13:53:58 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/10/07-rdfa-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/10/07-rdfa-irc ←
13:54:00 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
13:54:02 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 7332 ←
13:54:02 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes ←
13:54:03 <trackbot> Meeting: RDFa Working Group Teleconference
13:54:03 <trackbot> Date: 07 October 2010
13:57:41 <manu> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0030.html
13:57:50 <manu> Chair: Manu
13:57:56 <manu> Present: Manu, Ivan, Steven, ShaneM, Benjamin
13:57:57 <manu> Regrets: MarkB, Knud
13:59:59 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started ←
14:00:06 <Zakim> +manu
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu ←
14:01:55 <Zakim> + +63.12.057.5aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +63.12.057.5aaaa ←
14:02:24 <Zakim> +ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM ←
14:02:25 <Benjamin> zakim, aaaa is Benjamin
Benjamin Adrian: zakim, aaaa is Benjamin ←
14:02:25 <Zakim> +Benjamin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Benjamin; got it ←
14:02:37 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
Steven Pemberton: zakim, dial steven-617 ←
14:02:37 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Steven; the call is being made ←
14:02:37 <Zakim> +Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: +Steven ←
14:02:49 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
14:02:53 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
14:03:01 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
14:03:53 <manu> scribe: manu
(Scribe set to Manu Sporny)
14:03:58 <manu> scribenick: manu
14:04:03 <manu> zakim, who is on the call?
zakim, who is on the call? ←
14:04:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see manu, Benjamin, ShaneM, Steven, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see manu, Benjamin, ShaneM, Steven, Ivan ←
14:04:06 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
14:04:13 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←
14:04:38 <manu> Agenda is here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0030.html
Agenda is here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0030.html ←
14:04:51 <manu> Manu: any updates on RDFa?
Manu Sporny: any updates on RDFa? ←
14:05:08 <manu> Steven: Added Overstock news to RDFa blog
Steven Pemberton: Added Overstock news to RDFa blog ←
14:06:04 <manu> Manu: Observer also is publishing RDFa
Manu Sporny: Observer also is publishing RDFa ←
14:09:14 <ivan> iswc
Ivan Herman: iswc ←
14:10:14 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:10:21 <manu> ack ivan
ack ivan ←
14:11:25 <manu> q+ to discuss technical issues and their response
q+ to discuss technical issues and their response ←
14:13:22 <manu> Manu: Been talking with some very large content industries about RDFa - they're very interested, starting to work with and adopt RDFa in a very big way.
Manu Sporny: Been talking with some very large content industries about RDFa - they're very interested, starting to work with and adopt RDFa in a very big way. ←
14:13:59 <manu> Topic: ISSUE-20: Deep Processing of XMLLiterals
14:14:05 <manu> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/20
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/20 ←
14:14:45 <manu> Manu: Do we want to support the deep processing of XMLLiterals?
Manu Sporny: Do we want to support the deep processing of XMLLiterals? ←
14:16:39 <manu> Manu explains why this is a problem for Drupal, CMS systems.
Manu explains why this is a problem for Drupal, CMS systems. ←
14:16:50 <manu> Ivan: If something is a literal, processing stops at that moment.
Ivan Herman: If something is a literal, processing stops at that moment. ←
14:16:57 <manu> Ivan: The content of the literal is forgotten for RDFa.
Ivan Herman: The content of the literal is forgotten for RDFa. ←
14:17:29 <manu> Ivan: The question is whether we should generate the literal and if we should continue to process the contents of the literal.
Ivan Herman: The question is whether we should generate the literal and if we should continue to process the contents of the literal. ←
14:17:50 <manu> Steven: If you put <body property="foo:bar" datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral">...</body> then nothing would be accessible on the body.
Steven Pemberton: If you put <body property="foo:bar" datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral">...</body> then nothing would be accessible on the body. ←
14:17:54 <manu> Shane: Yes, that's correct.
Shane McCarron: Yes, that's correct. ←
14:18:11 <manu> Manu: I think we should support this.
Manu Sporny: I think we should support this. ←
14:18:35 <manu> Ivan: I don't see any reason why we wouldn't support this - we're adding more triples, not changing ones that already exist.
