IRC log of rdfa on 2010-09-23
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:00:00 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
- 14:00:01 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/09/23-rdfa-irc
- 14:00:02 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs world
- 14:00:02 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #rdfa
- 14:00:04 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be 7332
- 14:00:04 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start now
- 14:00:05 [trackbot]
- Meeting: RDFa Working Group Teleconference
- 14:00:06 [trackbot]
- Date: 23 September 2010
- 14:00:14 [Steven]
- zakim, dial steven-617
- 14:00:14 [Zakim]
- ok, Steven; the call is being made
- 14:00:15 [Zakim]
- SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
- 14:00:16 [Zakim]
- +Steven
- 14:01:27 [ivan]
- zakim, dial ivan-voip
- 14:01:33 [Zakim]
- ok, ivan; the call is being made
- 14:01:35 [Zakim]
- +Ivan
- 14:02:08 [Zakim]
- +??P19
- 14:02:14 [manu1]
- zakim, I am ??P19
- 14:02:14 [Zakim]
- +manu1; got it
- 14:03:21 [Zakim]
- + +49.631.205.75.aaaa
- 14:03:39 [manu1]
- manu1 has changed the topic to: RDFa Telecon Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Sep/0125.html (manu1)
- 14:03:41 [Benjamin]
- zakim, aaaa is Benjamin
- 14:03:41 [Zakim]
- +Benjamin; got it
- 14:04:53 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has joined #rdfa
- 14:05:11 [Zakim]
- +ShaneM
- 14:06:54 [manu1]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Sep/0125.html
- 14:06:58 [manu1]
- Chair: Manu
- 14:07:19 [manu1]
- Present: Ivan, Steven, Benjamin, Manu
- 14:07:28 [manu1]
- Regrets: MarkB
- 14:07:37 [manu1]
- Present: Ivan, Steven, Benjamin, Manu, Shane
- 14:08:30 [manu1]
- Topic: Discussion about RDFa talk
- 14:08:57 [manu1]
- Benjamin: There was a question about further annotating stuff in RDFa in XML3D?
- 14:09:13 [manu1]
- Ivan: We could put the data in SVG metadata tag.
- 14:09:39 [Benjamin]
- scribenick: Benjamin
- 14:09:40 [manu1]
- scribe: Benjamin
- 14:16:03 [manu1]
- Topic: ISSUE-41: Under-defined processor graph vocabulary
- 14:16:14 [manu1]
- http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/41
- 14:16:44 [Benjamin]
- manu1: Talked to Mark about this issue. Agreed about an RDFa Processor Graph
- 14:17:08 [Benjamin]
- ... also agreed about the vocabulary to be out of scope here.
- 14:18:05 [ivan]
- q+
- 14:18:11 [manu1]
- ack
- 14:18:13 [Benjamin]
- ... implementors are interested in this vocabulary. Therefore is it still out of scope?
- 14:18:55 [manu1]
- Shane: I disagree that it's out of scope.
- 14:18:57 [Benjamin]
- ivan: The vocabulary is not out of scope, but the group could not find a consensus about defining the vocabulary.
- 14:19:53 [Benjamin]
- ... we have other issues to solve and shuld not re-open the issue about the vocabulary
- 14:20:58 [Steven]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2010/Talks/0915Berlin-KB/ What do they do with my RDFa?
- 14:25:40 [Benjamin]
- manu1: Ivan will add the vocabulary he already defined and will send it around the mailing list.
- 14:26:58 [Benjamin]
- manu1: we close issue 41
- 14:27:04 [manu1]
- Topic: ISSUE-45: @cite and @longdesc support
- 14:27:14 [manu1]
- http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/45
- 14:27:46 [Benjamin]
- manu1: It's about generating triples about longdesc and cite
- 14:28:19 [ivan]
- q+
- 14:28:27 [Benjamin]
- ... do we support the attributes @longdesc and @cite?
- 14:29:37 [Benjamin]
- Shane: We always meant to support these attributes. It's simple to implement.
- 14:30:54 [manu1]
- ack
- 14:31:09 [Benjamin]
- Steven: Metadata elements in HTML such as title should conatin markup.
- 14:31:16 [Benjamin]
- Ivan: I am against it
- 14:32:21 [Benjamin]
- ... it will raise too much effort.
- 14:33:17 [Zakim]
- -Benjamin
- 14:34:21 [Zakim]
- +Benjamin
- 14:35:00 [manu1]
- Manu: I don't think we should support @longdesc or @cite (fill in later)
- 14:35:29 [Benjamin]
- ISSUE-16: RDF Collections
- 14:35:29 [trackbot]
- ISSUE-16 Determine if there is a good way of supporting RDF Collections notes added
- 14:37:33 [Benjamin]
- manu1: Is it ok to vote via mail list?
