Chatlog 2011-10-20

From RDFa Working Group Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

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

13:55:49 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
13:55:49 <RRSAgent> logging to
13:55:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:55:51 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfa
13:55:53 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
13:55:53 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
13:55:54 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference
13:55:54 <trackbot> Date: 20 October 2011
13:55:58 <manu1> Chair: Manu
13:47:42 <manu1> Guest: Niklas (lindstream) Lindström
13:56:06 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdfa
13:57:44 <ivan> ivan has joined #rdfa
14:00:07 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
14:00:08 <Zakim> +??P6
14:00:13 <Steven> Steven has joined #rdfa
14:00:18 <niklasl> zakim, I am ??P6
14:00:18 <Zakim> +niklasl; got it
14:00:36 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
14:00:36 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:00:37 <Zakim> +Ivan
14:01:10 <Zakim> +??P8
14:01:16 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P8
14:01:19 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
14:01:40 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
14:01:49 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
14:01:49 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
14:01:51 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
14:01:51 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
14:01:56 <Zakim> +??P2
14:01:58 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P2
14:01:59 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
14:02:46 <Zakim> +Steven
14:02:47 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
14:02:48 <Zakim> On the phone I see niklasl, Ivan, gkellogg, MacTed (muted), manu1, Steven
14:02:50 <manu1> zakim, who is making noise?
14:03:01 <Zakim> manu1, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Ivan (52%), Steven (4%)
14:05:10 <manu1> Agenda:
14:05:22 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:05:22 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
14:05:53 <manu1> Topic: ISSUE-108: Refine/deprecate Link relations
14:06:46 <MacTed> manu1: we're trying to figure out what link relations should be in initial context
14:07:17 <MacTed> ... HTML5 spec appears to define a couple of link relations in way incompatible to XHTML
14:07:30 <MacTed> ... depending on who reads
14:08:24 <manu1> +1 - I hate the stylesheet references as well
14:08:27 <MacTed> ivan: as HTML5 author, these relationships are troublesome and distracting, without much (any?) added value
14:09:18 <manu1> q+ to discuss HTML5 and XHTML1 @rel values.
14:09:39 <MacTed> ... HTML5 radically reduces @rel relationship choices vs XHTML1
14:10:14 <manu1> ack manu1
14:10:14 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to discuss HTML5 and XHTML1 @rel values.
14:11:56 <ivan> q+
14:11:57 <niklasl> q+ to ask about backcompat
14:12:18 <manu1> ack ivan
14:12:23 <MacTed> manu1 sees 2 proposals --  1. create different initial RDFa contexts for HTML5 and for XHTML1; 2. drop all @rel when dealing with HTML5, but retain them when dealing with XHTML1
14:12:38 <MacTed> s/manu1 sees/manu1: sees/
14:13:54 <MacTed> ivan: major confusion likely if we keep all the @rel from XHTML1
14:14:00 <manu1> ack niklas
14:14:00 <Zakim> niklasl, you wanted to ask about backcompat
14:14:22 <niklasl>
14:14:32 <manu1> This is from our new charter, Ivan is correct in that we're allowed to make this change per the charter: "As exceptions to this general goal, some small non-compatible changes with regard to the defaults on XML Literals, as well as whether all reserved @rel/@rev attribute values would automatically generate RDF triples, may be introduced. No radical redefinition of the RDFa language is envisaged."
14:14:48 <MacTed> niklasl: Creative Commons advice...  against dropping all @rel, because they recommend @rel=license; see
14:16:06 <niklasl>
14:16:16 <MacTed> ivan: CC does advise this...  so we should probably keep that one, which is part of the HTML5 set
14:17:08 <MacTed> manu: being too aggressive isn't too big a deal, we can always add stuff back to the initial context document
14:17:20 <niklasl> .. interesting: whatwg also says: " For historical reasons, user agents must also treat the keyword "copyright" like the license keyword."
14:17:54 <manu1> MacTed: I'm concerned about taking everything out and then putting stuff in... if the initial context document is too volatile, it becomes a problem.
