:06 <lindstream> q+
14:10:11 <Benjamin> manu: there is a chance that time element is going to be replaced by data elements. Data contains machine readable values about content
14:10:21 <manu1> ack lindstream
14:10:30 <Benjamin> ivan: hence, it is an open issue and we should leave it for now
14:10:55 <manu1> q+ to note how we follow HTML5 via HTML+RDFa
14:11:13 <Benjamin> lindstream: there is a problem with versioning issues
14:11:29 <Benjamin> \me Nicklas I missed your point. Could you repeat it in log?
14:11:52 <manu1> q-
14:12:21 <lindstream> my point was that html5 is a "living spec", which supposedly won't have versioning. So the rdfa spec, having versions, might have trouble "keeping up"
14:12:41 <lindstream> np :)
14:14:04 <lindstream> q?
14:14:12 <Benjamin> ivan: HTML allows the use of meta only if it contains microdata content. This is a bit strange.
14:14:42 <manu1> ISSUE: Determine if RDFa should normatively state that <link> and <meta> elements are supported in flow content.
14:14:42 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-104 - Determine if RDFa should normatively state that <link> and <meta> elements are supported in flow content. ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/104/edit .
14:15:07 <Benjamin> ivan: Next issue is about build in prefixes. 
14:15:18 <Benjamin> ... RDFa has such a mechanism
14:15:45 <Benjamin> ... Next issue is about the itemref functionality
14:15:47 <manu1> ISSUE: Should RDFa support something like Microdata's @itemref attribute.
14:15:47 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-105 - Should RDFa support something like Microdata's @itemref attribute. ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/105/edit .
14:16:12 <manu1> ISSUE: Should RDFa support the creation of ordered lists?
14:16:12 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-106 - Should RDFa support the creation of ordered lists? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/106/edit .
14:16:15 <Benjamin> ivan: There is an issue about the creation of ordered lists in RDFa
14:17:18 <Benjamin> ivan: The next issue for us is about using the src attribute
14:17:54 <manu1> ISSUE: Determine if @src attribute should be viewed in the object position instead of the subject position.
14:17:55 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-107 - Determine if @src attribute should be viewed in the object position instead of the subject position. ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/107/edit .
14:17:56 <Benjamin> manu: the concern about this is backward compatability.
14:18:19 <gkellogg> @src is often a problem for example markup, one of the things I noted that people often get wrong.
14:18:58 <Benjamin> ivan: Jeni mentions link relations, which relates to the use of terms in RDFa1.1
14:19:22 <Benjamin> .. we might revise which terms are relevant or not
14:19:39 <manu1> ISSUE: Refine/deprecate Link relations for the RDFa 1.1 Default Profile.
14:19:40 <lindstream> q+
14:19:40 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-108 - Refine/deprecate Link relations for the RDFa 1.1 Default Profile. ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/108/edit .
14:19:51 <manu1> ack lindstream
14:20:06 <Benjamin> ... at the moment the RDFa HTML default profile still contains all tokens, which we should look at again
14:20:16 <manu1> q+ to say we've discussed this before.
14:20:44 <Benjamin> lindstream: Jeni's problem was about the implied subject, when using these link relations.
14:20:53 <manu1> ack manu1
14:20:53 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to say we've discussed this before.
14:20:56 <ShaneM> Remember that ARIA cares about some of those relationships.
14:21:04 <bergie> q+
14:21:08 <Benjamin> ivan: someone should lookup the list of necessary tokens in RDFa
14:21:41 <bergie> Zakim, unmute me
14:21:41 <Zakim> bergie should no longer be muted
14:21:42 <manu1> ack bergie
14:21:53 <Benjamin> manu: link relaitonships concern the HTML integration and should not be defined in RDFa core
14:21:55 <lindstream> one example raising the subject issue is: rel="stylesheet alternate"
14:22:57 <Benjamin> bergie: We should spend more explanations on these tokens and their relation to subjects
14:23:36 <bergie> Zakim, mute me
14:23:36 <Zakim> bergie should now be muted
14:23:47 <lindstream> for the record: one way out of this "mess" *might* be the idea of letting @property capture @href/@resource if present...
14:23:53 <Benjamin> ivan: these are the issues we can extract from Jeni's blog
14:24:07 <Benjamin> manu: That is four new issues.
14:24:26 <Benjamin> manu: Any other concerns about Jeni'
14:24:31 <manu1> Topic: ISSUE-103: preserve @vocab declarations
14:24:39 <Benjamin> .. writeup?
14:24:39 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/103
14:24:44 <ivan> ISSUE-103?
14:24:44 <trackbot> ISSUE-103 -- Should RDFa Processors preserve @vocab declarations in the default graph? -- open
14:24:44 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/103
14:25:34 <ivan> rdfa:has-vocab
14:25:44 <lindstream> .. or rdfa:usesVocab ?
