16:51:55 RRSAgent has joined #tagmem 16:51:56 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/27-tagmem-irc 16:55:07 Noah says he'll be a few minutes late . . . 16:58:03 any word from Kevin A? 16:58:47 i can imagine. i am too 16:59:51 JeniT has joined #tagmem 17:00:01 Larry has joined #tagmem 17:00:13 Zakim has joined #tagmem 17:00:19 zakim, this is tagmem 17:00:19 sorry, ht, I do not see a conference named 'tagmem' in progress or scheduled at this time 17:00:23 zakim, this is tag 17:00:23 ok, ht; that matches TAG_Weekly()1:00PM 17:00:29 zakim, who is on the call? 17:00:29 On the phone I see ??P13 17:00:32 DKA has joined #tagmem 17:00:36 zakim, ? is me 17:00:36 +ht; got it 17:00:48 +Masinter 17:00:49 +Jonathan_Rees 17:01:01 Ashok has joined #tagmem 17:01:07 +??P25 17:01:37 +Ashok_Malhotra 17:02:14 +DKA 17:02:31 +plinss 17:02:39 noah has joined #tagmem 17:03:25 +noah 17:03:49 +Yves 17:04:04 zakim, who is here? 17:04:04 On the phone I see ht, Masinter, Jonathan_Rees, JeniT, Ashok_Malhotra, DKA, plinss, noah, Yves 17:04:06 On IRC I see noah, Ashok, DKA, Zakim, Larry, JeniT, RRSAgent, jar, timbl, ht, plinss, trackbot, Yves 17:05:07 scribenick: Larry 17:05:15 topic: approval of last week's minutes 17:05:41 no objections 17:05:49 RESOLUTION: Minutes of the 13th of October are approved http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/10/13-minutes 17:06:11 +TimBL 17:07:51 thought about TPAC: Peter St Andre (IETF apps area director) will be at TPAC and wonder if we could possibly ask him to come talk about TAG issues that relate to IETF work in apps 17:08:06 +1 to PSA visit 17:11:09 DKA: I'll send text relating to minimization 17:12:20 larry: No probs publishing the status report as is 17:12:26 definitely +1 to discuss with @stpeter 17:12:56 larry: Maybe swap mime&web with fragids 17:13:31 swap "Fragment identifiers and Mime Types" and MIME and the Web 17:15:05 "informing" => "asking for feedback" 17:15:56 the main thing i want to make sure you say Noah is that we really want feedback about what we're doing and waht we should be doing 17:16:28 and that you not only ask for questions, that you ask for feedback, complaints, kudos, encouragement, etc. 17:17:00 Noah, make suggested changes or not at your discretion 17:17:20 Larry: Want to see call for feedback in status report and talk 17:18:23 . RESOLUTION: TAG agrees to publication of TAG Status Report http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10.html with call for feedback and Noah adoption changes receive in e-mail at his discretion 17:18:40 +1 17:18:41 +1 17:18:46 RESOLUTION: TAG agrees to publication of TAG Status Report http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10.html with call for feedback and Noah adopting changes received in e-mail at his discretion 17:18:47 +1 17:18:58 thank you for putting that together 17:19:29 i won't be there on wednesday plenary day 17:21:18 time for "mid-afternoon" with DAP? 17:21:38 does that conflict with the AC meeting? 17:21:45 ACTION-616? 17:21:45 ACTION-616 -- Noah Mendelsohn to contact Fred Hirsch to suggest joint TAG/DAP meeting at TPAC on REST vs. Javascript APIs -- due 2011-10-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW 17:21:45 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/616 17:21:52 close ACTION-616 17:21:52 ACTION-616 Contact Fred Hirsch to suggest joint TAG/DAP meeting at TPAC on REST vs. Javascript APIs closed 17:24:31 Noah: SPDY group no response, won't try to meet with them 17:24:42 yves: can ping them again 17:25:31 discussion of trying to meet with Raman 17:25:58 noah: publishing & linking breakout has a session proposal 17:26:46 noah: Noah & Dan will be at breakout 17:27:09 Dan: someone has to defend the session, I'll do that but others encouraged to do so too 17:27:29 Dan: Will again try to catch up with Rigo about this topic 17:27:44 action-613? 