- 14:37:34 [manu1]
- http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/16
- 14:37:34 [ivan]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/wiki/ContainersAndCollections Ivan's proposal
- 14:37:43 [Benjamin]
- group agrees
- 14:37:47 [manu1]
- s/vote/close issues/
- 14:39:57 [Benjamin]
- Shane: Can't I generate tiples about RDF Collections by using e.g., @typeof rdf:Seq?
- 14:40:55 [Benjamin]
- Ivan: List may cause problems. You have to build up the list manually which is too complicated in RDFa
- 14:41:16 [manu1]
- q+ to discuss linked data cloud
- 14:41:19 [manu1]
- ack
- 14:41:28 [Zakim]
- -Steven
- 14:42:01 [Benjamin]
- q+
- 14:42:04 [ivan]
- q+
- 14:42:20 [manu1]
- ack
- 14:42:22 [manu1]
- ack ivan
- 14:42:23 [Steven]
- zakim, dial steven-617
- 14:42:24 [manu1]
- ack manu1
- 14:42:24 [Zakim]
- ok, Steven; the call is being made
- 14:42:26 [Zakim]
- +Steven
- 14:42:26 [ivan]
- q+
- 14:42:27 [Zakim]
- manu1, you wanted to discuss linked data cloud
- 14:42:43 [ivan]
- ack Benjamin
- 14:43:01 [manu1]
- ack ivan
- 14:43:34 [manu1]
- Benjamin: These features are very useful - they just have bad support thus far
- 14:43:36 [Benjamin]
- manu1: We don't need to support this feature because no one is using SEQ, AALT, BAG.
- 14:44:08 [Benjamin]
- s/AALT/ALT/
- 14:44:52 [Benjamin]
- q+
- 14:44:55 [manu1]
- q+ to say that we don't disallow this stuff
- 14:45:51 [Benjamin]
- Ivan: OWL is using lists ver much.
- 14:45:54 [manu1]
- ack Benjamin
- 14:46:14 [manu1]
- ack manu1
- 14:46:14 [Zakim]
- manu1, you wanted to say that we don't disallow this stuff
- 14:47:16 [Benjamin]
- manu1: The issue is just to make it easier in RDFA to model lists and similar structures
- 14:50:18 [Benjamin]
- ivan1: we should separate the ISSUE into: Is it worth to simlifier it in generally; Is the solution in the wiki OK
- 14:50:54 [Benjamin]
- s/ivan1/ivan/
- 14:51:16 [Benjamin]
- Steven: It would be nice to do it
- 14:52:34 [Benjamin]
- Shane: If we have the energy, we should solve it
- 14:52:39 [ivan]
- http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/wiki/ContainersAndCollections#Transformation_Examples
- 14:52:54 [Benjamin]
- manu1: we should not simplify it
- 14:54:57 [manu1]
- q+ to discuss LC timeline
- 14:55:17 [manu1]
- ack
- 14:56:23 [Benjamin]
- manu1: Our last call is in 5 weeks. We have not enough time do make such a major change.
- 14:57:21 [ShaneM]
- q+ to discuss schedule
- 14:57:25 [manu1]
- ack manu1
- 14:57:25 [Zakim]
- manu1, you wanted to discuss LC timeline
- 14:57:44 [Benjamin]
- manu1: based on the timeline, should we skip this or not?
- 14:58:16 [manu1]
- ack ShaneM
- 14:58:17 [Zakim]
- ShaneM, you wanted to discuss schedule
- 14:59:20 [Benjamin]
- ivan: it's nearly finished and nobody spoke against the solution in the maining list. I already implemeted it.
- 14:59:44 [Benjamin]
- shane: I don't want to change or schedule.
- 15:00:04 [manu1]
- q+ to end the call
- 15:00:13 [Benjamin]
- ivan: First priority should be the format of profile files
- 15:00:16 [manu1]
- ack
- 15:00:30 [Benjamin]
- manu1: three issues are left
- 15:03:13 [Benjamin]
- manu1: We start with literal or non literal in profiles, as necessary for supporting the Open Graph Protocol
- 15:03:20 [ivan]
- zakim, drop me
- 15:03:20 [Zakim]
- Ivan is being disconnected
- 15:03:22 [Zakim]
- -Ivan
- 15:03:22 [Zakim]
- -Steven
- 15:03:24 [Zakim]
- -manu1
- 15:03:29 [Zakim]
- -Benjamin
- 15:03:30 [Zakim]
- SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
- 15:03:32 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Steven, Ivan, manu1, +49.631.205.75.aaaa, Benjamin, ShaneM
- 15:04:37 [manu1]
- no problem, thanks for scribing :)
- 15:05:13 [Benjamin]
- You did a really good job in refining the examples in the RDFa API
- 15:06:16 [manu1]
- good, glad to hear that - they still need a bit more refining, but hopefully it's a bit more clear now.
- 16:02:30 [ivan]
- ivan has joined #rdfa
- 16:14:43 [manu1]
- manu1 has left #rdfa
- 17:31:50 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #rdfa
- 19:20:42 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has joined #rdfa