14:25:46 <Benjamin> ivan: first thing is that the term i used in the mail was not good -- rdfa:hasVocab
14:26:02 <ivan> <uriofrdfasource> a rdfa:source ;
14:26:07 <lindstream> q+
14:26:41 <MacTed> provenance  :-)
14:27:01 <lindstream> if used, it should be rdfa:Source (uppercase 'S')
14:27:09 <Benjamin> ivan: other thing is that a link from triples to the original source is missing. Some people complained about that.
14:27:19 <manu1> ack lindstream
14:28:58 <manu1> So, the current proposal seems to be: <current-document> rdfa:hasVocabulary <iri-to-vocab> .
14:29:05 <manu1> q+ to discuss an issue
14:29:54 <lindstream> np; short version: I'm beginning to agree with Ivan's suggestion
14:30:15 <ivan> q+
14:30:22 <ivan> ack manu1 
14:30:22 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to discuss an issue
14:30:44 <manu1> ack ivan
14:31:21 <manu1> foo:bar
14:31:28 <manu1> vocab1 vocab2
14:31:42 <gkellogg> q+
14:31:47 <lindstream> vocab1:bar or vocab2:bar :)
14:31:47 <manu1> ack gkellogg
14:32:14 <lindstream> q+
14:32:42 <ShaneM> q+ to say ask why the rdfs claim would matter?
14:32:53 <manu1> ack lindstream
14:34:07 <gkellogg> vocab1 { dc:title rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:label } vocab2 { dc:title rdfs:subPropertyOf something else}
14:34:29 <gkellogg> … expands all use of dc:title within document
14:34:50 <ivan> q+
14:34:52 <manu1> ack ShaneM
14:34:52 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to say ask why the rdfs claim would matter?
14:35:48 <Benjamin> Shane: initially, rdfs expansion was not in scope of the RDFa processor? 
14:36:04 <ShaneM> Benjamin: and it still is not
14:36:25 <manu1> ack ivan
14:36:29 <lindstream> RDFS uses multiple inheritance FTW ;)
14:37:14 <MacTed> +1
14:37:47 <Benjamin> manu: finally, there is no issue with the current proposal
14:38:57 <Benjamin> ivan: let's accept the proposal
14:39:00 <gkellogg> Also generate <> a rdfa:Source when @vocab encountered?
14:39:12 <MacTed> +1 uses
14:39:30 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Generate a triple in the default graph when the @vocab attribute is processed: <current-document> rdfa:usesVocabulary <iri-to-vocab> .
14:39:34 <ivan> +1
14:39:35 <manu1> +1
14:39:37 <gkellogg> +1
14:39:37 <bergie> +1
14:39:37 <MacTed> +1
14:39:39 <ShaneM> +1
14:39:39 <Benjamin> +1
14:39:40 <lindstream> +1
14:39:41 <Knud> +1
14:39:54 <manu1> RESOLVED: Generate a triple in the default graph when the @vocab attribute is processed: <current-document> rdfa:usesVocabulary <iri-to-vocab> .
14:39:55 <lindstream> and +1 to Gregg's "also rdfa:Source"
14:40:13 <ivan> <uriofdocument> a rdfa:Source .
14:40:47 <Benjamin> manu: Why is the triple useful?
14:40:59 <ShaneM> You need to know provenance.  I agree
14:41:12 <Benjamin> ivan: At the moment there is no way to make preserve any provenance information 
14:41:25 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:41:25 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
14:41:49 <Benjamin> .. in terms of indexing, the index should contain links to originating sources
14:42:01 <lindstream> rdfa:Source will mean e.g. "this resource is data markup using RDFa"
14:42:38 <Benjamin> MacTed: That's also how we do it in our product.
14:43:05 <lindstream> q+
14:43:29 <manu1> ack lindstream
14:44:25 <MacTed> a look at an example...  http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/html/http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/entity/http/cprtheory.referata.com/wiki/Main_Page
14:44:35 <Benjamin> manu: it is not related to the vocab attribute
14:45:54 <Benjamin> MacTed: It's about this is document the processor extracted RDFa from
14:46:15 <lindstream> btw, rdfa:Source should be a subClassOf (e.g.) foaf:Document
14:46:23 <Benjamin> ShaneM: It is a provenance concern
14:46:57 <Benjamin> MacTed: The minimum that I need is, this is document were I got the data from.
14:47:31 <lindstream> .. *if* we got data from it? (Even just from rel stylesheet?)
14:47:37 <Benjamin> manu: That means in every default graph of an RDFa processor a triple shuld exist that says where the data comes from
14:48:03 <Benjamin> manu: But if we merge two graphs, such triples become useless
14:48:30 <Benjamin> MacTed: Of course you have to add graph identifiers
14:48:32 <lindstream> q+
14:48:37 <manu1> ack lindstream
14:50:26 <lindstream> quads are beyond the scope of this issue...
14:52:17 <MacTed> <current graph> foaf:primaryTopic <parsed-document>
14:52:22 <lindstream> .. are we at risk of  conflating documents and graphs here?
