IRC log of rdfa on 2007-09-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:51:17 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
14:51:17 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc
14:51:21 [RalphS]
Meeting: RDFa Task Force
14:51:27 [RalphS]
zakim, this will be rdfa
14:51:27 [Zakim]
ok, RalphS; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
14:52:02 [RalphS]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0141.html
14:52:26 [RalphS]
-> http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html previous 2007-09-06
14:52:33 [RalphS]
rrsagent, please make record public
15:01:06 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
15:01:13 [Zakim]
+??P11
15:02:57 [markbirbeck]
zakim, code?
15:02:57 [Zakim]
the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
15:03:19 [Zakim]
+markbirbeck
15:03:22 [Zakim]
+Ralph
15:03:50 [RalphS]
zakim, ??p11 is Manu
15:03:50 [Zakim]
+Manu; got it
15:04:57 [ShaneM]
ShaneM has joined #rdfa
15:05:25 [Zakim]
+??P0
15:05:34 [ShaneM]
zakim, P0 is ShaneM
15:05:34 [Zakim]
sorry, ShaneM, I do not recognize a party named 'P0'
15:05:41 [ShaneM]
zakim, ??P0 is ShaneM
15:05:41 [Zakim]
+ShaneM; got it
15:06:42 [Zakim]
+benadida
15:06:51 [benadida]
benadida has joined #rdfa
15:08:36 [benadida]
zakim, pick a victim
15:08:36 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Ralph
15:09:01 [RalphS]
Chair: Ben
15:09:04 [RalphS]
Scribe: Ralph
15:10:41 [RalphS]
Ben: next TF telecon is 20 Sep
15:11:25 [RalphS]
... the SWD WG telecon on Tuesday 25 Sep is critical to getting review before the SWD f2f
15:11:49 [RalphS]
... so all our issues should [result in] minor changes to the document right now
15:12:52 [RalphS]
Mark: how frozen is the f2f agenda?
15:12:59 [RalphS]
Ralph: I don't think it's frozen yet
15:13:51 [RalphS]
-> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/AmsterdamAgenda SWD WG Amsterdam Agenda
15:14:30 [RalphS]
Topic: Doc status check
15:14:48 [RalphS]
Ben: we've made some non-binding resolutions that we're now depending on
15:14:57 [RalphS]
... @instanceof, handling of @src, ...
15:15:19 [RalphS]
... I think we should proceed with the non-binding resolutions as long as we can
15:15:27 [RalphS]
Manu: main issue is the spelling of @instanceof
15:15:41 [RalphS]
... haven't seen many alternatives being discussed recently in mail
15:15:53 [RalphS]
Ben: yes, I just want to be clear on what we've finally resolved
15:16:12 [RalphS]
Mark: should we refer to these non-binding resolutions in the document?
15:16:27 [RalphS]
Shane: we said 6 weeks ago these were non-binding
15:16:31 [RalphS]
... that was 6 weeks ago
15:16:37 [RalphS]
... let's move on at this point
15:17:00 [RalphS]
Ben: I definitely want to move forward but I've made procedural mistakes in the past that people have called to attention
15:17:55 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben collect all the non-binding resolutions into a mail message and call for a vote
15:19:26 [RalphS]
Ralph: so our objective is to turn all non-binding resolutions into either closed issues or open issues and document the open issues in the published WD?
15:19:30 [RalphS]
Ben: yes
15:19:46 [RalphS]
Ralph: ... by next telecon
15:19:57 [RalphS]
Ben: we should have a new editor's draft by next Tuesday evening
15:20:25 [RalphS]
... act as if the resolutions were resolved, revisit Thursday if not resolved
15:20:56 [RalphS]
Mark: will the Tuesday draft be the one we send to the WG?
15:21:16 [RalphS]
Ben: by Tuesday night we should have a draft that is ready to go to the WG except for the non-binding resolutions
15:21:27 [RalphS]
... we can do limited edits on Friday
15:21:48 [RalphS]
Ben: we really want to send a document to the WG by Friday 21 Sep
15:23:29 [RalphS]
Shane: the document we give to the WG on 21 Sep does not have to pass W3C pubrules, right?