Ivan Herman: I don't see any reason why we wouldn't support this - we're adding more triples, not changing ones that already exist. ←
14:18:41 <manu> Ivan: Pretty trivial change in the processing instructions.
Ivan Herman: Pretty trivial change in the processing instructions. ←
14:19:05 <manu> Ivan: Editorially, it's a bit more complicated - we do have a processing step whether or not we do/do not do recursion.
Ivan Herman: Editorially, it's a bit more complicated - we do have a processing step whether or not we do/do not do recursion. ←
14:19:15 <ShaneM> q+ to suggest making it optional
Shane McCarron: q+ to suggest making it optional ←
14:19:18 <manu> Ivan: We should say, we always do recursion if the change is accepted.
Ivan Herman: We should say, we always do recursion if the change is accepted. ←
14:19:20 <manu> ack
ack ←
14:19:21 <manu> ack manu
ack manu ←
14:19:21 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to discuss technical issues and their response
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to discuss technical issues and their response ←
14:19:23 <manu> ack shanem
ack shanem ←
14:19:23 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to suggest making it optional
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to suggest making it optional ←
14:19:39 <manu> Shane: I think there is a use case here that says that this should be optional behavior.
Shane McCarron: I think there is a use case here that says that this should be optional behavior. ←
14:20:05 <manu> Shane: Do you think they'd be okay with enabling this as an optional feature?
Shane McCarron: Do you think they'd be okay with enabling this as an optional feature? ←
14:20:12 <manu> Ivan: That sounds sexy, but not sure how we'd do that.
Ivan Herman: That sounds sexy, but not sure how we'd do that. ←
14:20:28 <manu> Ivan: things become complicated in that case, maybe.
Ivan Herman: things become complicated in that case, maybe. ←
14:20:44 <manu> Ivan: Mark raised the issue where we have a mechanism where some features of the process can be controlled.
Ivan Herman: Mark raised the issue where we have a mechanism where some features of the process can be controlled. ←
14:20:58 <manu> Ivan: Not an attribute in the XML sense, but a command parameter passed to the parser.
Ivan Herman: Not an attribute in the XML sense, but a command parameter passed to the parser. ←
14:21:06 <manu> Ivan: Wondering if its worth the trouble to do that.
Ivan Herman: Wondering if its worth the trouble to do that. ←
14:21:28 <manu> q+ to focus on yes/no question to support deep processing.
q+ to focus on yes/no question to support deep processing. ←
14:21:37 <manu> Shane: Adding another attribute has weight
Shane McCarron: Adding another attribute has weight ←
14:22:01 <manu> Shane: We've already made a major change in this area - only place we've changed backwards compatibility
Shane McCarron: We've already made a major change in this area - only place we've changed backwards compatibility ←
14:22:10 <manu> Shane: Now we're making a stronger change to XMLLiteral
Shane McCarron: Now we're making a stronger change to XMLLiteral ←
14:22:21 <manu> Shane: In 1.1 we get a plain literal instead of an XMLLiteral now.
Shane McCarron: In 1.1 we get a plain literal instead of an XMLLiteral now. ←
14:22:33 <manu> Shane: So, now if I want an XMLLiteral, I have to request it
Shane McCarron: So, now if I want an XMLLiteral, I have to request it ←
14:23:10 <manu> Shane: Today, right now, for RDFa 1.0 you can explicity say that the datatype is rdf:XMLLiteral - and that has the same behavior if you didn't specify the datatype in 1.0
Shane McCarron: Today, right now, for RDFa 1.0 you can explicity say that the datatype is rdf:XMLLiteral - and that has the same behavior if you didn't specify the datatype in 1.0 ←
14:23:23 <manu> Shane: In all of my RDFa that I produce right now, I say rdf:XMLLiteral so that I'm forward compatible.
Shane McCarron: In all of my RDFa that I produce right now, I say rdf:XMLLiteral so that I'm forward compatible. ←
14:23:32 <manu> Shane: Presumably, anybody that is in the know is doing the same thing now, but
Shane McCarron: Presumably, anybody that is in the know is doing the same thing now, but ←
14:23:51 <manu> Shane: A 1.0 parser in that mode is going to produce fewer triples than a 1.1 parser - don't know if that's bad or not.
