IRC log of htmltf on 2006-02-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:55:59 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #htmltf

13:55:59 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc

13:56:09 [RalphS]

Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML Task Force

13:56:19 [RalphS]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Feb/0021.html

13:57:15 [RalphS]

Previous: 2006-02-06 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2006Feb/0018.html

14:00:57 [Zakim]

SW_BPD(rdfxhtml)9:00AM has now started

14:00:59 [Steven]

Steven has joined #htmltf

14:01:04 [Zakim]

+Ralph

14:01:31 [Steven]

zakim, dial steven-617

14:01:31 [Zakim]

ok, Steven; the call is being made

14:01:34 [Zakim]

+Steven

14:01:59 [MarkB_]

MarkB_ has joined #htmltf

14:02:30 [danbri]

danbri has joined #htmltf

14:03:11 [benadida]

benadida has joined #htmltf

14:04:00 [Zakim]

+Mark_Birbeck

14:04:42 [Zakim]

+Ben_Adida

14:04:49 [RalphS]

Chair: Ben

14:06:05 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

14:07:04 [RalphS]

Regrets: Jeremy

14:07:35 [Steven]

Steven has joined #htmltf

14:08:26 [RalphS]

agenda+ CURIE consensus

14:08:31 [RalphS]

agenda+ RDF Containers

14:08:47 [RalphS]

Topic: Action Item Review

14:09:19 [RalphS]

Steven: XHTML2 Editor's draft announcement still pending

14:09:45 [RalphS]

ACTION: once Steven sends editors' draft of XHTML2, all TF members take a look and comment on showstopper issues only [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action01]

14:09:46 [RalphS]

-- continues

14:10:13 [RalphS]

[PENDING] ACTION: Jeremy followup on edge case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action03]

14:10:13 [RalphS]

[PENDING] ACTION: Jeremy followup with Mark on the question of multiple triples from nested meta and add to issues list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action01]

14:10:13 [RalphS]

[PENDING] ACTION: Jeremy propose wording on reification [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action02]

14:10:51 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben to draft full response to Bjoern's 2004 email [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/24-swbp-minutes.html#action03]

14:10:54 [RalphS]

-- continues

14:11:02 [RalphS]

Ben: awaiting discussion of RDF/A Containers

14:11:10 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben start separate mail threads on remaining discussion topics [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action04]

14:11:12 [RalphS]

-- continues

14:11:33 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben write out a proposal for how OL and UL turn into rdf:Seq and rdf:Bag [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action08]

14:11:36 [RalphS]

-- done

14:11:47 [RalphS]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2006-rdfa-containers RDF/A Containers

14:11:56 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben update the editor's draft to add to section 2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action09]

14:12:19 [danbri]

[rdf:Bag, eek.... i'm out of touch...]

14:12:27 [RalphS]

-- done

14:14:41 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ralph add a sentence to 2.2.3 pointing to a citation for the triples syntax

14:14:42 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

14:14:54 [RalphS]

zakim, ipcaller is Jeremy

14:14:54 [Zakim]

+Jeremy; got it

14:15:59 [RalphS]

Mark, Ben: the citation to the triples syntax does not need to hold up the first working draft

14:16:06 [RalphS]

Topic: getting the Primer published

14:16:59 [jeremy]

jeremy has joined #htmltf

14:17:37 [RalphS]

Steven: Primer is being served with wrong character encoding

14:18:32 [RalphS]

Ben: saw that, but might be confusing to debug until the .html variant exists

14:18:48 [RalphS]

Steven: just change the META element in the doc

14:19:18 [RalphS]

... the document really is ISO-Latin-1

14:19:30 [jeremy]

check documentation for xsl:output

14:19:36 [jeremy]

I think it has a flag for encoding

14:20:10 [RalphS]

Jeremy: the HTML output method of XSLT defaults to Latin-1, I believe

14:20:33 [RalphS]

... so look for a flag to specify UTF-8 as the output encoding

14:20:41 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben resolve the document encoding issue

14:21:15 [jeremy]

<xsl:output

14:21:15 [jeremy]

method = "xml" | "html" | "text" | qname-but-not-ncname

14:21:15 [jeremy]

version = nmtoken

14:21:15 [jeremy]

encoding = string

14:21:15 [jeremy]

omit-xml-declaration = "yes" | "no"