15:23:41 [RalphS]
Ralph: right, it's a draft for the WG to review to decide to request W3C publication
15:24:41 [RalphS]
Ben: we also need the XHTML2 Working Group to formally decide to publish the document
15:24:49 [RalphS]
... since it's joint work of the two WGs
15:26:01 [RalphS]
Shane: we're not going to have a shortname and issue the W3C request for publication on 21 Sep, right?
15:26:03 [RalphS]
Ralph: right
15:27:53 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben to write up @instanceof referring to other subjects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
15:27:56 [RalphS]
-- done
15:28:06 [RalphS]
ACTION: Michael look for a more semantically correct predicate for tests 42-45 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
15:28:08 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:28:19 [RalphS]
ACTION: Michael make sure to confirm a design for checking that the ASK SPARQL queries evaluate (yes/no) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action07]
15:28:21 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:28:33 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben add an isbn: resource example to the Primer to illustrate @resource overriding @href [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action08]
15:28:35 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:28:49 [RalphS]
Ben: I worked on this but had trouble fully integrating, so still in progress
15:29:01 [RalphS]
Mark: I did include an isbn: example in the Syntax doc
15:29:19 [RalphS]
Ben: isbn: was a simple use case for @resource overriding @href
15:29:35 [RalphS]
... I'm still working on a convincing case for @resource overriding @src
15:29:44 [RalphS]
Mark: FOAF has an "online ID"
15:29:58 [RalphS]
... something that isn't meant to be a clickable link; just an identifier
15:30:07 [RalphS]
... this might be an example use case
15:30:20 [RalphS]
[DONE] ACTION: Ben send mail to the TF list when the Primer editors' draft is ready for the TF to read [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
15:30:28 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben to look into Science Commons use case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/11-htmltf-minutes.html#action04]
15:30:29 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:30:52 [RalphS]
Ben: the Science Commons use case may be becomming less relevant to this TF but let's keep this action open
15:31:02 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben to recontact implementors Elias, MarkB, triplr [and Fabien] and post their implementations to http://esw.w3.org/topic/RDFa#Implementations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
15:31:04 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:31:11 [RalphS]
Ben: I want to add those to the implementations page
15:31:24 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben to work test cases 31 and 32 into primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
15:31:27 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:31:34 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben, Mark, Elias, and other implementors to add xml:lang support [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
15:31:36 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:31:49 [RalphS]
Mark: I've implemented xml:lang but not wrapping
15:32:01 [RalphS]
ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action06]
15:32:04 [RalphS]
-- continues
15:32:30 [RalphS]
Ralph: none appear to be critical path for the editors' drafts
15:32:34 [RalphS]
Ben: right
15:32:43 [RalphS]
Topic: Doc status
15:33:08 [RalphS]
i|Ben to write up @instanceof|Topic: Action Review|
15:33:19 [RalphS]
-- Conformance Section
15:33:31 [RalphS]
Shane: W3C specs are now expected to have a conformance section
15:33:39 [RalphS]
... defines what it means to be conformant
15:33:53 [RalphS]
Ben: Mark and I appear to have a bit of a disagreement on what it means to be conformant
15:34:04 [RalphS]
Shane: that's exactly why we write a conformance section
15:34:11 [RalphS]
Mark: I'm trying to achieve a particular set of use cases
15:34:26 [RalphS]
... the QA people will ask us how we test conformance, so conformance should be testable
15:34:45 [RalphS]
... there's a question about whether I'm non-conformant if I generate extra triples
15:35:35 [RalphS]
Ben: the issue is "Can an RDF-conformant parser generate additional triples than those specified in the Syntax specification?"
15:37:10 [RalphS]
Ralph: I thought we'd resolved that issue
15:37:46 [RalphS]
ACTION: Ben research whether "Can an RDF-conformant parser generate additional triples than those specified in the Syntax specification?" is an already closed issue
15:38:11 [myakura]
myakura has joined #rdfa
15:38:20 [RalphS]
Mark: we'll need to work out how we define conformance
15:38:30 [RalphS]
Shane: every assertion in the document applies to conformance
15:38:45 [RalphS]
ACTION: Shane create a conformance section
15:39:03 [RalphS]
Shane: the debate about "what does it mean to conform" is a debate about the entire document
15:39:36 [RalphS]
-- will xml:base work?
