Chatlog 2010-12-02

From RDFa Working Group Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

See CommonScribe Control Panel, original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.

14:56:15 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
14:56:15 <RRSAgent> logging to
14:56:16 <tinkster> A fallback to .value seems like it would be more useful. I agree that this would mean failure was undetectable though - which is a bad thing.
14:56:17 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:56:17 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfa
14:56:19 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
14:56:19 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
14:56:20 <trackbot> Meeting: RDFa Working Group Teleconference
14:56:20 <trackbot> Date: 02 December 2010
14:57:01 <manu1> I'm trying to figure out if it is safe to close ISSUE-57, or if you have an alternative proposal.
14:57:41 <tinkster> My alternative proposal is to just return .value in the case of conversion failure.
14:58:18 <tinkster> I think each method has its advantages and disadvantages though, so can live with either solution.
14:58:43 <tinkster> Whatever closes the issue and stabllises the API fastest is fine.
14:59:09 <manu1> Ok, then I'm going to close the issue and if we have new input later on why the decision we made was a bad idea, we can re-open the issue.
14:59:19 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
14:59:19 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:59:20 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
14:59:22 <Zakim> +Ivan
14:59:38 <Zakim> + +44.785.583.aaaa
14:59:47 <tinkster> Zakim, aaaa is me.
14:59:51 <Zakim> +tinkster; got it
15:00:13 <Zakim> +??P14
15:00:18 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P14
15:00:18 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
15:00:22 <Knud> Knud has joined #rdfa
15:01:47 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
15:01:47 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), markbirbeck
15:01:49 <Zakim> +Knud
15:02:21 <Zakim> +??P21
15:02:25 <markbirbeck> zakim, i am ?
15:02:25 <Zakim> +markbirbeck; got it
15:02:35 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
15:02:55 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
15:02:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ivan, tinkster, manu1, Knud, markbirbeck
15:03:26 <Steven_> zakim, dial steven-617
15:03:26 <Zakim> ok, Steven_; the call is being made
15:03:28 <Zakim> +Steven
15:03:36 <Zakim> +Shane
15:04:37 <manu1> Chair: Manu
15:04:40 <manu1> scribe: MarkB
15:04:58 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:04:59 <manu1> scribenick: markbirbeck
15:05:20 <Nathan> Zakim, I am +[IPcaller]
15:05:20 <Zakim> sorry, Nathan, I do not see a party named '+[IPcaller]'
15:05:26 <Nathan> Zakim, I am IPcaller
15:05:26 <Zakim> ok, Nathan, I now associate you with [IPcaller]
15:05:30 <manu1> Agenda:
15:05:54 <markbirbeck> Manu: Any other items?
15:06:12 <markbirbeck> Ivan: Thomas Steiner from Google will be visiting me next week.
15:06:26 <markbirbeck> ...Will try to get as much feedback from him as possible about the RDFa API.
15:07:25 <markbirbeck> @Ivan: Thanks. :)
15:07:27 <manu1> Topic: RDFa API Super-session
15:30:05 <manu1> Manu: Nathan has been updating the RDFa API:
15:33:56 <markbirbeck> Manu: Progress on the API has been slow because changes tend to have a knock-on effect.
15:34:15 <markbirbeck> ...Proposal is to have a 'super-session' where we knock off lots of issues in one go.
15:34:29 <markbirbeck> ...Will put a poll online to find a time on Sunday.
15:34:42 <markbirbeck> ...Then get a new draft up for next Thursday.
15:34:56 <markbirbeck> ...Also want to ensure that we have something more advanced by the time new people join the group.
15:35:14 <markbirbeck> ...Ivan - you wanted to make some comments about the structure?
