RDFa in XHTML Task Force

Manu: We may not have quorum today, so we won't be able to talk about everything

Steven: Tesco, the largest UK retailer has started using RDFa, see rdfa.info for a link to an example

Manu: We know the person who did hProduct, he's at Best Buy
... in charge of their future web stuff

Ivan: A large company has announced it will join the WG
... we have 4 days to go
... before the deadline

Action items

<manu> http://www.w3.org/2010/01/14-rdfa-minutes.html#ActionSummary

<scribe> ACTION: ShaneM to identify the requirements for html2ps and see about getting reSpec to support them. [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]

Shane: I've been contacting Robin, still on it

<scribe> ACTION: Manu to get in touch with LibXML developers about TC 142. [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action02]

<scribe> ACTION: Mark to generate spec text for @token and @prefix [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action03]

Manu: Mark hopes to have that done by tomorrow

<scribe> ACTION: Mark to generate spec text for pulling in external vocabulary documents [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action04]

RDFa Community Updates

Manu: Someone has asked to become an invited expert
... people support this
... has done a number of semweb parsers
... I've worked with him in microformats
... good guy
... on the rdfa-tf mailing list
... he's very thorough

[Discussion of invited expert process]

Manu: Mediawiki discussion
... big discussion
... people saying microdata should be used for license information
... lots of misconceptions
... some FUD
... I responded
... End result is that the mediawiki people are discussing their own syntax

Ivan: There is a semantic media wiki already
... not easy to use
... but once set up, decent

<manu> Here's the discussion: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/186906?do=post_view_threaded

Ivan: the issue for us is not the syntax they use, but the generated HTML
... which *is* relevant
... A wider issue
... what is the difference between microdata and the version of RDFa we are discussing?
... Can't we reconcile these things?
... with microdata as a subset of RDFa

Manu: Good point
... microdata is changing
... maybe three things that are different
... so wikimedia people said, well if they are so similar, it doesn't matter which we choose

Ivan: We need some cool-headed people to try and reconcile them and get rid of the stupid religious discussion

Manu: CURIEs, how to express datatypes, and one other thing
... those are the differences
... and we need default prefixing
... Danbri volunteered to do a comparison of microdata and RDFa

<manu> ACTION: Manu to contact Dan Brickley to discuss Microdata to RDFa mapping. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action05]

Manu: microdata supports fully qualified names
... with a mapping mechanism, but everything is hardcoded, with only three vocabularies
... otherwise you have to use the full URI

<ShaneM> wow - that's *MUCH* better than RDFa. NOT

Ivan: RDFa 1 microdata 0

Manu: The short name is hardcoded

<Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about vocabs in microdata

Ivan: We need to address the issue of hardcoded names

Shane: I think that is already addressed.
... So the vocabs are not extensible

Manu: No. To get a new vocab in is to update HTML5

Shane: But the whole point of RDFa is extensibility and discoverability

Ivan: So to do microdata, I have to check the HTML5 list weekly and update the implementation? That is absolutely unrealistic

Manu: You have to understand a lot about the semweb to understand these points
... some of the wikimedia people don't understand why a page needs inbedded semantics
... HTML5 people haven't grasped the extensible vocabulary concept properly yet

Shane: There are so many examples!

Manu: I've tried to point them to them

<ShaneM> foaf dc owl rdf rdfs skos xsd dbp d2rq sioc

<manu> We could pre-define those in RDFa 1.1

<manu> that would make some WHAT WG folks happy

Manu: We can hardcode some prefixes for the most used cases
... Subtopic HTML WG discussion
... next draft for HTML+RDFa is ready to go, and will be published I think
... some objections to the microdata spec
... from a couple of people
... who are asking why W3C has two solutions for this
... both are saying use RDFa
... and one says that the HTML WG shouldn't even be looking at it

RDFa vocabs

Ivan: I did send a comment
... there are some holes in the discussion
... [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2010Jan/0047.html]
... It is easy for us to understand that 'next' is mapped

Shane: I thought we were extending keywords to all places where you can have CURIEs
... I think it eases implementation
... it's about consistency

Ivan: It is not a proposal, but a question

Shane: I would like this to happen

Manu: Having 'next' in @typeof wouldn't make sense
... in @resource maybe

<ivan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2010Jan/0047.html

Manu: in @property?
... We can discuss this when the WG starts up

Ivan: The mail above contains my point that was not scribes
... On a related point, there is a discussion going on about a registration mechanism for rel/rev/role
... Mark Nottingham is proposing it

http://www.mnot.net/drafts/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-01.txt

Manu: I didn't realise it was progressing

Shane: I have been participating in that discussion
... saying that the rel values were described in HTML4, and we (XHTML WG) have put them in a registry (http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab)

Ivan: I don't know where this will end, Harry Halpin has an action item in W3C to follow up

<manu> Steven: Our values of @rel are much more widely usable.

Steven: Mnot's version is for http link values

Ivan: It will come into our vocab discussion

ADJOURN

<manu> Manu: Perhaps we need to have something that is jointly run by W3C, IETF and IANA