17:27:44 ACTION-613 -- Daniel Appelquist to organize deep linking breakout at TPAC -- due 2011-10-06 -- CLOSED 17:27:44 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/613 17:32:06 Larry: i'd suggest the IETF items I mentioned (MIME issues, IRI issues, etc.) and scheduling that based on constraints or avialability of IETF/W3C liaison & IETF apps area 17:32:43 noah: come out of Friday TPAC of client-side storage 17:33:22 noah: concerns about "context-sensitive URIs" ... monday afternoon after TIM arrives 17:33:56 ashok: there are two client-side storage APIs that do similar things in different ways 17:34:21 ashok: "I will do that" 17:35:30 ashok will put together slides for discussion at TPAC 17:36:57 Larry wonders if we should have agenda time Friday to discuss items that came up during earlier the week? 17:37:10 +1 17:37:45 Larry will we have XML/HTML task force time? 17:38:48 my priorities for TPAC/TAG time are: give priority to topics which advance better with people who are avilable 17:41:07 I'm in a WG meeting Tuesday 17:42:26 ACTION: Larry to pull together plans for IETF<-> TAG coordination at TPAC 17:42:26 Created ACTION-623 - Pull together plans for IETF<-> TAG coordination at TPAC [on Larry Masinter - due 2011-11-03]. 17:43:49 topic: issue-60 17:43:56 . RESOLUTION: The TAG concurs with Henry Thompson's analysis of RDFa Core and FYN http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html and its suggestion on wording. 17:44:03 s/issue-60/Issue-60 Fragids in RDFa/ 17:44:08 ACTION-509? 17:44:08 ACTION-509 -- Jonathan Rees to communicate with RDFa WG regarding documenting the fragid / media type issue -- due 2011-10-18 -- OPEN 17:44:08 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/509 17:44:29 timbl_ has joined #tagmem 17:44:30 E-mail from Henry: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html 17:44:44 E-mail from Jonathan: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2011Oct/0039.html 17:46:03 henry: #1 ... wording should point people in the right direction ... 17:46:27 henry: #2 ... HTML5 removed all mention of RDFa, there is still a follow-your-nose problem ... 17:47:02 From Henry's email (at the end): 17:47:09 Per my argument above the media type argument is settled -- text/html 17:47:09 is covered by HTML5's reference to RDFa (not currently there, but 17:47:09 assuming that at least gets sorted) and other witting or unwitting 17:47:09 uses are covered as described above. 17:47:25 That's the 2nd point. 17:47:35 HT: The first point is the proposed worthing further back. 17:47:53 #1: ... we're proposing some wording ... esentially says: "you may wonder about the use of fragment ids, all we do is build graphs ...>" 17:48:29 q+ to wonder about the process 17:48:59 LM: Wondering about the process by which the TAG proposes specific wording. 17:49:11 LM: I know that was necessary with HTML, is it in general good? 17:49:19 q+ to say "always propose wording" 17:49:22 ack next 17:49:23 Larry, you wanted to wonder about the process 17:49:37 HT: In this case we've already started helping them with wording. 17:49:40 ht: the bottom line is that we already started down this path 17:49:54 ht: ... attempts to draw a line .... 17:49:56 JAR: I think this is an excpeiton 17:50:05 s/excpeiton/exception/ 17:50:07 ack next 17:50:08 noah, you wanted to say "always propose wording" 17:50:51 noah: it doesn't just make it easier, it's "here is something that would satisfy me" 17:51:06 NM: I would like to ask about: 17:51:08 "If I'm right, the answer is "(c) neither", on the grounds that RDFa 17:51:08 introduces nothing new with respect to the use of fragment identifiers 17:51:08 (that's already in RDF) or with respect to the _interpretation_ of 17:51:08 fragment identifiers, since no RDFa attribute creates an anchor in the 17:51:08 resource corresponding to its host document." 17:51:16 larry: distinguish between 'propose wording' and 'mandate wording' 17:51:23 q? 17:51:47 nm: "since no RDFa attribute creates an anchor " -- what does that mean? 17:52:07 ht: was hard to describe what i meant 17:52:14 NM: What did you mean? 17:52:20 it doesn't give an id to an element 17:52:34 ht: waht i meant was the only way in which RDFa could be implicated in its host language media types is if it creates anchors 17:52:55 q+ to wonder whether media types have to explicitly add RDFa for RDFa to apply 17:53:57 larry: the text/html MIME type definition needs to explicitly allow RDFa in it and define meaning of fragment identifiers to point to RDFa meaning 17:54:26 nm: ... in the particular case where it is self-referential... where the base name is the .... 