15:40:06 [RalphS]
Ben: the main idea is that if the host language doesn't support xml:base then it doesn't make sense for RDFa to require it
15:40:27 [RalphS]
... and since XHTML1 doesn't support xml:base, we don't depend on it
15:40:59 [RalphS]
... if the host language -- e.g. XHTML2 -- does support xml:base then RDFa will use it
15:41:16 [RalphS]
... so we resolve URIs the same way as the host language
15:41:47 [RalphS]
... and BASE in XHTML1 is called out specifically in the Syntax document
15:42:01 [RalphS]
... the issue resolution is meant to leave the door open to XHTML2
15:42:14 [RalphS]
Mark: XHTML modularization also leaves open the door to other languages
15:43:03 [RalphS]
... should I remove the language about xml:base that's in the editor's draft now?
15:43:06 [RalphS]
Ben: I think so
15:43:14 [RalphS]
... this document is about RDFa in XHTML1
15:44:23 [RalphS]
Shane: we already have a document about RDFa modularization and could move the xml:base words to there
15:44:27 [RalphS]
... or put it into an appendix
15:45:04 [RalphS]
Manu: reading the xml:base words from a newcomer's perspective, it appeared to be coming from left field; I didn't understand why that language was there in the document
15:45:35 [RalphS]
Ralph: I move to put it into an appendix
15:46:04 [RalphS]
Ben: I'm worried about how this document will be accepted by other folks
15:46:39 [RalphS]
Mark: I'm talking about consistency and how this module will be used in other languages
15:47:31 [RalphS]
Ben: this Syntax document is not a module specification
15:47:53 [RalphS]
... for folks working with XHTML1.1 and writing a parser for that, the language about xml:base is not relevant
15:47:57 [ShaneM]
The module is defined in http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml-rdfa-20070811/
15:48:33 [RalphS]
Mark: it _is_ possible for xml:base to appear in an XHTML1.1 document
15:48:55 [RalphS]
Manu: taking it out of the normal flow of the document and putting it into the end is sufficient
15:49:07 [RalphS]
RESOLVED: move xml:base discussion to an appendix
15:49:21 [benadida]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0142.html
15:49:41 [RalphS]
-- SAX Processing
15:49:53 [RalphS]
Mark: good idea to find one, but I don't have one at the moment
15:50:07 [RalphS]
... since I say "SAX-like", I'd better find one or clarify
15:50:23 [RalphS]
ACTION: Mark find a reference for SAX or clarify the "SAX-like" language
15:50:36 [RalphS]
-- datatypes
15:50:54 [RalphS]
Shane: the question was "What datatypes are allowed to be specified?"
15:50:58 [RalphS]
Mark: there's really no limit
15:51:18 [RalphS]
Manu: my understanding was that anything in XSD could be used
15:51:38 [RalphS]
Mark: and any other datatype URI
15:51:40 [RalphS]
Ben: that's also what I understood
15:52:07 [RalphS]
PROPOSED: RDFa does not restrict datatypes
15:52:44 [RalphS]
Mark: in terms of the abstract syntax, it's any datatype URI
15:52:50 [RalphS]
RESOLVED: RDFa does not restrict datatypes
15:53:05 [RalphS]
-- definition of canonicalization
15:53:20 [RalphS]
Ben: this is complicated by the question of whether the DOM is used to resolve whitespace
15:53:43 [RalphS]
Shane: my gut feeling is that we should not pay any attention to the fact that XHTML sets xml:whitespace to 'preserve'
15:54:25 [RalphS]
... XHTML says that whitespace is preserved, so after processing all the whitespace is present, which strictly means that the whitespace should be available to the RDFa processor
15:54:35 [RalphS]
... but in practice all the implementations strip out the whitespace
15:55:03 [RalphS]
Mark: we'd had a long discussion in XHTML2 and I thought we'd already agreed that XHTML1 should not have chosen 'preserve'
15:55:08 [RalphS]
Shane: I don't think that's true
15:55:21 [RalphS]
Mark: still, I don't quite know how we do this
15:55:42 [RalphS]
... unless we create a profile that does not include xml:space=preserve
15:56:03 [RalphS]
Shane: do you believe we can access this data from the client side?
