Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
Chatlog 2011-03-10
From RDFa Working Group Wiki
See CommonScribe Control Panel, original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.
14:46:17 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa 14:46:17 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/03/10-rdfa-irc 14:46:19 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world 14:46:19 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfa 14:46:21 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332 14:46:21 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes 14:46:22 <trackbot> Meeting: RDFa Working Group Teleconference 14:46:22 <trackbot> Date: 10 March 2011 14:46:28 <manu> Chair: Manu 14:58:31 <Benjamin> Benjamin has joined #rdfa 14:59:32 <Steven> scribe: Steven 14:59:49 <Knud> Knud has joined #rdfa 15:00:59 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started 15:01:06 <Zakim> + +44.123.456.aaaa 15:01:08 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip 15:01:11 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made 15:01:12 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617 15:01:13 <Zakim> +Ivan 15:01:15 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made 15:01:17 <Zakim> +Steven 15:01:33 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes 15:01:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/03/10-rdfa-minutes.html Steven 15:01:41 <Zakim> + +3539149aabb 15:01:59 <Knud> zakim, I am aabb 15:02:01 <Zakim> +??P17 15:02:05 <Zakim> +Knud; got it 15:02:14 <manu> zakim, who is on the call? 15:02:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see +44.123.456.aaaa, Ivan, Steven, Knud, ??P17 15:02:17 <Benjamin> zakim, i am aaaa 15:02:19 <Zakim> +Benjamin; got it 15:02:50 <Steven> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Mar/0050 15:05:12 <manu> Topic: Updating RDFa Test Suites 15:05:19 <manu> http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/test-suite/ 15:05:48 <Steven> Manu: I have made some updates for different host languages 15:06:08 <Steven> ...I need to add back the RDF 1.0 work 15:06:16 <Zakim> +??P31 15:06:17 <Steven> ... anyone can write and submit tests 15:06:26 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa 15:06:31 <ivan> q+ 15:06:35 <ShaneM> zakim, who is here? 15:06:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see Benjamin, Ivan, Steven, Knud, ??P17, ??P31 15:06:36 <Zakim> On IRC I see ShaneM, Knud, Benjamin, Zakim, RRSAgent, Steven, webr3, ivan, tinkster2, manu, manu1, trackbot 15:06:42 <manu> https://github.com/msporny/rdfa-test-suite 15:06:47 <ShaneM> zakim, I am ??P31 15:06:47 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it 15:07:08 <ShaneM> ShaneM has left #rdfa 15:07:28 <manu> ack ivan 15:07:29 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa 15:07:41 <Steven> Manu: Please add tests you come across when doing your implementations 15:07:59 <Steven> Ivan: I've had problems accessing the site 15:08:13 <Steven> Manu: You should have access 15:08:18 <Steven> Ivan: I will try again 15:08:39 <Steven> Manu: Ping me if you have problems 15:09:13 <Steven> Ivan: We should ensure we use the DTDs etc for the 1.1 tests 15:09:25 <ShaneM> Feel free to use the XML Schema for validation too. 15:09:27 <manu> Is this the DOCTYPE you're talking about: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML+RDFa 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-2.dtd"> 15:09:45 <Steven> ... all the 1.0 tests are in XHTML 15:09:55 <Steven> ... do we need to repeat them in HTML5 and pure XML? 15:10:02 <Steven> Manu: Yes. We have an HTML5 test 15:10:10 <manu> HTML5 test suite uses: <!DOCTYPE html> 15:10:11 <Steven> s/test/testsuite/ 15:10:57 <Steven> Ivan: It's nice to have SVG 15:11:16 <Steven> ... we now specify what it means to have a hostlanguage 15:11:28 <Steven> ... but we don't yet have an SVG hostlanguage 15:12:03 <ShaneM> q+ to discuss media types 15:12:06 <Steven> Manu: We use media type to identify the content types 15:12:17 <manu> ack shanem 15:12:17 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to discuss media types 15:12:33 <Steven> Shane: XHTML5+RDFa? 15:12:42 <ivan> header http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/test-suite/test-cases/0001.xhtmlHTTP/1.1 200 OK 15:12:43 <ivan> Date Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:12:24 GMT 15:12:43 <Steven> Manu: Yes... 15:12:43 <ivan> Server Apache/2.2.16 (Debian) 15:12:43 <ivan> Vary Accept-Encoding 15:12:43 <ivan> Content-Type text/html 15:12:50 <Steven> Shane: Media type? 15:13:05 <Steven> Steven: Same as XHTML1.1 15:13:32 <Steven> Ivan: I've just tried, and it doesn't seem to be working right 15:13:36 <Steven> Manu: