13:00:20 RRSAgent has joined #rdfa 13:00:20 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/03-rdfa-irc 13:00:22 RRSAgent, make logs world 13:00:22 Zakim has joined #rdfa 13:00:24 Zakim, this will be 7332 13:00:24 ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 60 minutes 13:00:25 Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference 13:00:25 Date: 03 May 2012 13:01:01 ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda, May 3, http://www.w3.org/mid/4FA19233.2020701@digitalbazaar.com 13:01:11 -> http://www.w3.org/mid/4FA19233.2020701@digitalbazaar.com Agenda call 13:01:15 Chair: Manu 13:43:35 bergie has joined #rdfa 14:00:40 MacTed has joined #rdfa 14:01:08 niklasl has joined #rdfa 14:01:42 SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started 14:01:49 +??P16 14:01:52 zakim, I am ??P16 14:01:52 +gkellogg; got it 14:02:05 zakim, dial ivan-voip 14:02:05 ok, ivan; the call is being made 14:02:06 +Ivan 14:02:12 +??P24 14:02:15 zakim, I am ??P24 14:02:15 +manu1; got it 14:02:17 +??P21 14:02:24 zakim, ??P21 is ShaneM 14:02:24 +ShaneM; got it 14:02:46 +??P18 14:02:50 zakim, I am ??P18 14:02:50 +niklasl; got it 14:03:13 +scor 14:03:43 zakim, who is on the call? 14:03:45 On the phone I see gkellogg, Ivan, manu1, ShaneM, niklasl, scor 14:06:04 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012May/0015.html 14:07:02 manu: We'll go through some minor editorial changes and address some HTML5+RDFa issues. 14:07:36 Topic: ISSUE-142: Minor editorial fixes to CR document before transitioning to PR 14:07:45 http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/142 14:07:54 +OpenLink_Software 14:08:00 Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me 14:08:00 +MacTed; got it 14:08:01 Zakim, mute me 14:08:01 MacTed should now be muted 14:08:11 * Introductory text clarification on RDFa Lite (Liam Quin [1]) 14:08:13 * Clarification on the meaning of @about="[]" (Alex Milowski, [2]) 14:08:14 manu: quick overview of the three edits (very recently requested): 14:08:14 * Spelling out the case of empty list generation (Alex Milowski and Gregg Kellogg, [3,4]) 14:08:21 [1] http://www.w3.org/mid/1335828395.4787.9.camel@localhost.localdomain 14:08:23 [2] http://www.w3.org/mid/CABp3FNLGR=Q9F3j9jkAfDx9=6xMoH9DGmPG00wfOTscn82xB5A@mail.gmail.com 14:08:25 [3] http://www.w3.org/mid/E6D4EFA0-587A-45A3-84FE-C0E65C90E413@greggkellogg.net 14:08:26 [4] http://www.w3.org/mid/CABp3FNJh0zJZXeHu=f-DwioZpBjMtCzPVB=+QAN_qYB7DHFu3A@mail.gmail.com 14:09:15 1. Clarification in introduction of RDFa Lite 14:09:27 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012May/0017.html 14:09:36 scor has joined #rdfa 14:09:46 manu: Liam asked us to spell out what RDFa is 14:10:01 … and was confused by the use of "structured data" 14:10:41 … took "possible to grasp by web authors" as potentially insulting to web devs (not our intent of course) 14:11:28 … Liam was satisfied by our changes 14:13:52 q+ 14:20:38 Zakim, unmute me 14:20:38 MacTed should no longer be muted 14:21:11 Zakim, mute me 14:21:11 MacTed should now be muted 14:21:14 ack niklasl 14:21:56 Shane added this text to address the about="[]" issue: A related consequence of this is that when the value of an attribute of this datatype is an empty SafeCURIE (e.g., @about="[]"), that value does not result in an IRI and therefore the value is ignored. 14:22:28 http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2012/PR-rdfa-core-20120508/#s_curieprocessing 14:23:16 and this change brings the textual description in line with the test cases, which have reflected the intent throughout... 14:24:13 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012May/0019.html 14:24:16 2. Alex needed clarification to how the empty list is generated (related to test 0218) 14:24:56 manu: we changed the step to say what happens when an empty list of list mappings is generated 14:26:04 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:26:04 On the phone I see gkellogg, Ivan, manu1, ShaneM, niklasl, scor, MacTed (muted) 14:26:26 gregg: this is consistent with what many implementations do 14:27:23 manu: any other changes needed to the document? 14:27:28 : 14:27:44 PROPOSAL: Accept the editorial changes made to RDFa Core 1.1 and RDFa Lite 1.1 addressing the comments raised in ISSUE-142. 14:27:49 +1 14:27:50 +1 14:27:50 +1 14:27:50 +1 14:28:05 +1 14:28:06 +1 14:28:21 +1 14:28:23 RESOLVED: Accept the editorial changes made to RDFa Core 1.1 and RDFa Lite 1.1 addressing the comments raised in ISSUE-142. 