14:21:16 [jeremy]

standalone = "yes" | "no"

14:21:19 [jeremy]

doctype-public = string

14:21:20 [jeremy]

doctype-system = string

14:21:22 [jeremy]

cdata-section-elements = qnames

14:21:24 [jeremy]

indent = "yes" | "no"

14:21:26 [jeremy]

media-type = string />

14:21:28 [jeremy]

try encoding="utf-8"

14:22:53 [RalphS]

Topic: Implementation status

14:23:07 [RalphS]

Jeremy: the first attempt at implementing things other than verification

14:23:16 [RalphS]

... Ralph reported some bugs, not too surprising

14:23:47 [RalphS]

Ralph: I have neglected to provide test cases to Jeremy for the bugs I believe I found

14:24:41 [RalphS]

Ben: our issues page lists several issues that I believe we've resolved

14:24:44 [benadida]

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-current-issues

14:25:04 [RalphS]

Ben: let's document those we have resolved explicitly

14:25:25 [RalphS]

Topic: 1. QNames in href and about

14:25:36 [RalphS]

Ben: this issue we resolved by CURIE

14:25:59 [RalphS]

Steven: yes, we've resolved to use option B

14:26:27 [RalphS]

Ralph: there is not Team consensus on the CURIE proposal so I must abstain

14:26:47 [RalphS]

Steven: I told the HTML WG long ago that the TF chose option B

14:26:57 [RalphS]

RESOLVED: issue 1 option B chosen

14:27:12 [RalphS]

DanBri: abstain as I've been out of the loop for a while

14:27:48 [RalphS]

Topic: 5. (Local) blank node identifiers

14:28:09 [RalphS]

Ben: I believe we've tentatively resolved this again using CURIEs

14:28:21 [benadida]

_:foo

14:28:26 [benadida]

[_:foo]

14:28:37 [benadida]

_:foo is the CURIE

14:28:42 [benadida]

[_:foo] is the CURIE/URI

14:28:45 [danbri]

I don't see 'blank' or 'anonymous' in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-10-21-curie

14:28:48 [danbri]

(as steven says)

14:29:05 [danbri]

q+ to suggest the _ be made reserved at least in CURIE

14:29:09 [RalphS]

Ben: '_' is the mechanism that specifies this is a bnode

14:29:29 [RalphS]

... this may be missing from the current documentation

14:29:47 [RalphS]

... we've chosen not to raise the topic of bnodes in the Primer

14:30:13 [jeremy]

(note: "_" is a valid xmlns ... )

14:31:23 [RalphS]

Ralph: the intent is that there is a local identifier in the document that is not exported

14:31:54 [RalphS]

Jeremy: DAWG has been clear in SPARQL that applications _may_ reveal their bnode identifiers

14:32:18 [RalphS]

DanBri: bnode identifiers must not be confused with URIs

14:32:59 [RalphS]

Mark: so we have to be careful to specify that the expansion is to either a URI or a bnode

14:33:07 [danbri]

[is there an escaping mechanism in CURIE? if i wanted a CURIE that began with _ for some non-bnode purpose?]

14:33:16 [jeremy]

NCName ::= (Letter | '_') (NCNameChar)*

14:35:45 [RalphS]

Jeremy: choosing a different leading character adds weight to our conclusion

14:36:14 [RalphS]

... as QNames in N3 are misleading; here's another case where N3 differs from QName spec

14:37:29 [RalphS]

Ralph: '#' might convey the idea that these are local identifiers

14:37:31 [benadida]

about="#foo" vs. about="[#:foo]"

14:38:20 [RalphS]

Mark: perhaps just [:foo]

14:38:29 [RalphS]

Jeremy: N3 uses :foo for the default namespace

14:39:12 [RalphS]

Mark: if you don't know a mapping for '_' then we could still specify that URI names and bnode identifiers are disjoint

14:39:30 [RalphS]

Jeremy: we don't actually need to support people who use "_" for a namespace prefix

14:39:42 [RalphS]

Mark: but this creates an issue for the processor implementation

14:39:54 [RalphS]

Jeremy: could say that any prefix that is undefined maps to itself

14:40:08 [RalphS]

... so http: maps to itself when you're expecting a CURIe

14:41:43 [RalphS]

Ralph: I like #foo and #:foo

14:41:49 [jeremy]

!*$%^

14:42:04 [jeremy]

=@~

14:42:17 [RalphS]

Mark: another alternative ...