I'll check 15:13:51 <ivan> alias header='curl --head ' 15:14:01 <Steven> SHane: Your client has to say it accepts the media type in order to get it 15:14:22 <Steven> s/SH/Sh/ 15:14:35 <Steven> Ivan: I don't think curl sends an accept header 15:14:55 <Steven> Manu: Oh, I don't change the content type. Bug. Will fix 15:15:56 <Steven> Shane: If XHTML5 uses the same media type as XHTML 1 (and it does) then we don't know what versio 15:16:12 <Steven> Steven: There is no difference in processing between XHTML5 and 1.1 surely 15:16:16 <Steven> Ivan: Right 15:16:21 <Steven> Shane: Not yet... 15:17:06 <Steven> Ivan: The two are esssentially the same from an RDFa POV 15:17:08 <Steven> Shane: OK 15:17:33 <Steven> Shane: Therefore we don't need a separate XHTML5+RDFa testsuite then 15:17:51 <Steven> Manu: I need to think about it more 15:18:27 <Steven> Manu: we could have a separate selector for XHTML5 though 15:19:11 <Steven> ... the DOCTYPE of the result would change 15:19:36 <Steven> ... the RDFa rules don't take the DOCTYPE into account though 15:19:37 <Steven> Subtopic: Guessing Content-Type and DOCTYPE/root element sniffing 15:21:03 <Steven> Shane: There was a thread in the last 5 days 15:21:35 <manu> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Mar/thread.html 15:22:00 <Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Mar/0037.html 15:22:36 <Steven> Shane: He asked if it's OK to look at the root element 15:23:16 <Steven> ... to determine the document type 15:23:38 <Steven> ... but you don't get a media type in a filesystem, so how do you know? 15:24:02 <Steven> Ivan: FIlename extensions are used to map to media types 15:24:08 <ShaneM> Gregg said in his mail: "I guess what concerns me is the requirements of a conforming processor. This depends on the interpretation of the third sentence (If the RDFa Processor is unable ...). I would hope/expect that a processor which uses unspecified heuristics to determine the document type (e.g., file extension, root element name, etc.) would not be inconsistent with this definition. If this leaves room for other forms of identification, perhaps the spec shoul 15:24:09 <Steven> s/FI/Fi/ 15:24:35 <Steven> Shane: It is not required though 15:24:44 <Steven> Ivan: It is the only way I can see it working 15:25:46 <Steven> Shane: Gregg wants to know if you are nonconforming if you sniff 15:26:13 <Steven> Manu: The decision to sniff happens after all other means have failed. 15:26:19 <Steven> ... we don't need to specify that 15:26:56 <Steven> ... do we think there are many people with this issue? 15:27:02 <Steven> ... I don't think so 15:27:48 <Steven> Shane: But, if you don't specify it, you won't get interoperability 15:27:58 <Steven> ... I agree we don't need to lock it down 15:28:30 <Steven> ... "We don't specify behaviour in the environment of incorrect input" 15:29:01 <Steven> Manu: I propose leaving it unspecified. Any objections? 15:29:33 <Steven> Shane: Do we say that in the spec? 15:29:39 <Steven> Manu: Probably 15:30:15 <ShaneM> I proposed: "If the media type is unavailable, a conforming RDFa Processor MAY look at the document's DOCTYPE to determine if its Formal Public Identifier matches that of a known Host Language." 15:30:28 <ShaneM> no reason to say this though 15:30:39 <Steven> Shane: Or use a note 15:31:24 <ShaneM> NOTE A conforming RDFa Processor MAY use additional mechanisms to attempt to determine the Host Language if the media type is unavailable. These mechanisms are unspecified. 15:33:03 <ShaneM> NOTE A conforming RDFa Processor MAY use additional mechanisms (e.g., the DOCTYPE, a file extension, the root element) to attempt to determine the Host Language if the media type is unavailable. These mechanisms are unspecified. 15:33:19 <Steven> Manu: I like that text 15:33:20 <manu> PROPOSAL: Add text to the RDFa Core document specifying a note that reads: NOTE: A conforming RDFa Processor MAY use additional mechanisms (e.g., the DOCTYPE, a file extension, the root element) to attempt to determine the Host Language if the media type is unavailable. These mechanisms are unspecified. 15:33:23 <Steven> Ivan: It's fine 15:33:37 <manu> +1 15:33:41 <Knud> +1 15:33:41 <Steven> ... I don't want to be obliged to do sniffing 15:33:45 <Steven> +1 15:33:47 <Benjamin> +1 15:34:00 <ShaneM> +1 15:34:02 <manu> RESOLVED: Add text to the RDFa Core document specifying a note that reads: NOTE: A conforming RDFa Processor MAY use additional mechanisms (e.g., the DOCTYPE, a file extension, the root element) to attempt to determine the Host Language if the media type is unavailable. These mechanisms are unspecified. 