14:29:54 manu: we'll gather votes to go into PR, then for the next month work on promotion 14:30:22 q+ 14:30:47 ivan: the point is, we have a four week voting period, starting tuesday next week 14:30:53 danbri has joined #rdfa 14:33:26 Ivan: We are going to try to get as many AC reps to vote on RDFa 1.1 and get as many testimonials as possible. 14:33:46 Manu: We really want to get as much press around this as possible after it goes to REC. 14:34:56 manu: Ralph was really happy with our work 14:35:01 q+ to ask about API specs 14:35:12 … Congratulations on the PR everybody! 14:35:18 ack ivan 14:35:22 ack shanem 14:35:22 ShaneM, you wanted to ask about API specs 14:36:16 Shane: our charter is at an end, we should publish our API documentation as notes. 14:36:34 Topic: ISSUE-126: Can use of xmlns: be reported as an error? 14:36:41 http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/126 14:37:04 manu: raised by Mike Smith while working on the validator code 14:37:35 … putting support for xmlns into that would take a lot of work, and the xmlns is deprecated in HTML5 14:38:23 q+ 14:38:41 ack ivan 14:38:44 … Mike wants processors to be allowed to report use of xmlns as an error 14:38:45 q+ to ask about confrmance checker texts 14:39:14 ivan: "An rdfa:Error must be generated when the document fails to be fully processed as a result of non-conformant Host Language markup." 14:39:22 ivan: the problem is, at the moment, that RDFa Core refers to an rdfa:Error when the processor cannot process the source code 14:39:44 … meaning that an rdfa:Error in this sense has a consequence (stopping the processor, the result contains error) 14:40:17 … so in this sense, a processor (and conformance checker) should still produce a Warning 14:41:51 ack shanem 14:41:51 ShaneM, you wanted to ask about confrmance checker texts 14:42:12 shane: I respectfully disagree. The quoted text (and we) does not *require* a processor to stop. 14:42:17 " The RDFa Processor is designed to continue processing, even in the event of errors." 14:42:47 "An rdfa:Error must be generated when the document fails to be fully processed as a result of non-conformant Host Language markup." 14:43:34 q+ 14:43:54 ack niklasl 14:44:02 q+ to ask about confrmance checker texts 14:44:07 niklas: Does he want the entire text to be removed, or does he want this to be added? 14:44:12 ack shanem 14:44:12 ShaneM, you wanted to ask about confrmance checker texts 14:45:48 manu: He wants the text to be struck. 14:46:20 shane: we don't speak about conformance checkers in the text, right? 14:46:51 http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/#document-conformance 14:48:12 manu: do you want to remove the text about conformance *checkers*? 14:49:06 ivan: we should change the part about checker to rdfa processor (and use the "may" wording) 14:49:47 http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/#conformance-criteria-for-xmlns--prefixed-attributes 14:54:28 PROPOSAL: Section 5.2 of the HTML+RDFa specification should state that the use of xmlns: is valid from a conformance standpoint, but that a processor may generate a warning if it detects the usage of xmlns:, which is deprecated. 14:54:37 +1 14:54:38 +1 14:54:40 +1 14:54:44 +1 14:54:44 +1 14:55:08 +1 14:55:32 RESOLVED: Section 5.2 of the HTML+RDFa specification should state that the use of xmlns: is valid from a conformance standpoint, but that a processor may generate a warning if it detects the usage of xmlns:, which is deprecated. 14:55:35 can we please remove any reference to a conformance checked from the draft? 14:55:44 s/checked/checker/ 14:55:59 Topic: ISSUE-141: @datetime datatype matching 14:56:05 https://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/141 14:58:15 manu: we may have to reference the regexes for xsd date/time types 14:59:11 ivan: in the microdata-to-rdf conversion document, it just refers to the relevant parts of the HTML5 spec 14:59:31 manu: I agree 14:59:58 ivan: we can probably just use the same texts. 15:00:27 gregg: it actually spells out various valid datatype variants, with references (not actual regexps) 15:01:19 manu: but the html5 spec may violate the ISO spec for e.g. timezone or duration? 