15:56:16 [RalphS]
Mark: no, implementation-wise I agree [that whitespace is not preserved]
15:56:41 [RalphS]
... but how can we undo what XHTML1 has chosen? How do we get rid of the whitespace that XHTML1 is requiring us to preserve?
15:56:50 [RalphS]
... we could require the parser to strip the whitespace
15:57:08 [RalphS]
Shane, Ben: yes, tell the parser to strip it
15:57:20 [RalphS]
Shane: defer to the CSS definition
15:57:25 [RalphS]
... I will grab the text from there
15:57:53 [RalphS]
PROPOSED: the RDFa parser does canonicalization according to CSS rules
15:58:32 [RalphS]
Mark: we don't want to be inconsistent [across implementations] -- that was Fabien's problem
15:58:45 [RalphS]
... with test case 29
15:59:03 [ShaneM]
XHTML M12N says: On rendering, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2].
15:59:10 [RalphS]
Ben: do the CSS rules only concern whitespace or does it cover other canonicalization questions?
15:59:13 [RalphS]
Mark: only whitespace
15:59:32 [ShaneM]
so we just say "for processing purposes of XML Literals, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2]"
15:59:43 [RalphS]
PROPOSED: the RDFa parser does whitespace canonicalization according to CSS rules
16:00:17 [RalphS]
Manu: the CSS rules are quite heavy. It's not necessarily clear which ones we're citing
16:00:21 [RalphS]
Shane: just the whitespace rules
16:00:37 [RalphS]
Ben: from the implementation point-of-view, all the parser needs to do is access the DOM
16:01:03 [RalphS]
Shane: yes, that's why we want to make this choice for the client. On the server side you may have to do more work
16:01:57 [RalphS]
RESOLVED: for processing purposes of XML Literals, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2]
16:02:19 [RalphS]
Mark: it's all literals, not just XML Literals
16:02:27 [RalphS]
RESOLVED: for processing purposes of literals, whitespace is processed according to the rules of [CSS2]
16:02:33 [RalphS]
Shane, yep; that's what I meant
16:02:41 [RalphS]
s/Shane,/Shane:/
16:03:21 [RalphS]
Ben: Elias' point was also about stripping elements from markup when @datatype=""
16:03:33 [RalphS]
Mark: that was Fabien's question too
16:03:43 [RalphS]
... we've defined rules for converting child elements
16:03:50 [RalphS]
... Fabien asked for clarification of those rules
16:04:07 [RalphS]
Ben: FireFox DOM has a notion of 'text content'; is that a standard method?
16:04:15 [RalphS]
Mark: I think it is defined in the XML DOM
16:04:22 [RalphS]
... I
16:04:31 [RalphS]
... I'll add better language in the next draft
16:04:50 [RalphS]
ACTION: Mark find language for canonicalization of markup in plain literals
16:05:05 [RalphS]
-- @lang
16:05:15 [RalphS]
Shane: we've resolved to use xml:lang, right?
16:05:35 [RalphS]
Ben: XHTML1.1 only uses @xml:lang
16:05:57 [RalphS]
RESOLVED: RDFa in XHTML1.1 uses @xml:lang and does not use @lang
16:06:05 [RalphS]
Mark: are we sure we ignore @lang in XHTML?
16:06:11 [RalphS]
Shane: @lang is not in the DTD
16:06:35 [RalphS]
Ben: points 6 and 7 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0142.html left to separate discussions?
