IRC log of htmltf on 2006-10-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:55:19 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #htmltf
12:55:19 [RRSAgent]
logging to
12:55:27 [RalphS]
Meeting: RDFa Task Force
12:55:44 [RalphS]
rrsagent, please make this record public
12:56:10 [RalphS]
Previous: 2006-10-16
12:56:27 [RalphS]
12:56:49 [RalphS]
agenda+ Action Item Review
12:56:54 [RalphS]
agenda+ Reification
12:57:02 [RalphS]
agenda+ RDF Containers in RDFa
12:57:09 [RalphS]
agenda+ State of Documents, Assignment of Work
13:00:29 [EliasT]
EliasT has joined #htmltf
13:01:43 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(rdfxhtml)9:00AM has now started
13:01:50 [Zakim]
13:03:06 [benadida]
benadida has joined #htmltf
13:03:28 [Zakim]
13:06:58 [Steven]
Steven has joined #htmltf
13:07:06 [Steven]
zakim, dial steven-617
13:07:06 [Zakim]
ok, Steven; the call is being made
13:07:07 [Zakim]
13:08:58 [RalphS]
zakim, take up agendum 1
13:08:58 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Action Item Review" taken up [from RalphS]
13:09:09 [RalphS]
[DONE] ACTION: Ben announce new URIs for editors' drafts to TF [recorded in]
13:09:19 [RalphS]
[DONE] ACTION: Elias summarize the reification discussion [recorded in]
13:09:57 [RalphS]
ACTION: Mark write examples/tests of striping support [recorded in]
13:09:59 [RalphS]
-- continues
13:10:07 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben update the issues list [recorded in]
13:10:09 [RalphS]
-- continues
13:10:13 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben start separate mail threads on remaining discussion topics [recorded in]
13:10:16 [RalphS]
-- continues
13:10:37 [RalphS]
ACTION: Steven to put together sample XHTML2 doc with all mime type, etc.. [recorded in]
13:10:49 [RalphS]
-- continues
13:11:04 [RalphS]
Steven: I work a bit on this each week; you can see changes
13:11:50 [RalphS]
Steven: we've submitted a WWW2007 RDFa workshop proposal
13:12:12 [MarkB_]
MarkB_ has joined #htmltf
13:13:00 [Zakim]
13:13:05 [MarkB_]
zakim, i am ?
13:13:05 [Zakim]
+MarkB_; got it
13:13:40 [RalphS]
Mark: my action on striping examples is nearly ready to send out
13:13:45 [EliasT]
EliasT has joined #htmltf
13:14:09 [RalphS]
Ben: reminder; we've targetted 27 Oct as date for code and examples of new syntax
13:14:19 [Zakim]
13:14:47 [RalphS]
ACTION: Elias start an FAQ [recorded in]
13:14:55 [RalphS]
-- in progress
13:15:01 [RalphS]
Elias: just started it
13:15:18 [Steven]
13:15:34 [RalphS]
^ sample XHTML2 document
13:15:55 [RalphS]
Steven: at the moment it is intentionally served as text/html
13:16:00 [EliasT]
13:16:15 [RalphS]
... I will make a snapshot as .xhtml so it is served with the correct MIME type
13:16:18 [Steven]
13:16:40 [RalphS]
13:17:13 [RalphS]
move to next agendum
13:17:13 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Reification" taken up [from RalphS]
13:18:18 [RalphS]
Mark: my impression after the discussion was that some of the problems were due to reification in a particular context
13:18:33 [RalphS]
... for what we need, the issue seems more clear
13:19:07 [RalphS]
s/we need/RDFa needs/
13:19:21 [RalphS]
... e.g. 'who said X' does seem to be clear
13:19:33 [RalphS]
... in the references that Elias cited
13:20:26 [RalphS]
... Dan's point is that he wants RDFa to be no more expressive than RDF/XML
13:20:47 [RalphS]
... so that all RDFa can be transformed to RDF/XML
13:21:08 [RalphS]
Elias: I don't agree that it is clear how we can identify a triple
13:21:36 [RalphS]
Mark: if it's not clear how to do this in RDF/XML then we don't need to do it in RDFa
13:22:04 [RalphS]
Elias: by 'identify' I mean know whether it exists in a specific named graph
13:22:19 [RalphS]
... it's not clear how to say 'that triple'
13:22:40 [RalphS]
... the RDF spec is clear that reification is about identification, not about quoting
13:22:47 [RalphS]
... but we don't have a clear way to identify
13:23:10 [RalphS]
