Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
Chatlog 2012-01-12
From RDFa Working Group Wiki
See CommonScribe Control Panel, original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.
14:55:48 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa 14:55:48 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/01/12-rdfa-irc 14:55:50 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world 14:55:50 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfa 14:55:52 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332 14:55:52 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes 14:55:53 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference 14:55:53 <trackbot> Date: 12 January 2012 14:56:20 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started 14:56:27 <Zakim> +??P3 14:56:33 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P3 14:56:34 <Zakim> +manu1; got it 15:00:34 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdfa 15:01:04 <Zakim> +??P39 15:01:11 <niklasl> zakim, I am ??P39 15:01:11 <Zakim> +niklasl; got it 15:01:30 <Zakim> +??P37 15:01:35 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P37 15:01:35 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it 15:01:49 <Zakim> +??P42 15:01:59 <Zakim> +scor 15:02:15 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software 15:02:22 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me 15:02:23 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it 15:02:23 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me 15:02:26 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted 15:02:29 <scor> scor has joined #rdfa 15:03:06 <Zakim> +Steven 15:03:31 <manu1> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Jan/0001.html 15:04:06 <Steven> Scribe: STeven 15:04:11 <Steven> Scribe: Steven 15:04:54 <Steven> Topic: Planning 15:05:09 <Steven> Manu: Are we ready for LC, are we OK with the timeline? 15:05:20 <Steven> ... the first reviews are already coming in 15:05:29 <manu1> Topic: Any Remaining Issues? 15:05:36 <Steven> ... so are there any remaining issues? 15:05:59 <Steven> Manu: Gavin Carothers of RDF WG is raising issues on CURIE syntax next week 15:06:17 <Steven> ... they feel that we are too inclusive 15:06:39 <Steven> ... he's comment is about http://example.com being interpreted as CURIE 15:06:50 <Steven> ... we need to tighten up the CURIE syntax 15:06:59 <Steven> ... they propose a narrower definition in SPARQL 15:07:13 <gkellogg> q+ 15:07:18 <Steven> ... so that people couldn't have http:// be detected as a CURIE 15:07:20 <ShaneM> q+ to ask about http 15:07:33 <manu1> ack gkellogg 15:07:45 <niklasl> q+ 15:07:52 <Steven> Gregg: One issue is the ability to have a CURIE with path information in it, can't have a slash, can you? 15:08:19 <Steven> Manu: They allow slash in theirs, I believe. 15:08:53 <manu1> ack shaneM 15:08:53 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about http 15:08:59 <Steven> ... if it doesn't then we'd be in trouble 15:09:24 <Steven> Shane: Why do they think http: can be detected as a CURIE? 15:09:33 <Steven> Manu: if you declare http as a prefix 15:09:54 <Steven> ... they think that it shouldn't be allowed, and be the same as in SPARQL; I'd be OK with it as is 15:10:15 <manu1> ack niklasl 15:10:35 <Steven> Niklas: I too am wary about http: as prefix 15:10:49 <Steven> ... I'd be interested to see how it is done 15:11:22 <Steven> Manu: Two issues 1) backwards incompatible 15:11:39 <Steven> ... if no one is using it, then there's no problem surely 15:11:45 <Steven> ... angels on the head of a pin 15:11:47 <ShaneM> note that almost all of RDF is 'angels on the head of a pin' 15:12:03 <Steven> ... 2) we wouldn't be using PNAME from SPARQL anyway, but a modification that doesn't allow '//' to exist at the beginning of a reference (to prevent http:// from being detected as a CURIE) 15:12:24 <Steven> ... so we would still have a different range of characters 15:12:41 <Steven> Steven: Anyway, SPARQL did it after we did 15:12:47 <Steven> Manu: heh. True. 15:13:04 <Steven> Manu: The rest seems to be editorial issues from RDF WG 15:13:04 <Steven> Shane: Except for the "URI/IRI" thing, that may not be editorial 15:13:37 <manu1> Steven: I thought we referenced IRI anyway, it's just called URI, right? 