17:55:06 s/name is the/name is the host document/ 17:55:22 nm: let's say the sample.rdf and there's a reference to sample.rdf#xxx 17:55:31 ht: we're dealing with html documents, not rdf documents 17:56:01 nm: RDF spec says this doesn't refer to an anchor, it refers to a puppy dog 17:56:04 q? 17:56:13 ack next 17:56:14 Larry, you wanted to wonder whether media types have to explicitly add RDFa for RDFa to apply 17:56:16 s/RDF spec/RDFa spec/ 17:56:37 HST: But the RDFa spec doesn't _say_ that, the RDF Concept does 17:56:38 q+ jar to remind regarding (1) FYN is not strictly required by 3986, it's a webarch thing (2) as HT says no webarch obligation for RDFa to say anything new to support FYN, (3) *helpful* > necessary 17:56:41 NM: I'm still nervous that this is "squatting" on the space of fragment syntax that HTML itself could use to refer to anchors (or someting else) after all. 17:56:52 NM: Of course, if HTML does explicitly point to RDFa there's no issue. 17:57:17 NM: My problem is that the quoted text suggests that such explicit reference from the HTML media type registration isn't necessary. 17:57:38 q+ to ask about appliction/xhtml+xml also 17:57:53 ack next 17:57:54 jar, you wanted to remind regarding (1) FYN is not strictly required by 3986, it's a webarch thing (2) as HT says no webarch obligation for RDFa to say anything new to support FYN, 17:57:56 ... (3) *helpful* > necessary 17:57:57 q+ to follow up on what Jonathan is saying -- I didn't need to say that at all 17:58:25 Right, but we have said that FYN is a very good thing, as set out in e.g. Self-describing Web 17:58:40 jar: spec or registration needs to say something about what the fragids mean, this isn't required in 3986? 17:59:17 So...are you all saying "RDFa doesn't need to say anything but HTML does." Fine, but you have to read to the very end to get that. 17:59:21 Larry: maybe it belongs in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-4395bis-irireg-03 17:59:25 q+ to make HTML dependency more explicit 17:59:37 Henry -- please also read my comment in IRC before you go. 18:00:03 repeat: ACION-509 is urgent. . RESOLUTION: The TAG concurs with Henry Thompson's analysis of RDFa Core and FYN http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html and its suggestion on wording. 18:00:04 ht: I realize this is interesting an dimportant but not germain. The only point we're trying to settle is the "follow your nose" point; if it leads to a conflict.... 18:00:20 I would like to highlight much more clearly that changes ARE needed to HTML. 18:00:20 s/ACION/ACTION/ 18:00:28 q? 18:00:38 ack next 18:00:39 Larry, you wanted to ask about appliction/xhtml+xml also 18:00:57 q- ht 18:01:08 larry: Concerned about xml+xhtml. 18:01:13 never mind 18:01:41 sorry i meant http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-freed-media-type-regs-01 18:01:45 3023bis will have to be compatible with xml+html (which includes RDFa) 18:02:33 ht: I didn't realize that all mention of RDFa was gone from HTML 18:02:36 +DKA.a 18:03:26 jar: see specific resolution proposal above 18:03:29 -ht 18:03:57 . RESOLUTION: The TAG concurs with Henry Thompson's analysis of RDFa Core and FYN http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html and its suggestion on wording. The importance of FYN and the need for the HTML media type registration (and spec) to reference RDFa explicitly should be highlighted. 18:04:25 larry: right now fragment identifier definition is in the "Additional information" optional info 18:04:25 18:04:38 well, and JS as well 18:04:48 . RESOLUTION: The TAG concurs with Henry Thompson's analysis of RDFa Core and FYN http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html and its suggestion on wording, except that the importance of FYN and the need for the HTML media type registration (and spec) to reference RDFa explicitly should be highlighted. 