14:42:33 [RalphS]

... we have the idea of a CURIE that is understood as a CURIE in context without '[]'

14:43:05 [RalphS]

... but Steven also suggested an alternative leading character

14:43:15 [jeremy]

_: is bnode, @pre:foo is qnamelike, as is @_:foo

14:43:32 [RalphS]

Ben: it may be that bnodes will only appear in the case where '[]' is required

14:44:18 [RalphS]

... so '_' inside '[]' could be defined as different from '_' in QName

14:45:20 [RalphS]

Jeremy: leading '@' could behave in the way that '[]' have been

14:45:37 [RalphS]

Mark: in some situations we want to write both a:b and _:b

14:45:57 [RalphS]

... so we have context in which the type is implicit

14:46:10 [RalphS]

... but we also have [a:b] and [_:b] to make the type explicit

14:46:48 [RalphS]

Ben: as bnodes appear only in subject and object positions, the current syntax forces bnode identifiers to be in '[]'

14:46:58 [RalphS]

Mark: but I'm trying to find a way not not have to change the meaning of '_'

14:47:47 [RalphS]

Ben: clearly issue 5 is still open; I will summarize the options now on the table

14:48:05 [RalphS]

Steven: I believe issues 4 and 7 are essentially the same and can be combined under one discussion

14:48:28 [RalphS]

... [syntactic sugar for role (4) and class (7) attributes

14:48:43 [RalphS]

Topic: 12. CURIEs in Predicate Attributes

14:49:26 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben summarize the syntax options for issue 5. (Local) blank node identifiers

14:50:03 [RalphS]

Ben: we've not had any debate about whether 'about' and 'href' can both contain CURIEs

14:50:30 [MarkB_]

q+

14:50:38 [danbri]

q-

14:51:05 [RalphS]

... if we restrict these to CURIE only, not CURIE/URI, we get backwards compatibility

14:51:05 [danbri]

re html link types vocab, that's at http://www.w3.org/2005/05/hrel/ (can it go on the issues list?)

14:51:25 [RalphS]

Mark: I think it would be good to require CURIE syntax as the default namespace might not be the HTML namespace

14:51:38 [RalphS]

... as we've resolved issue 11

14:51:39 [Steven]

q+

14:52:32 [RalphS]

... important consistency of having attributes all behave in the same way; '[]' generally required, URI permitted

14:52:54 [RalphS]

... so an author does not have to go to the effort of defining a namespace just to use a single URI

14:53:22 [RalphS]

... e.g. things like SKOS where the document contains a taxonomy

14:53:38 [RalphS]

... author would get fed-up having to define lots of namespaces

14:53:41 [danbri]

[I helped SKOS but Alistair Miles is Dr SKOS :]

14:54:11 [benadida]

ack MarkB_

14:54:13 [RalphS]

... but I don't see a problem with the processor having to explicitly recognize these special terms; it's a known, finite list

14:54:32 [danbri]

(I'm wary of too many builtins)

14:54:41 [RalphS]

Steven: disagree; one of our aims is to make this all look as much as possible like traditional HTML

14:54:57 [RalphS]

... [it would be bad] to have rel='next' mean something different than href='next'

14:55:13 [RalphS]

... even though we think of 'rel' value as being a URI, the World doesn't see it that way

14:55:25 [benadida]

+1 to Steven

14:55:36 [RalphS]

... I think that rel is something different for an HTML author, therefore a different syntax is not a problem

14:56:03 [RalphS]

Jeremy: it's awkward to create namespace prefixes but not hopeless

14:56:06 [danbri]

(if rel='next' and href='next' mean different things, that'll be hard to teach...)

14:56:06 [benadida]

q+ to mention the [] syntax

14:56:13 [benadida]

ack steven

14:56:28 [RalphS]

... in the case of an embedded taxonomy it's not a huge pain to delcare one more namespace

14:57:03 [benadida]

ack me

14:57:03 [Zakim]

benadida, you wanted to mention the [] syntax

14:57:05 [RalphS]

... the case of only needing to use a prefix once is the bigger nuissance

14:57:31 [RalphS]

Ben: I favor Steven's approach

14:57:46 [RalphS]

... the '[]' syntax is the weakest proposal from this Task Force

14:58:03 [RalphS]

... it's the proposal that has raised the most concern from outside

14:58:26 [RalphS]

... so the more we force it to be used the more objection we can expect

14:58:50 [RalphS]

... we can special-case all the strings in the current HTML spec

14:59:01 [RalphS]

Steven: special-casing causes extensibility to go out the window

14:59:14 [danbri]

(I'm reminded of the xpointer registry...)