15:01:31 gregg: duration should be fine 15:03:45 q+ to ask for a resolution to reference the latest XML Schema Definition Language in RDFa Core 15:04:38 -MacTed 15:04:45 gregg: date, time, dateTime, gYear, gYearMonth, gDuration 15:04:54 s/gDuration/Duration/ 15:05:27 s/Duration/duration/ 15:05:48 PROPOSAL: When processing the @datetime attribute in HTML5+RDFa, support the generation of the proper xsd datatype when a date, time, datetime, gYearMonth, gYear, or duration value is detected. 15:05:58 +1 15:06:00 +1 15:06:01 +1 15:06:01 +1 15:06:03 +1 15:06:05 +1 15:06:29 RESOLVED: When processing the @datetime attribute in HTML5+RDFa, support the generation of the proper xsd datatype when a date, time, datetime, gYearMonth, gYear, or duration value is detected. 15:06:52 http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2011-11-17#resolution_2 15:08:40 PROPOSAL: In the absence of a @datetime attribute, process the text contents of the TIME element using the matching rules above. 15:08:44 +1 15:08:45 +1 15:08:46 +1 15:08:48 +1 15:08:52 +1 15:08:58 +1 15:09:03 RESOLVED: In the absence of a @datetime attribute, process the text contents of the TIME element using the matching rules above. 15:09:12 q 15:09:17 ack shanem 15:09:17 ShaneM, you wanted to ask for a resolution to reference the latest XML Schema Definition Language in RDFa Core 15:09:55 shane: we couldn't switch to the new xsd definition before because it's brand new 15:10:27 PROPOSAL: Refer to the newly published XML Schema Definition Language document in RDFa Core. 15:10:32 +1 15:10:33 +1 15:10:34 +1 15:10:35 +1 15:10:38 (and XHTML+RDFa) 15:10:39 +1 15:10:51 RESOLVED: Refer to the newly published XML Schema Definition Language document in RDFa Core. 15:12:18 Topic: ISSUE-139: XHTML5 processing specifically excludes the use of xml:base 15:12:24 http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/139 15:13:31 core says "The base can be set using the @xml:base attribute as defined in [XML10-4e]." 15:14:31 PROPOSAL: XHTML5+RDFa MUST process and honor the contents of the xml:base attribute. 15:14:35 +1 15:14:36 +1 15:14:37 +1 15:14:37 +1 15:14:52 +1 15:14:58 +1 15:15:01 RESOLVED: XHTML5+RDFa MUST process and honor the contents of the xml:base attribute. 15:16:21 q+ 15:16:45 ack scor 15:17:09 stephane: what's the timeline for this issue (135)? 15:18:25 ivan: tied to HTML5, but it's valuable to resolve this now 15:18:50 I have updated the draft date space versions of RDFa Core and XHTML+RDFa to reflect today's resolutions 15:26:19 -manu1 15:26:21 -gkellogg 15:26:22 -Ivan 15:26:23 -scor 15:26:24 -ShaneM 15:26:25 -niklasl 15:26:26 SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended 15:26:26 Attendees were gkellogg, Ivan, manu1, ShaneM, niklasl, scor, MacTed 15:28:20 … just to be clear: CURIEs in RDFa 1.0 used irelative-ref from RFC 3987, which (via irelative-part) allows ipath-empty. 15:29:17 .. so I think we were fine already; but it's good to have a clarification in there. 15:31:25 niklasl: you are correct. I checked that during the call too. 15:31:32 ShaneM has left #rdfa 15:43:09 good. 15:43:13 niklasl has left #rdfa 17:21:20 Zakim has left #rdfa 18:15:50 ShaneM has joined #rdfa 18:29:09 ShaneM has left #rdfa 19:54:24 manu1: was it clear in the meeting that xml:base applies to XHTML5 only, not HTML5 in non-XML mode? 19:54:34 In the HTML5 spec, it's defined as an XML only attribute 19:54:38 rdfa has joined #rdfa 19:54:38 [librdfa] msporny pushed 2 new commits to rdfa1.1: https://github.com/rdfa/librdfa/compare/e17a51f...7c01199 19:54:38 [librdfa/rdfa1.1] Fixing small compiler warnings. - Manu Sporny 19:54:38 [librdfa/rdfa1.1] Fixing build issues when using a pure C (non-C++) compiler. - Daniel Richard G 19:54:41 rdfa has left #rdfa 19:55:04 gkellogg: yes, I believe it was clear 19:55:33 Great, so it only affects adding and removing "xhtml5" from a couple of tests 20:02:54 rdfa has joined #rdfa 20:02:54 [rdfa-website] gkellogg pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/rdfa/rdfa-website/compare/2c81dc5...284bb0a 20:02:54 [rdfa-website/master] Change xml:base tests to include XHTML5. - Gregg Kellogg 20:02:56 [rdfa-website/master] Minor updates to librdfa and pyrdfa EARL repots to indicate 100% passage, doesn't affect rollup report. - Gregg Kellogg 20:02:59 [rdfa-website/master] Added green-turtle DOAP file. - Gregg Kellogg 20:03:01 rdfa has left #rdfa 21:21:50 rdfa has joined #rdfa 21:21:50 [rdfa-website] gkellogg pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/rdfa/rdfa-website/commit/bc6eb67e51bab36a398d6c750cf5d92a23186ed2 21:21:50 [rdfa-website/master] Include XML+RDFa in xml:base tests. - Gregg Kellogg 21:21:52 rdfa has left #rdfa