18:04:53 jar: I'd like to finish this today and send a message today, they'd really like to get to press 18:05:36 noah: i'm proposing there is a preamble... "we conclude for the reasons below that there is no need for the RDFa spec to change ..." 18:06:15 larry: shouldn't RDFa note that it only works if the media type registry for the enclosing type explicitly allows RDFa? 18:06:43 jar: I don't think we need to say anything to the working group 18:07:05 noah: we should sayss what the broader ommunity needs to here 18:07:27 jar: your sentence about what needs to be highlighted ... 18:07:33 noah: I'd be willing to help ... 18:07:44 note that this media type issue will always appear when rdf is mixed with rfc3023 type because of the original issue on barename clash (same for javascript) 18:07:51 . RESOLUTION: The TAG concurs with Henry Thompson's analysis of RDFa Core and FYN http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html and its suggestion on wording, except that the importance of FYN and the need for the HTML media type registration (and spec) to reference RDFa explicitly should be highlighted in the cover e-mail. 18:08:04 say in resolution "highlighted in the email to the working group"? 18:08:13 . RESOLUTION: The TAG concurs with Henry Thompson's analysis of RDFa Core and FYN http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html and its suggestion on wording. Also: the importance of FYN and the need for the HTML media type registration (and spec) to reference RDFa explicitly should be highlighted in the cover e-mail. 18:08:40 . RESOLUTION: The TAG concurs with Henry Thompson's analysis of RDFa Core and FYN http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Oct/0068.html and its suggestion on wording. Also: the importance of FYN and the need for the HTML media type registration (and spec), and the registrations for any other host languages, to reference RDFa explicitly should be highlighted in the cover e-mail. 18:08:57 larry: RDFa Core should be explicit about the need for ... 18:09:03 LM: RDFa core should point out the responsibility of each host format to explicitly reference RDFa in its media type registration. 18:09:43 Noah: RDFa core should point out the responsibility of each host format to directly or indirectly explicitly reference RDFa in its media type registration. 18:09:51 Noah: RDFa core should point out the responsibility of each host format to directly or indirectly reference RDFa in its media type registration. 18:10:12 larry: ... if RDFa is going to be useful with those media types 18:10:27 JAR: They'll want wording. 18:11:02 larry: is RDFa meeting at TPAC and can we talk with them about this? 18:11:23 They're not going to disagree, they'll just justifiably balk if we ask them to do more work 18:11:55 ACTION-590? 18:11:55 ACTION-590 -- Noah Mendelsohn to follow up with Addison Phillips on Unicode normalization http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html -- due 2011-08-30 -- CLOSED 18:11:55 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/590 18:11:58 ACTION-590? 18:11:58 ACTION-590 -- Noah Mendelsohn to follow up with Addison Phillips on Unicode normalization http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html -- due 2011-08-30 -- CLOSED 18:11:58 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/590 18:12:00 ACTION-509? 18:12:02 ACTION-509 -- Jonathan Rees to communicate with RDFa WG regarding documenting the fragid / media type issue -- due 2011-10-18 -- OPEN 18:12:06 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/509 18:12:08 rrsagent, pointer 18:12:08 See http://www.w3.org/2011/10/27-tagmem-irc#T18-12-08 18:12:34 ACTION-509 Due 2011-11-15 18:12:34 ACTION-509 Communicate with RDFa WG regarding documenting the fragid / media type issue due date now 2011-11-15 18:12:51 topic: Microdata and RDFa 18:14:12 http://www.w3.org/wiki/Html-data-tf 18:14:38 Jeni: link to wiki page, there are some pages off of that, describing different things related to that 18:14:38 http://www.w3.org/wiki/Mapping_Microdata_to_RDF 