15:13:43 <Steven> Shane: No, in some cases it must be URI, like for @href and @src in HTML... I don't think we can change URI to IRI 15:13:48 <niklasl> q+ 15:13:51 <manu1> Shane: The cases where we say URI, we mean URI - like in @href and @src 15:14:02 <gkellogg> q+ to talk about @href being a URL, not a URI 15:15:04 <Steven> SHane: I agree that it is an editorial change 15:15:12 <Steven> s/SH/Sh/ 15:15:16 <manu1> ack niklasl 15:15:34 <Steven> Niklas: I agree that @href and @src are OK 15:15:55 <Steven> ... but there are someplaces where we need to check the details, we use IRI where we mean that 15:16:37 <Steven> Shane: In M12N URI points to ANYURI 15:16:51 <manu1> ack gkellogg 15:16:51 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to talk about @href being a URL, not a URI 15:16:59 <Steven> Steven: Which is the same value space, but a different lexical space IIRC 15:17:09 <Steven> Gregg: HTML spec uses URL 15:17:19 <Steven> ... but there are open issues on that 15:17:36 <Steven> ... I'd be wary of depending on the range of attributes that we are importing 15:17:49 <manu1> q+ 15:17:58 <manu1> ack manu1 15:18:00 <Steven> ... point out that it is dependent on host language 15:18:17 <Steven> Manu: Can't we just say that RDFa supports IRIs everywhere, but keep in mind that the host language can restrict the lexical space. In that case, respect the host language, but RDFa can process IRIs everywhere. Can we reword along these lines, Shane? 15:18:34 <Steven> ... use IRI with a caveat 15:18:50 <Steven> Shane: probably 15:19:16 <Steven> Manu: But this would change our datatypes 15:19:23 <Steven> Shane: No I think it would be OK 15:19:56 <Steven> Manu: Any other issues? 15:20:00 <Steven> [silence] 15:20:13 <Steven> Manu: OK, discuss remaining issues next week, and then go to LC 15:20:16 <manu1> Topic: Review of RDFa Lite 1.1 and HTML+RDFa 1.1 Updates 15:20:26 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-lite/ 15:20:31 <Steven> Manu: I updated these over the vacation 15:20:33 <manu1> http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/ 15:21:06 <gkellogg> q+ I don't see anything about the value space of <time> in html+rdfa 15:21:10 <Steven> Manu: Changes - conformance section cleaned up 15:21:51 <Steven> q+ gkellogg to discuss <time> 15:21:55 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip 15:22:03 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made 15:22:06 <Zakim> +Ivan 15:22:10 <Steven> Manu: updated dependencies 15:22:16 <Steven> ... on other docs 15:22:28 <Zakim> -Ivan 15:22:29 <Steven> ... added link and meta to the body of a doc 15:22:35 <niklasl> q+ to ask about Lite timeline 15:23:03 <Steven> Manu: Added datetime and value attributes 15:23:34 <Steven> Gregg: We can't just add @datetime, we also have to process the <time> element 15:23:36 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip 15:23:36 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made 15:23:37 <Zakim> +Ivan 15:23:48 <manu1> q+ to talk about TIME element processing 15:24:00 <Steven> ... gyear, gyearmonth, and duration I think 15:24:05 <manu1> ack n 15:24:05 <Zakim> niklasl, you wanted to ask about Lite timeline 15:24:09 <manu1> ack g 15:24:09 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to discuss <time> 15:24:35 <Steven> niklas: do Google or schema.org need this to be a rec by some particular time? 15:24:45 <Steven> Manu: I don't think so 15:25:46 <Steven> [Ivan joins] 15:26:44 <Steven> Ivan: We will have to decide the @resource vs @about at some time 15:27:29 <Steven> ... Jeni has a script to convert microdata on schema.org to RDFa Lite 15:27:48 <niklasl> q+ 15:27:54 <Steven> ... she says it would be harder if there was only @resource 15:28:02 <manu1> ack manu1 15:28:02 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to talk about TIME element processing 15:28:24 <niklasl> .. Jeni's text related to microdata and @resource: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/htmldata/raw-file/default/html-data-guide/index.html#microdata-and-rdfa-equivalencies 15:28:32 <Steven> Manu: About <time>, people are asking for support, but it gets complicated quickly... time has a variety of different syntaxes... some of them new. 15:28:55 <niklasl> (.. section 2.2.2.3) 15:29:00 <Steven> ... and RDFa is