14:18:29 <MacTed> ivan: 14 entries in WHATWG's current list --
14:19:26 <ivan> We should keep: author, license, next, prev, 
14:19:56 <Steven> q+
14:20:02 <ivan> We should drop: alternate, bookmark, help, icon, nofollow, noreferrer prefetch search stylsheet tag
14:20:16 <manu1> ack Steven
14:20:31 <MacTed> ... these definitely have value -- author, license, next, prev
14:20:31 <MacTed> ... these are questionable -- alternate, bookmark, help, icon, nofollow, noreferrer, prefetch, search, stylsheet, tag
14:20:58 <MacTed> Steven: don't see what the win is for making extra limitation
14:22:05 <manu1> q+ to talk about erroneous triples.
14:22:40 <MacTed> [General discussion about stylesheet and other @rel-generated triples - do they provide value? Arguments both ways.]
14:23:30 <manu1> ack manu1
14:23:30 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to talk about erroneous triples.
14:23:56 <MacTed> manu: one pitfall is putting features in because they /might/ have a use in the future... we shouldn't put stuff in that nobody has used in the past 3 years and we don't think people will use in the future.
14:28:28 <ivan> q+
14:29:22 <MacTed> [Further discussion about value (or lack) of any data tied to these relations]
14:29:52 <ivan> We could just refer to this list:
14:30:09 <niklasl> q+
14:30:14 <manu1> ack ivan
14:30:15 <ivan> ack ivan 
14:30:17 <manu1> ack niklasl
14:30:58 <MacTed> niklasl: does initial context override @vocab?  or vice versa?
14:31:05 <niklasl> .. vocab="”
14:31:11 <MacTed> manu: @vocab overrides the initial context - I don't think defining a default vocabulary is a good idea.
14:32:23 <MacTed> Ivan: I agree, we should not do that.
14:34:55 <niklasl> So, we could use the terms from here?
14:38:03 <niklasl> q+
14:38:13 <MacTed> [ discussion about IANA registry list -- ]
14:39:07 <MacTed> ivan: concerned with which URIs are assigned to each term in that registry, and whether the definitions linked from that registry list are correct/current.
14:39:44 <niklasl> uses @prefix iana: <>
14:41:00 <niklasl> .. vocab="” - we could do that.
14:41:34 <MacTed> MacTed: +1
14:41:43 <niklasl> q+
14:42:51 <manu1> ACTION: Ivan to contact Mark Nottingham about a permanent URL to the IANA Link Type Registry for use in RDF - need URIs for the relation-names.
14:42:51 <trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Contact Mark Nottingham about a permanent URL to the IANA Link Type Registry for use in RDF - need URIs for the relation-names. [on Ivan Herman - due 2011-10-27].
14:45:14 <MacTed> niklasl: sees need for some URI centralization 
14:45:42 <MacTed> ivan: for future, after advice from Mark Nottingham per ACTION-100
14:46:31 <niklasl> (.. e.g. linkrelvocab:describedby  owl:equivalentProperty powder:describedby)
14:47:37 <Zakim> +??P1
14:48:13 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #rdfa
14:48:23 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Adopt IANA Link Type Registry terms ( ) as terms that will be specified for the following RDFa 1.1 languages XHTML1, HTML5, XHTML5.
14:48:26 <Steven> +1
14:48:28 <ShaneM> zakim, who is here?
14:48:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see niklasl, Ivan, gkellogg, MacTed, manu1, Steven, ??P1
14:48:30 <Zakim> On IRC I see ShaneM, Steven, ivan, niklasl, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, danbri, gkellogg, trackbot, manu, manu1
14:48:43 <ivan> +1
14:48:47 <manu1> +1
14:48:50 <niklasl> +1 (at least for those)
14:48:53 <gkellogg> +1
14:48:55 <ShaneM> zakim, ??P1 is ShaneM
14:48:55 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it
14:49:01 <MacTed> MacTed: +1
14:49:42 <MacTed> RESOLVED: Adopt IANA Link Type Registry terms ( ) as terms that will be specified for the following RDFa 1.1 languages XHTML1, HTML5, XHTML5.