14:52:35 <ivan> <base>
14:53:02 <lindstream> q+
14:53:54 <MacTed> <graphURI> foaf:primaryTopic <htmlURI>
14:53:58 <gkellogg> Then we'd need to make assertions about graphs, which requires quads
14:54:13 <MacTed> <> foaf:primaryTopic <htmlURI>
14:54:15 <bergie> q+
14:55:00 <ivan> ack lindstream 
14:55:40 <bergie> Zakim, unmute me
14:55:40 <Zakim> bergie should no longer be muted
14:55:48 <manu1> ack bergie
14:55:49 <MacTed> I'm also in Provenance WG... :-)
14:56:15 <MacTed> (which call starts in 5 minutes)
14:56:27 <ShaneM> Bless you.  someone has to do it.
14:57:10 <Benjamin> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html
14:57:10 <MacTed> <> describes <sourceURI>
14:57:39 <gkellogg> Only different if document has html>head>base?
14:59:05 <lindstream> ... while graph identifiers enable us to "have turtles all the way down", we're within the RDFa "turtle" and should stay here.
15:00:17 <lindstream> q+
15:00:17 <bergie> so, my proposal was not to set a source URI for a given graph, since the graph itself doesn't have an identifier
15:00:33 <bergie> but instead to just say "this subject has data coming from this RDFa document"
15:00:42 <ShaneM> I agree with Ted that this is a significant terminology issue.
15:00:45 <bergie> Zakim, unmute me
15:00:46 <Zakim> bergie was not muted, bergie
15:01:02 <ShaneM> I also agree that we should have a way to reference our 'graph' in notation.
15:01:09 <bergie> Zakim, mute me
15:01:11 <Zakim> bergie should now be muted
15:01:23 <lindstream> +1 on "output graph". But let's *not* talk about identifiers for graphs in RDFa..
15:01:26 <manu1> ISSUE: Resolve differences terminology for 'default graph' and 'output graph'.
15:01:26 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-109 - Resolve differences terminology for 'default graph' and 'output graph'. ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/109/edit .
15:02:00 <Benjamin> ivan: processors may have difficulties in generating such provenance triples because of the lack of names for originating graphs. We don't have a mechansim to name the output graph
15:02:15 <bergie> +1 lindstream, on both points
15:03:17 <Benjamin> manu: This is end of the call. We need to define additional issues
15:03:36 <manu1> ISSUE: Should RDFa Processor output a triple for the source of a graph?
15:03:36 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-110 - Should RDFa Processor output a triple for the source of a graph? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/110/edit .
15:03:57 <scor> The Definitive Guide to Drupal 7 book was published by Apress: http://definitivedrupal.org/ - one of the chapters I contributed is on Drupal and the Semantic Web, Linked Data and RDFa 1.0 (namespaces, prefixes, CURIEs, etc...) 
15:05:45 <bergie> scor: congrats about the book! hopefully the Drupal 8 edition will be able to talk about VIE as well :-)
15:06:19 <Zakim> -Knud
15:06:20 <scor> bergie: thanks. sure! I still need to take a closer look at VIE though :)
15:06:25 <Zakim> -gkellogg
15:06:29 <Zakim> -MacTed
15:06:31 <Zakim> -scor
15:06:34 <Zakim> -bergie
15:06:35 <Zakim> -ShaneM
15:06:35 <bergie> scor: if you need any help or info, just ping me
15:06:43 <scor> alright will do!
15:06:48 <Benjamin> rrsagent, make minutes
15:06:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/08/25-rdfa-minutes.html Benjamin
15:09:47 <MacTed> Named Graphs are a popular topic...   http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.08.25
15:10:49 <MacTed> also see  http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs
15:10:49 <MacTed> and  http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal
15:11:55 <Zakim> -Benjamin
15:12:20 <manu1> Thanks for scribing, Benjamin!
15:13:14 <Zakim> -manu1
15:15:26 <Zakim> -Ivan
15:15:28 <Zakim> -lindstream
15:15:30 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
15:15:32 <Zakim> Attendees were +358.405.25aaaa, bergie, Ivan, scor, Benjamin, gkellogg, lindstream, MacTed, Knud, ShaneM, manu1
15:15:42 <lindstream> lindstream has left #rdfa
16:02:03 <danbri> danbri has joined #rdfa
17:04:09 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdfa
17:24:34 <ShaneM> ShaneM has left #rdfa
17:55:57 <ShaneM1> ShaneM1 has joined #rdfa
17:56:16 <ShaneM1> ShaneM1 has left #rdfa
18:06:11 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
18:06:15 <ShaneM> ShaneM has left #rdfa
18:16:03 <ShaneM1> ShaneM1 has joined #rdfa
18:16:05 <ShaneM1> ShaneM1 has left #rdfa
18:49:54 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
19:11:26 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
20:07:29 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
20:15:57 <ShaneM> ShaneM has left #rdfa