about attributes, not elements 15:29:11 <ivan> q+ 15:29:42 <manu1> ack niklasl 15:29:58 <Steven> niklas: See the link above from Jeni 15:30:26 <niklasl> .. correct link: http://www.w3.org/TR/html-data-guide/#microdata-and-rdfa-equivalencies 15:30:29 <Steven> . Jeni's text related to microdata and @resource: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/htmldata/raw-file/default/html-data-guide/index.html#microdata-and-rdfa-equivalencies 15:31:05 <Steven> Ivan: This is only about RDFa+HTML5, we should say we will come back to it when they are ready 15:31:37 <Steven> ... <time> has a rocky history 15:32:22 <ivan> q+ 15:32:28 <gkellogg> http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata-rdf/#value-typing 15:32:47 <ivan> q- 15:33:13 <manu1> Topic: Reviewers for RDFa Core 1.1 and XHTML+RDFa 1.1 15:33:35 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-rdfa-core-20111215/ 15:33:38 <Steven> Manu: Niklas was yours a full review of RDFa Core 1.1? 15:33:42 <Steven> Niklas: No, not full. 15:33:45 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa/ 15:33:59 <Steven> Manu: We need 2 full reviews by non-editors 15:34:12 <Steven> Niklas: Given time constraints, I will do my best 15:34:20 <manu1> ACTION: Ivan to review RDFa Lite 1.1 15:34:20 <Steven> Ivan: I will do Lite 15:34:20 <trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Review RDFa Lite 1.1 [on Ivan Herman - due 2012-01-19]. 15:35:06 <manu1> ACTION: Manu to review RDFa Core 1.1 15:35:06 <trackbot> Created ACTION-107 - Review RDFa Core 1.1 [on Manu Sporny - due 2012-01-19]. 15:35:23 <Steven> Shane: I will do Lite 15:35:32 <manu1> ACTION: Shane to review RDFa Lite 1.1 15:35:33 <trackbot> Created ACTION-108 - Review RDFa Lite 1.1 [on Shane McCarron - due 2012-01-19]. 15:35:39 <Steven> Niklas: I will do COre 15:35:42 <manu1> ACTION: Niklas to review RDFa Core 1.1 15:35:43 <trackbot> Created ACTION-109 - Review RDFa Core 1.1 [on Niklas Lindström - due 2012-01-19]. 15:35:44 <Steven> s/CO/Co/ 15:36:04 <manu1> ACTION: Stephane to review XHTML+RDFa 1.1 15:36:04 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Stephane 15:36:23 <scor> ACTION: scor to review XHTML+RDFa 1.1 15:36:23 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - scor 15:36:41 <ShaneM> ACTION: Shane to ensure that the right working group name is used in each document 15:36:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-110 - Ensure that the right working group name is used in each document [on Shane McCarron - due 2012-01-19]. 15:36:47 <manu1> ACTION: Ivan to review XHTML+RDFa 1.1 15:36:48 <trackbot> Created ACTION-111 - Review XHTML+RDFa 1.1 [on Ivan Herman - due 2012-01-19]. 15:37:04 <ShaneM> ACTION: Shane to ensure that the list of working group participants is correct in each document. 15:37:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-112 - Ensure that the list of working group participants is correct in each document. [on Shane McCarron - due 2012-01-19]. 15:37:20 <Steven> Manu: We need reviews of the primer, over the next months, no hurry on that one 15:37:33 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes 15:37:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/01/12-rdfa-minutes.html Steven 15:37:33 <manu1> Topic: Publication Timeline 15:37:52 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Jan/0003.html 15:38:16 <Steven> Manu: That is the timeline 15:39:07 <manu1> Jan 26th - WG resolves to take documents to Last Call 15:39:09 <manu1> Jan 31st - LC publication of RDFa Core, XHTML+RDFa and RDFa Lite 1.1 15:39:10 <manu1> Feb 21st - End of LC period for RDFa Core, XHTML+RDFa and RDFa Lite 1.1 15:39:33 <manu1> Feb 23th - Schedule Transition Call to Candidate Recommendation 15:39:35 <manu1> Feb 27th - WG resolves to take documents to Candidate Rec 15:39:37 <manu1> Mar 6th - CR Publication of RDFa Core, XHTML+RDFa and RDFa Lite 1.1 15:39:38 <manu1> Apr 1st - CR Implementation Reports in by April 1st 15:39:40 <manu1> Apr 10th - Schedule Transition Call to Proposed Recommendation 15:39:41 <manu1> Apr 17th - PR Publication of RDFa Core, XHTML+RDFa and RDFa Lite 1.1 15:39:43 <manu1> May 21st - Schedule Transition Call to Recommendation 15:39:44 <manu1> May 29th - REC Publication of RDFa Core, XHTML+RDFa and RDFa Lite 1.1 15:41:16 <ShaneM> q+ to talk about scheduling 15:41:29 <Steven> Steven: No time needed for dealing with LC comments? 