15:35:30 <markbirbeck> Ivan: You have a set of sections that are defined as 'linked data' interfaces.
15:35:53 <markbirbeck> ...In terms of technology that may be true, but it may be less accurate when it comes to the messaging.
15:36:24 <markbirbeck> ...It could create some unnecessary controversy.
15:36:55 <markbirbeck> ...Would propose to cut the document into two.
15:37:41 <markbirbeck> ...The first would be a basic document focusing on the core.
15:37:43 <manu1> q+ to comment on Nathan's proposed structure
15:37:58 <manu1> Nathan's proposed structure:
15:38:29 <manu1> ack manu1
15:38:29 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to comment on Nathan's proposed structure
15:38:32 <Nathan> q+ to agree
15:38:32 <markbirbeck> ...The second would include the filters, property groups, etc., allowing people from a non-RDF background to get into it.
15:38:51 <ivan> q+
15:38:53 <markbirbeck> Manu: Agree generally, but think we should wait to split until we know where the charter is going.
15:39:18 <markbirbeck> ...Like Nathan's proposal. Can still split later.
15:39:29 <manu1> ack [IPcaller]
15:39:29 <Zakim> [IPcaller], you wanted to agree
15:39:53 <markbirbeck> Nathan: Would prefer to split into two. Easier to read...easier to edit.
15:40:12 <manu1> ack ivan
15:40:33 <markbirbeck> Ivan: The reason I'm pushing for this is exactly because of these problems.
15:40:57 <markbirbeck> ...At the moment the charter talks of an RDFa API, and the possibility of a note for the RDF side.
15:42:02 <markbirbeck> ...The note would then be the starting-point for the new spec.
15:42:03 <Nathan> q+ to ask a question
15:42:11 <manu1> ack [IPcaller]
15:42:11 <Zakim> [IPcaller], you wanted to ask a question
15:44:15 <Zakim> -tinkster
15:44:54 <Zakim> +tinkster
15:47:58 <markbirbeck> MarkB: Agree with a split.
15:48:17 <ivan> q+
15:48:27 <markbirbeck> Shane: There is a risk, though, since the RDFa API is layered on top.
15:48:32 <markbirbeck> Ivan: No.
15:48:37 <markbirbeck> Shane: Really?
15:48:42 <markbirbeck> Manu: Agree with Shane.
15:49:13 <markbirbeck> ...We could be creating more work for ourselves.
15:49:28 <markbirbeck> ...Important to keep the momentum going on the technical side.
15:49:36 <ivan> q-
15:50:12 <markbirbeck> Ivan: In my view the RDFa side would be layered on top of a fraction of what is in this document.
15:50:57 <markbirbeck> Shane: This doesn't clear up my concern...actually it's getting bigger.
15:51:07 <markbirbeck> ...Concern is that you have a rec depending on a note.
15:52:15 <markbirbeck> Ivan: But what I'm proposing is that the rec version would include what is currently called the RDF interfaces, and the RDFa side. Then the note would contain the more complicated things.
15:52:44 <markbirbeck> ...Query and a few other things are not part of RDFa.
15:53:50 <Nathan> q+ to discuss dependencies
15:53:58 <manu1> ack [IPcaller]
15:53:58 <Zakim> [IPcaller], you wanted to discuss dependencies
15:54:20 <markbirbeck> Nathan: Wouldn't then a future RDF API be dependent on the RDFa API?
15:56:08 <markbirbeck> Manu: Two notes?
15:56:15 <markbirbeck> Ivan: Two WDs.
15:56:39 <markbirbeck> Manu: The split will be done over the weekend - Sunday, I'll send out a poll to invite people to participate.
15:56:59 <Zakim> -tinkster
15:56:59 <ivan> zakim, drop me
15:57:01 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
15:57:01 <Zakim> -Ivan
15:57:02 <Zakim> -Steven
15:57:03 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
15:57:03 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
15:57:04 <Zakim> -Knud
15:57:06 <Zakim> -manu1
15:57:15 <Zakim> -Shane
15:57:16 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
15:57:18 <Zakim> Attendees were Ivan, +44.785.583.aaaa, tinkster, manu1, Knud, markbirbeck, Steven, Shane, [IPcaller]
15:57:22 <Knud> Knud has left #rdfa