See also: IRC log
The group of people that actively prepares XML spec examples reported on
alternatives for representing, as an example, requirement Core 2 "Emotion
Categories". The reasoning for avoiding implicit structure as in EARL and for
avoiding embedded text were accepted unanimously. Three alternatives for an
explicit structure allowing to specify the set of categories used were
presented. It was agreed to accept example 3b and to consider it as guideline
for the future examples. This is not a final decision, but a momentary
preference based on the simple appearance of the format.
2. Further actions were distributed among the active volunteers, to design
examples for the further requirements for discussion in the next phone
conference.
<marc> Examples to be discussed: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-emotion/2008Jul/0000.html
Marc introduces the agenda and asks for other suggestions.
No other suggestions are added.
<marc> 1. First we stated that the simplest form, as used in EARL [2] so far (flat and implicit):
<marc> <emotion category="pleasure"/>
<marc> has the charm of simplicity, but it has disadvantages:
<marc> - the markup gives no hint regarding the set of categories to use
<marc> - if you want to add meta-information (e.g., Meta 1: Confidence) specifically to the category, that is not straightforward to do.
Marc discusses issue 1 from the mail of Felix.
This is uncontroversial by all.
<marc> 2. An alternative would be
<marc> <emotion>
<marc> <category>pleasure</category>
<marc> </emotion>
<marc> but the usage of plain text in elements (vs. attributes) is to be avoided because our ML will certainly be used in conjunction with text processing steps and we certainly wouldn't want to be left with the " pleasure " string when all markup gets removed.
This item too is uncontroversial.
<marc> 3. We than thought about ways for making it explicit which set of categories is used and came up with three different ideas:
<marc> 3a. Category sets as the name of the element, e.g.:
<marc> <emotion> <category> <BigSixEmotion name="joy"/> </category> </emotion> or, in a flatter version <emotion> <EverydayEmotionCategory name="pleasure" confidence="0.9"/> </emotion>
No controversion by new adds.
Marc explains joint advantage of 3a-c: explicit structure, allowing meta-annotation (shown in the example as confidence), and the possibility to indicate which set of categories is used.
<marc> 3b. Category sets as the value of a apecial attribute attribute, e.g.:
<marc> <emotion> <category set="everyday" name="pleasure" confidence "0.9"/> </emotion>
<marc> 3c. Category sets as the namespace of the <category> element, e.g.
<marc> <emotionml:emotion
<marc> xmlns:everyday="http://emoxg.org/categories/everyday/">
<marc> <everyday:category id="pleasure" confidence="0.9" />
<marc> </emotionml: emotion>
Felix speaks against 3a and prefers 3b as easiest way.
Marc explains that the namespace variant is not necessarily more complex, but allows easier creation of outside of standard sets.
Marc states that in 3b this will probably be possible, too.
Bjoern states that this is an important feature.
Marc stresses usability over technical "cleanness"
Bjoern asks about certainness of being able to provide private sets and make them public in 3b.
Jianhua also prefers 3b for its simplicity.
Marc suggest providing an URL for this (wrt Bjoern's question).
Marc asks if 3b is ok for the moment.
This is agreed. It allows moving to 3c later on if there is interest to do that.
<Idoia> we also agree with the simplicity of 3b option
Bjoern agrees on 3b.
Marc suggests to have 3b as guideline for future items.
Marc stresses the importance of this decision.
Nobody objects.
Marc reads list of volunteers (Ian, Felix, Björn, Myriam, Marc) and suggests to split items among them for draft versions for discussion.
Marc says that work should be split respecting similarities.
Felix suggests to discuss this offline, first.
Marc asks others if they want to join the discussion on splitting requirements specs among volunteers.
Marc reminds of next meeting on 31st of July same time.
People not involved leave.
Marc, Ian, Felix, and Bjoern discuss split of 13 remaining mandatory requirements.
Marc suggests Ian for Links to the rest of the world (1-3).
Ian and Felix agree to work on this and the remaining reuqirements are shared among Marc, Myriam and Bjoern.