15:41:35 <manu1> ack shanem 15:41:35 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to talk about scheduling 15:41:37 <Steven> Ivan: I don't expect any major ones 15:41:45 <Steven> Shane: Short LC period here 15:42:01 <Steven> ... I expect some WGs will say that they can't meet the schedule 15:42:08 <Steven> Manu: We've warned them already... at the end of last year and we asked them for reviews. 15:43:02 <Steven> ... by email, warning of short last call; HTML and RDF took us up on it 15:44:11 <Steven> Ivan: the timing is aggressive 15:44:19 <Steven> ... the Rec is scheduled for May 15:44:29 <Steven> ... charter is to end of July 15:46:29 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Adopt the publication timeline as discussed on this conference call, taking RDFa 1.1 to REC by the end of May 2012. 15:46:33 <ivan> +1 15:46:34 <gkellogg> +1 15:46:35 <manu1> +1 15:46:37 <niklasl> +1 15:46:37 <Steven> Steven: +1 15:46:43 <scor> +1 15:46:58 <ShaneM> +1 I guess 15:47:02 <ivan> RESOLVED: Adopt the publication timeline as discussed on this conference call, taking RDFa 1.1 to REC by the end of May 2012. 15:47:21 <manu1> Topic: RDF Interfaces, RDF API and RDFa API 15:47:55 <Steven> Manu: Short of time to get these to Rec, also little interest in the group 15:48:08 <Steven> ... we lack people and time to do it 15:48:29 <Steven> ... so we propose to send them to a community group 15:48:36 <Steven> q+ 15:49:02 <manu1> Steven: Normal practice is to turn these documents into notes, so they have a final state, then let another group take them over if they wanted them. 15:49:15 <ivan> q+ 15:49:17 <Steven> Steven: Normal practice is to publish as a note, and then let someone take them over 15:49:20 <ivan> ack Steven 15:49:30 <Steven> Manu: Problem is that API is incomplete 15:49:43 <manu1> ack ivan 15:50:26 <Steven> Ivan: In the note we can put in the status that it is not final 15:50:41 <Steven> ... but a note is a proper ending state 15:50:54 <niklasl> q+ 15:51:01 <ShaneM> I agree it should be a note 15:51:25 <Steven> Niklas: I've previously expected Notes to be finished, so I share Manu's concern 15:52:04 <MacTed> +1 note (maybe "draft note"?) with clear caveats, possibly beyond just the status section (which many people do skip over, ill advised as that may be) 15:52:05 <Steven> Ivan: There are precedents for incomplete work being published as a note 15:52:30 <Steven> Manu: As long as there are big red warnings, OK 15:54:32 <Steven> Ivan: A note is a final state, so that you know no one is working on it 15:55:07 <Steven> Ivan: In the charter we had a Cookbook planned. 15:55:13 <ShaneM> q+ to ask if the IRI text is okay? 15:55:16 <Steven> ... so we need to remove that 15:55:20 <manu1> ack 15:55:21 <manu1> ack 15:55:41 <ShaneM> Even though this specification exclusively 15:55:41 <ShaneM> references IRIs, it is possible that a Host Language will 15:55:41 <ShaneM> restrict the syntax for its attributes to a subset of IRIs 15:55:41 <ShaneM> (e.g., <aref>href</aref> in HTML5). Regardless of 15:55:41 <ShaneM> validation constraints in Host Languages, an RDFa Processor 15:55:42 <ShaneM> is capable of processing IRIs. 15:56:01 <Steven> Shane: Suggested text, is that ok? 15:56:05 <Steven> Manu: Looks OK 15:56:22 <Steven> Ivan: Answer to RDF WG comments right? 15:56:31 <Steven> Manu: We discussed it before you joined Ivan 15:56:59 <Steven> ... next week we will discuss CURIE vs PNAME and any other issues that could be substantative. 15:58:15 <Steven> ... Jan 26 we resolve to go to LC 15:59:00 <Steven> [ENDS] 15:59:00 <Zakim> -manu1 15:59:03 <Zakim> -MacTed 15:59:06 <Zakim> -Ivan 15:59:06 <Zakim> -gkellogg 15:59:06 <Zakim> -scor 15:59:07 <Zakim> -Steven 15:59:09 <Zakim> -niklasl 15:59:11 <Zakim> -??P42 15:59:13 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended 15:59:15 <Zakim> Attendees were manu1, niklasl, gkellogg, scor, MacTed, Steven, Ivan 15:59:17 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes 15:59:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/01/12-rdfa-minutes.html Steven # SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC. DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW. SRCLINESUSED=00000269