14:49:57 <ivan> q+
14:50:02 <ivan> ack niklasl 
14:50:12 <manu1> ack ivan
14:52:15 <gkellogg> q+
14:52:23 <manu1> ack gkellogg
14:53:30 <ivan> q+
14:53:45 <MacTed> TOPIC: RDFa Core 1.1 Working Draft
14:53:54 <manu1> ack ivan
14:54:06 <MacTed> [discussion of whether we've resolved all outstanding technical issues]
14:54:31 <gkellogg> q+
14:55:15 <MacTed> manu: Let's publish this WD, and tell people that this will be the last chance for changes (preventing a 4th Last Call)
14:55:58 <manu1> ack gkellogg
14:56:12 <ivan> q+
14:56:18 <manu1> ack ivan
14:56:23 <MacTed> ivan: there may be some URI issues due to shifts from profile to context... but mostly about how nice the URLs look, not about functionality, just cosmetic stuff.
14:57:48 <MacTed> TAG has a(nother) thread about what RDFa should say about fragIDs
14:57:48 <MacTed> manu1: We have inserted what they wanted into the spec, they can raise an issue later on if they want to do so.
14:57:48 <MacTed> ShaneM: We need to discuss Henry Thompson's issue, it's the last one.
14:58:32 <manu1> Topic: Support for integration with XML
14:58:39 <manu1>
14:58:39 <Steven> q+
14:58:58 <niklasl> q+
14:59:06 <manu1> ack Steven
15:00:53 <manu1> ack niklasl
15:01:11 <Steven> Steven: XHTML+RDFa uses modularization, which says use the xhtml: prefix, and ODF has done this
15:01:38 <MacTed> niklasl: using RDFa in XSLT requires an XML namespace prefix
15:01:56 <ShaneM> If the Host Language uses XML Namespaces [XML-NAMES], the attributes in this specification should be defined in 'no namespace'. (e.g., when the attributes are used on elements in the Host Language's namespace, they can be used with no qualifying prefix: <myml:myElement property="next">).
15:02:15 <manu1> scribenick: manu1
15:02:21 <ShaneM> If the Host Language has its own definition for any attribute defined in this specification, that definition must be such that the processing required by this specification remains possible when the attribute is used in a way consistent with the requirements herein.
15:02:49 <Zakim> -MacTed
15:04:48 <manu1> Shane: This is an issue - if you ran an RDFa processor on an XML document w/ @property, it would process it. How do people integrate RDFa into XML languages that either conflict w/ the RDFa attributes, or want to integrate it using an XML namespace?
15:07:53 <manu1> Manu: Yes, but the issue is - does anyone need this? Who will use XSLT+RDFa?
15:08:24 <manu1> Shane: The spec allows RDFa attributes to be in no namespace, and it allows them to be in the XHTML namespace.
15:08:37 <manu1> Gregg: Should RDFa Core say you should use the XHTML namespace?
15:08:45 <manu1> Steven: it may as well say that, use the same namespace... not ideal, but it's what ODF decided to do and we shouldn't go against that if we don't have to.
15:13:19 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Add text to RDFa Core 1.1 to allow RDFa attributes to be placed into a namespace, where the namespace MUST be the xhtml namespace.
15:13:38 <ShaneM> +1
15:13:40 <Steven> +1
15:13:42 <ivan> 0
15:13:46 <gkellogg> +1
15:13:47 <manu1> +1
15:13:55 <niklasl> +1
15:14:05 <manu1> RESOLVED: Add text to RDFa Core 1.1 to allow RDFa attributes to be placed into a namespace, where the namespace MUST be the xhtml namespace.
15:14:33 <Zakim> -Steven
15:15:27 <ShaneM> "If a host language requires that RDFa attributes be used in a namespace, that namespace must be"
15:15:59 <Zakim> -Ivan
15:16:01 <Zakim> -manu1
15:16:01 <Zakim> -gkellogg
15:16:07 <Zakim> -ShaneM
15:16:11 <Zakim> -niklasl
15:16:12 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
15:16:14 <Zakim> Attendees were niklasl, Ivan, gkellogg, MacTed, manu1, Steven, ShaneM