Mark: but if RDF/XML hasn't solved the problem then RDFa can't solve it either
13:23:15 [RalphS]
Elias: but we have documents
13:23:39 [RalphS]
Mark: we can name some other type of Statement but we can't name an RDF triple
13:24:11 [RalphS]
... if we wanted to, we could say there is an xyz:Statement that has implicit information
13:24:43 [RalphS]
... but we'd still need some magic if there's no way to say that this maps to an rdf:Statement
13:25:07 [RalphS]
Elias: RDF reification does not say that if you have the quad it implies the triple
13:25:33 [Steven]
( is created )
13:25:38 [RalphS]
Mark: in terms of generation from RDF/XML that's the case
13:25:51 [RalphS]
... you're not supposed to assume that the original triple exists
13:26:12 [RalphS]
... but that doesn't prevent the other way around
13:26:23 [RalphS]
... RDFa could say the triple exists
13:27:56 [RalphS]
Ben: we can start with some RDFa and specify what it means in RDF/XML
13:28:27 [EliasT]
Note that asserting the reification is not the same as asserting the original statement, and neither implies the other. That is, when someone says that John said something about the weight of a tent, they are not making a statement about the weight of a tent themselves, they are making a statement about something John said. Conversely, when someone describes the weight of a tent, they are not also making a statement about a statement they made (since they may
13:29:39 [RalphS]
^excerpt from RDF spec
13:30:53 [RalphS]
13:31:39 [RalphS]
Ben: but we can say that the dc:creator of the s/p/o quad is responsible for a triple asserted by that quad
13:32:28 [RalphS]
Elias: we want to attach provenance to HTML documents, not to graphs
13:32:42 [RalphS]
Ben: we know how to do that
13:33:11 [RalphS]
... e.g. a LINK or a META on a DIV can say who is the creator of that DIV
13:33:29 [RalphS]
Mark: even without reification there is a question
13:33:39 [RalphS]
... on the one hand you're making statements about the DIV
13:33:59 [RalphS]
... on the other hand we're reusing it at a higher level to represent a bnode
13:34:09 [RalphS]
Ben: but the bnode is just a local concept
13:34:29 [RalphS]
Mark: to be consistent, the only thing you'd be making statements about is the DIV
13:35:00 [EliasT]
<div class="foo bar"/>
13:35:02 [RalphS]
... similar issue to describing the car or the web page that describes the car
13:35:47 [RalphS]
Elias: given a div with two classes, can we say that the two type statements were made by different creators?
13:35:57 [RalphS]
Ralph: that seems a corner case
13:36:55 [RalphS]
Mark: when we embed metadata in the document rather than have it standalone then we lose the ability to attach provenance to the metadata
13:37:27 [EliasT]
13:37:27 [RalphS]
Ben: we could add more to reify the class="foo bar" case if we really wanted to
13:37:36 [EliasT]
<meta property="class">foo</meta>
13:37:40 [EliasT]
<meta property="class">bar</meta>
13:37:43 [EliasT]
13:38:00 [RalphS]
Ben: that would be one way to think about it but this is still more than RDF/XML gives
13:38:17 [RalphS]
... but another way is to simply write the triple two times
13:38:41 [RalphS]
Mark: 2 choices; 1. use reification as it is
13:38:58 [RalphS]
... we've agreed that you can't connect between the asserted triple and the quad
13:39:49 [RalphS]
... 2. say that the "RDF-ness" is not really in the document; explode the document, expand every property in the document so that the contents are all objects, etc.
13:40:17 [RalphS]
... then this exploded version is converted back 'down' to RDF/XML
13:40:54 [RalphS]
... method 2 makes things quite complicated
13:42:03 [RalphS]
Elias: even if we go with method 1, there is still the question -- adding provenance to a DIV adds statements to multiple triples
13:42:20 [RalphS]
... and that DIV could become the object of some enclosing element
13:42:27 [EliasT]
<div rel="foo" rev="bar">
13:42:32 [EliasT]
.. reification ...