16:06:52 [RalphS]
-- @instanceof behaviour
16:07:13 [RalphS]
Mark: Ivan and Elias have also stated a preference for @instanceof applying to the element in which the attribute appears
16:07:25 [RalphS]
... I find it confusing to make @instanceof apply to the child
16:07:45 [RalphS]
Ben: perhaps we can resolve this in mail
16:08:08 [RalphS]
Mark: this was a reflection of a long practice for LINK being a child of a node
16:08:16 [RalphS]
... this got grey when we reintroduced chaining
16:08:45 [RalphS]
... we ended up with @instanceof referring to the child, even though @class didn't work this way
16:09:14 [RalphS]
Ben: I think there are reasonable use cases for either interpretation
16:09:39 [RalphS]
... but an author who puts too many attributes on a single element is just asking for trouble
16:10:03 [RalphS]
... an author who clearly wants separate nodes can make a child
16:10:22 [RalphS]
Mark: yes, and I think that approach is much clearer; implicitly creating a bnode is confusing
16:10:49 [RalphS]
Ben: when @about and @instanceof are the only attributes, the type applies to the @about
16:11:13 [RalphS]
... when @about, @resource and @instanceof all appear, that's where Mark and my interpretations differ
16:11:15 [RalphS]
Mark: yes
16:11:38 [RalphS]
... this turns out to be a minor change to the processing model, so the decision won't have a huge impact on the document
16:12:35 [RalphS]
Ralph: yes, making @resource change the interpretation of @instanceof feels like a huge leap
16:12:49 [RalphS]
Ben: but from the other direction, it's @about that is changing the interpretation
16:13:03 [RalphS]
Mark: yes, and our focus is on the "aboutness"
16:13:22 [RalphS]
Ben: it's a matter of the way you think about it; adding @resource to @about or adding @about to @resource
16:13:40 [RalphS]
Mark: if you can come up with a good way of picturing what you're describing, you may convince lots of people
16:14:05 [RalphS]
... a clear conceptual model may convince everyone
16:14:28 [RalphS]
Topic: Schedule
16:14:47 [RalphS]
Ben: everyone OK with Tuesday night for everything we're going to ask the WG to review?
16:14:50 [RalphS]
Shane, Mark: yes
16:15:14 [Zakim]
-ShaneM
16:16:11 [RalphS]
Ben: we'll work to resolve questions 6 and 7 by email
16:31:38 [RalphS]
[un-scribed discussion of conformance w.r.t. additional triples ...]
17:00:34 [Zakim]
-Ralph
17:00:35 [Zakim]
-markbirbeck
17:00:36 [Zakim]
-Manu
17:00:37 [Zakim]
-benadida
17:00:39 [Zakim]
SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
17:00:40 [Zakim]
Attendees were markbirbeck, Ralph, Manu, ShaneM, benadida
17:00:51 [RalphS]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
17:00:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-minutes.html RalphS
17:06:23 [benadida]
benadida has left #rdfa
17:43:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rdfa
18:13:54 [RalphS]
rrsagent, bye
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
I see 14 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-actions.rdf :
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben collect all the non-binding resolutions into a mail message and call for a vote [1]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-17-55
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to write up @instanceof referring to other subjects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] [2]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-27-53
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Michael look for a more semantically correct predicate for tests 42-45 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] [3]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-28-06
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Michael make sure to confirm a design for checking that the ASK SPARQL queries evaluate (yes/no) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action07] [4]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-28-19
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben add an isbn: resource example to the Primer to illustrate @resource overriding @href [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/30-rdfa-minutes.html#action08] [5]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-28-33
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to look into Science Commons use case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/11-htmltf-minutes.html#action04] [6]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-30-28
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to recontact implementors Elias, MarkB, triplr [and Fabien] and post their implementations to http://esw.w3.org/topic/RDFa#Implementations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [7]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-31-02
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to work test cases 31 and 32 into primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] [8]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-31-24
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben, Mark, Elias, and other implementors to add xml:lang support [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [9]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-31-34
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action06] [10]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-32-01
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben research whether "Can an RDF-conformant parser generate additional triples than those specified in the Syntax specification?" is an already closed issue [11]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-37-46
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Shane create a conformance section [12]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-38-45
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Mark find a reference for SAX or clarify the "SAX-like" language [13]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T15-50-23
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Mark find language for canonicalization of markup in plain literals [14]
18:13:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/14-rdfa-irc#T16-04-50