15:37:17 <manu> https://github.com/msporny/rdfa-test-suite/blob/master/crazyivan.js#L272 15:38:18 <Steven> Manu: We are not going to review test cases; we'll hear about it from users if any are wrong 15:38:28 <Steven> ... OK with that? 15:38:41 <manu> Topic: RDFa Core 1.1 and XHTML+RDFa 1.1 2nd Last Call 15:39:00 <Steven> ManU: I sent emails to all reviews of LC1 15:39:06 <Steven> s/U/u/ 15:39:46 <Steven> ... we have done our duty 15:40:21 <Steven> Ivan: We don't need a reply; it would be good though 15:40:44 <Steven> Manu: Nathan has to reply to Ian Hickson 15:41:02 <Steven> ... I haven't seen that reply yet 15:41:17 <Steven> ... Issue-66 15:41:52 <manu> Nathan is supposed to respond to: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/66 and http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/76 15:42:07 <manu> Toby has to respond to: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/74 15:42:21 <Steven> zakim, who is on the phone? 15:42:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see Benjamin, Ivan, Steven, Knud, ??P17, ShaneM 15:42:49 <Steven> Manu: We need to do these 15:43:35 <Steven> ... let's delay for a week to let them do that 15:44:04 <Steven> Ivan: Maybe we should send replies 15:46:15 <manu> zakim, who is on the call? 15:46:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see Benjamin, Ivan, Steven, Knud, ??P17, ShaneM 15:46:26 <manu> zakim, ??P17 is me 15:46:26 <Zakim> +manu; got it 15:46:38 <Steven> web3r++ 15:46:48 <Steven> s/3r/r3/ 15:47:17 <Steven> Manu: Delay a week? 15:47:20 <Steven> Ivan: No 15:47:46 <Steven> Steven: But that risks LC3 15:47:52 <Steven> Ivan: OK 15:49:43 <Steven> Manu: THe TAG says we should clarify that we cannot follow the specs to figure out what a fragid means when you use it in the way RDFa uses it 15:49:48 <Steven> s/TH/Th/ 15:49:55 <manu> about="#me" 15:50:28 <Steven> Steven: I hate that. Foaf:PrimaryTopicOf is much better 15:51:01 <ShaneM> I note that the TAG's job is to be pedantic. 15:51:12 <Steven> Manu: The TAG says it is fine to use #me, but we need to say that you can't work out what it is 15:51:14 <manu> "In some of the examples below we have used URIs with fragment ids 15:51:15 <manu> that are local to the document containing the RDFa fragments shown 15:51:17 <manu> (e.g. 'about="#me"'). This idiom, which is also used in RDF/XML and 15:51:18 <manu> other RDF serializations, gives a simple way to 'mint' new URIs for 15:51:20 <manu> entities described by RDFa and therefore contributes considerably to 15:51:21 <manu> the expressive power of RDFa. However, the media type registrations 15:51:23 <manu> that govern the meaning of fragment identifiers (see section 3.5 of 15:51:23 <Steven> Shane: It is nonnormative. 15:51:24 <manu> the URI specification RFC 3986, RFC 3023, and RFC 2854) have not yet 15:51:26 <manu> caught up with this practice. Uses of fragment identifiers that are 15:51:27 <manu> arbitrarily different from the meaning they are assigned by the 15:51:29 <manu> relevant media type registrations (eg. via @id) should be avoided. See 15:51:30 <manu> also AWWW 3.2.1." 15:51:50 <Steven> Shane: The TAG should give us text iof they think it's so importnant 15:51:51 <manu> I think that change is fine 15:51:55 <Steven> s/nant/ant/ 15:53:21 <Steven> s/iof/if/ 15:55:19 <Steven> Shane: Is this about using #id when there is no such id? 15:55:39 <Steven> Manu: There is no spec that specifies the use of this use of fragids 15:55:55 <Steven> Ivan: We're wasting time on this 15:56:06 <Steven> Steven: It's our own fault for using it in our examples 15:57:51 <Steven> Manu: OK with the text I pasted? 15:57:57 <Steven> Shane: Up to the last sentence 15:58:06 <Steven> Manu: I will strike it 15:58:09 <ShaneM> Strike the last sentence and move on. 15:58:15 <Steven> +1 15:58:17 <manu> +1 15:59:09 <Steven> Steven: Next week's call is an hour earlier for Europeans 16:00:16 <Steven> Shane: New dated ED? 16:00:25 <Steven> Manu: Nah. Just make the changes 16:00:48 <Steven> ... ping Gregg 16:00:52 <Steven> Shane: Already done 16:00:55 <Steven> [ADJOURN] 16:00:56 <Zakim> -manu 16:00:57 <Zakim> -Knud 16:00:58 <Zakim> -ShaneM 16:00:58 <ivan> zakim, drop me 16:00:59 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected 16:00:59 <Zakim> -Ivan 16:01:00 <Zakim> -Steven 16:01:09 <Zakim> -Benjamin 16:01:10 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended 16:01:11 <Zakim> Attendees were +44.123.456.aaaa, Ivan, Steven, +3539149aabb, Knud, Benjamin, ShaneM, manu 16:01:14 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes 16:01:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/03/10-rdfa-minutes.html Steven # SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC. DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW. SRCLINESUSED=00000212