13:42:33 [EliasT]
13:43:00 [RalphS]
Elias: if our granularity is the XML element the reification applies to two different things
13:43:21 [RalphS]
Mark: I could just about live with this
13:43:54 [RalphS]
... but in the IPTC case, given the statement "Reuters says this article is about skiing. Reuters is 80% confident in this categorization."
13:44:24 [RalphS]
... and separately "BBC says this article is about skiing. BBC is 60% confident in this categorization."
13:44:35 [RalphS]
Ben: but this is an RDF problem too
13:45:15 [RalphS]
Elias: if rev="bar" was added later by a different person than rel="foo" ...
13:45:30 [RalphS]
Ben: you're talking about multiple authors changing the same piece of HTML
13:46:29 [RalphS]
Elias: don't confuse two things; an HTML element and ...
13:46:38 [RalphS]
... the HTML element can create many triples
13:47:12 [RalphS]
Ben: I can understand that attaching a link to a DIV is attaching the link to every triple
13:47:25 [RalphS]
... this may not be the best practice, but that _is_ what the HTML says
13:48:11 [EliasT]
13:48:11 [EliasT]
<link rel="iptc:category" href="[iptc:skiiing]">
13:48:11 [EliasT]
<meta property="iptc:confidence" content=".8" />
13:48:11 [EliasT]
13:48:15 [RalphS]
Elias: Reuter's 80% confidence is not in the statement itself but that the category is skiing
13:49:03 [RalphS]
... if I add iptc:joke to the categories, the 80% should still only apply to skiing
13:49:29 [RalphS]
Ben: but why do we need to support that?
13:50:20 [RalphS]
Elias: I am also worried about the case where the LINK element participates in an enclosing rev property
13:51:11 [RalphS]
Ben: we need to look at some tricky examples give this new proposal and make sure they turn out sort-of reasonable
13:51:42 [RalphS]
Mark: now I'm having trouble seeing these examples as reification
13:52:10 [RalphS]
... I am reevaluating my earlier comments suggesting that n-ary relations were not what we wanted
13:52:50 [RalphS]
... the category/confidence example can be done with n-ary relatoins
13:53:17 [RalphS]
... IPTC used a LINK element to add a confidence
13:54:27 [RalphS]
... perhaps a way out of the provenance issue is to handle it at the HTML level
13:54:57 [RalphS]
... use an additional HTML element rather than adding properties [to an existing one]
13:55:26 [RalphS]
... I'm starting to see that an n-ary solution fits more cases than I'd originally thought
13:56:10 [RalphS]
... I will extract more examples from original IPTC documents
13:56:30 [RalphS]
ACTION: Mark produce more examples of applicability of n-ary relations from IPTC documents
13:57:05 [benadida]
ACTION: Elias to send by email examples of HTML markup that could be problematic with reification
13:57:32 [Zakim]
13:59:10 [EliasT]
14:03:31 [Steven]
14:05:33 [Zakim]
14:05:34 [Zakim]
14:05:35 [Zakim]
14:05:36 [Zakim]
14:05:37 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(rdfxhtml)9:00AM has ended
14:05:38 [Zakim]
Attendees were Ralph, Ben_Adida, Steven, MarkB_, Elias_Torres
14:06:51 [EliasT]
EliasT has left #htmltf
14:34:07 [benadida]
benadida has left #htmltf
15:12:55 [RalphS]
zakim, bye
15:12:55 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #htmltf
15:13:01 [RalphS]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
15:13:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate RalphS
15:13:11 [RalphS]
rrsagent, bye
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
I see 7 open action items saved in :
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Mark write examples/tests of striping support [recorded in] [1]
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben update the issues list [recorded in] [2]
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben start separate mail threads on remaining discussion topics [recorded in] [3]
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Steven to put together sample XHTML2 doc with all mime type, etc.. [recorded in] [4]
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Elias start an FAQ [recorded in] [5]
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Mark produce more examples of applicability of n-ary relations from IPTC documents [6]
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Elias to send by email examples of HTML markup that could be problematic with reification [7]
15:13:11 [RRSAgent]
recorded in