18:15:01 jeni: that links to a draft spec relating that 18:15:45 jeni: there are a number of areas where the mapping is hard, we've been exploring ways in which we can improve things without breaking things 18:16:11 jeni: one way is to create a mapping which results in something which is ugly but which can be post-processed 18:16:42 jeni: what i'm encouraging at the moment just to explore those issues, document the options, with a view toward informing any working group going forward 18:16:56 http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML_Data_Improvements 18:16:57 jeni: the other things that have been going around the issues around microdata and RDF 18:17:24 jini: that link, for these we had a big discussion about microdata not supporting multiple item times from different vocabularies 18:17:30 s/jini/jeni/ 18:17:55 jeni: Hixie believes there aren't any use cases that require that 18:18:13 jeni: that [???] is still an open bug 18:18:47 jeni: it doesn't support schema.org ... vocabulary ... different item types ... 18:18:54 Here we are talking about language modifier on string values, I assume? 18:18:58 s/???/language use in microdata 18:19:02 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14470 18:19:27 tim: Language tags on string values aren't supported in microdata 18:19:40 q+ to ask about RDF -> microdata as more important workflow 18:20:05 tim: e.g., JSON doesn't have language tags, add it after 18:20:27 jeni: there's an open bug, we'll see how it pans out 18:20:43 jeni: some issues around RDFa and the definition of the 'rel' attribute 18:21:04 jeni: the property attribute is much closer to itemprop 18:21:46 jeni: 4 weeks to try to get something out before christmas, that's my plan 18:21:56 noah: anything particular at TPAC? 18:25:41 q? 18:28:36 q- 18:28:37 ack next 18:28:38 Larry, you wanted to ask about RDF -> microdata as more important workflow 18:29:35 jeni: it's really waht WG members wanted to work on 18:30:41 tim: has anyone written RDF -> RDFa ... 18:30:52 jeni: that's not a primary use case 18:30:59 Funny - I just asked that on twitter 18:31:40 noah: formally adjourn 18:31:49 q? 18:31:52 meeting adjourned 18:31:53 We are adjourned 18:32:08 -DKA.a 18:32:24 -Yves 18:32:48 TBL: I have been interested in doing a serializer: start with RDF, look up ontologies, do the tabulator thing, turn into HTML, annotate with RDFa 18:32:55 tim: wondering a serializer which would take RDF generate HTML from the data that was annotated with RDFa... 18:33:15 JT: People are doing some generation 18:33:29 TBL: I should look over the wiki page on mapping microdata to rdf? 18:33:56 TBL: What solution do they have for picking the URI for a vocabulary in the case where the original had those concatenated URIs 18:34:10 JT: ...ooops, missed something important about URIs for types.... 18:34:29 JT: Short name properties. 18:34:35 -plinss 18:34:35 TBL: They're specific to the type of the object? 18:34:41 JT: Yes. 18:34:58 TBL: is the URI for the short name formed by concating the short name with the URI for the type. 18:35:04 JT: There are several ways. See wiki page. 18:35:05 on http://www.w3.org/wiki/Mapping_Microdata_to_RDF 18:35:27 JT: The one that works well for RDF heads is to take off the last bit from the type, then add the property name 18:35:44 rrsagent, make logs public 18:36:10 I have to go. If we're going to scribe this unofficial part of the mtg, someone else will have to do it. 18:36:12 Tnx 18:36:18 -noah 18:37:35 -Jonathan_Rees 18:40:47 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-data-tf/2011Oct/0202.html 18:42:15 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-data-tf/2011Oct/0204.html 18:43:19 -TimBL 18:43:23 -JeniT 18:43:30 -Masinter 18:48:31 -Ashok_Malhotra 18:53:32 disconnecting the lone participant, DKA, in TAG_Weekly()1:00PM 18:53:34 TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended 18:53:35 Attendees were ht, Masinter, Jonathan_Rees, JeniT, Ashok_Malhotra, DKA, plinss, noah, Yves, TimBL 20:51:39 Zakim has left #tagmem 20:56:32 timbl_ has joined #tagmem 22:03:15 timbl has joined #tagmem