14:59:26 [RalphS]

... if we want to add a new string in the next version we have to special-case it too

14:59:32 [danbri]

(ie. http://www.w3.org/2005/04/xpointer-schemes/ )

14:59:43 [RalphS]

Mark: not really special casing, just saying the URI base is different

14:59:57 [RalphS]

... but we do lose consistency no matter which choice we make

15:00:31 [benadida]

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2006-rdfa-containers

15:00:43 [RalphS]

ACTION: Ben summarize options discussed for issue 12

15:00:47 [RalphS]

Topic: RDF/A Containers

15:01:13 [RalphS]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2006-rdfa-containers proposal for RDF/A Containers

15:01:15 [danbri]

(I quite strongly disagree that they have semantic value, except for rdf:Seq which rss needs)

15:01:36 [RalphS]

Ben: I think there is a good match between OL, UL, and LI to RDF Containers

15:02:16 [danbri]

(I commented in irc to avoid derailingthe audio; sorry. I came late to this... might be wrong point to comment)

15:02:22 [RalphS]

... UL, OL, and NL can have specific RDF types

15:02:51 [RalphS]

... I've been careful (see Section 3) that none of the triples previously generated by RDF/A are affected by this proposal

15:03:08 [RalphS]

... e.g. see 3.3.2 example

15:03:25 [RalphS]

... the about, rel, and href attributes still generate the same triples as before

15:03:34 [RalphS]

... the UL and LI semantics only add new triples

15:03:47 [RalphS]

... so I think this approach makes sense and is not too confusing

15:04:06 [Zakim]

-danbri]

15:04:09 [RalphS]

... so please send thoughts to the mailing list

15:04:24 [RalphS]

... next week is a US Holiday

15:04:36 [RalphS]

Jeremy: regrets for next week; I'm on holiday

15:05:26 [RalphS]

Steve: 2 weeks from today is Technical Plenary week

15:05:55 [RalphS]

Ben: propose to meet Tuesday 21 March

15:05:59 [Steven]

s/Steve/Steven/

15:06:20 [RalphS]

RESOLVED: next meeting Tuesday 21 Feb 1400 UTC

15:06:23 [Zakim]

-Mark_Birbeck

15:06:24 [Zakim]

-Steven

15:06:25 [Zakim]

-Jeremy

15:06:30 [Zakim]

-Ben_Adida

15:06:31 [Zakim]

-Ralph

15:06:32 [Zakim]

SW_BPD(rdfxhtml)9:00AM has ended

15:06:33 [Zakim]

Attendees were Ralph, Steven, Mark_Birbeck, Ben_Adida, danbri], Jeremy

15:06:53 [Steven]

:-)

15:10:04 [RalphS]

rrsagent, please make this record public

15:10:29 [RalphS]

rrsagent, please draft minutes

15:10:42 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-minutes.html RalphS

15:11:03 [benadida]

benadida has left #htmltf

15:12:02 [RalphS]

zakim, bye

15:12:02 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #htmltf

15:12:05 [RalphS]

rrsagent, bye

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

I see 9 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-actions.rdf :

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: once Steven sends editors' draft of XHTML2, all TF members take a look and comment on showstopper issues only [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action01] [1]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-09-45

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ben to draft full response to Bjoern's 2004 email [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/24-swbp-minutes.html#action03] [2]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-10-51

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ben start separate mail threads on remaining discussion topics [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/12/06-swbp-minutes#action04] [3]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-11-10

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ben write out a proposal for how OL and UL turn into rdf:Seq and rdf:Bag [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action08] [4]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-11-33

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ben update the editor's draft to add to section 2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/06-htmltf-minutes.html#action09] [5]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-11-56

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ralph add a sentence to 2.2.3 pointing to a citation for the triples syntax [6]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-14-41

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ben resolve the document encoding issue [7]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-20-41

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ben summarize the syntax options for issue 5. (Local) blank node identifiers [8]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T14-49-26

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ben summarize options discussed for issue 12 [9]

15:12:05 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/13-htmltf-irc#T15-00-43