Shane McCarron: A 1.0 parser in that mode is going to produce fewer triples than a 1.1 parser - don't know if that's bad or not. ←
14:24:00 <manu> Ivan: Let's put it this way, formally speaking, this is not a problem.
Ivan Herman: Let's put it this way, formally speaking, this is not a problem. ←
14:24:20 <manu> Ivan: All we're saying is that 1.0 triples are still generated, but now we have even more triples that are generated.
Ivan Herman: All we're saying is that 1.0 triples are still generated, but now we have even more triples that are generated. ←
14:24:35 <manu> Ivan: Charter-wise this is not a problem
Ivan Herman: Charter-wise this is not a problem ←
14:24:44 <manu> Ivan: Socially, this might be a problem...
Ivan Herman: Socially, this might be a problem... ←
14:25:04 <manu> Ivan: Difficult to say if that's a problem - I'm not sure that XMLLiterals were used very frequently in 1.0 in the first place.
Ivan Herman: Difficult to say if that's a problem - I'm not sure that XMLLiterals were used very frequently in 1.0 in the first place. ←
14:25:27 <manu> ack manu
ack manu ←
14:25:27 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to focus on yes/no question to support deep processing.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to focus on yes/no question to support deep processing. ←
14:25:50 <ivan> <span proberty="blab"><span rel="sfasdfa" resource="werwrw">asdfasd</span></span>
Ivan Herman: <span proberty="blab"><span rel="sfasdfa" resource="werwrw">asdfasd</span></span> ←
14:26:23 <manu> Ivan: In 1.1 the property 'blab' will be a plain literal.
Ivan Herman: In 1.1 the property 'blab' will be a plain literal. ←
14:26:45 <manu> Ivan: Even if this is a plain literal, the sfasdfa will be generated as well.
Ivan Herman: Even if this is a plain literal, the sfasdfa will be generated as well. ←
14:27:00 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
14:27:00 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←
14:27:12 <ivan> zakim, unmute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute me ←
14:27:12 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should no longer be muted ←
14:27:36 <manu> <div property="dcterms:content"> foo bar <span rel="next" resource="foo">asdfasd</span></div>
<div property="dcterms:content"> foo bar <span rel="next" resource="foo">asdfasd</span></div> ←
14:27:50 <manu> Ivan: So in 1.0, that would've been an XMLLiteral.
Ivan Herman: So in 1.0, that would've been an XMLLiteral. ←
14:28:36 <manu> Shane: But, according to the spec, sequence step 11, the recurse is only set to false when you're talking about an XMLLiteral
Shane McCarron: But, according to the spec, sequence step 11, the recurse is only set to false when you're talking about an XMLLiteral ←
14:28:44 <manu> Shane: Plain content recurses anyway
Shane McCarron: Plain content recurses anyway ←
14:28:57 <manu> <div property="dcterms:content" datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral"> foo bar <span rel="next" resource="foo">asdfasd</span></div>
<div property="dcterms:content" datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral"> foo bar <span rel="next" resource="foo">asdfasd</span></div> ←
14:30:04 <manu> Shane: If I have a plain literals, or datatype="" - you recurse
Shane McCarron: If I have a plain literals, or datatype="" - you recurse ←
14:30:13 <manu> Shane: Processing continues
Shane McCarron: Processing continues ←
14:31:46 <manu> Manu: So, the issue here is that you don't recurse in the very specific case listed above (property and datatype of XMLLIteral)
Manu Sporny: So, the issue here is that you don't recurse in the very specific case listed above (property and datatype of XMLLIteral) ←
14:32:08 <manu> Ivan: There is no good reason why we shouldn't deeply process the XMLLiteral.
Ivan Herman: There is no good reason why we shouldn't deeply process the XMLLiteral. ←
14:32:21 <manu> Shane: The changes to the spec are trivial
Shane McCarron: The changes to the spec are trivial ←
14:33:15 <ShaneM> The CHANGE to make is that we remove references to the recuse flag. There is no reason to do anything more complicated.
Shane McCarron: The CHANGE to make is that we remove references to the recuse flag. There is no reason to do anything more complicated. ←
14:33:39 <Zakim> -Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: -Steven ←
14:33:47 <Steven> zakim, cal steven-617
Steven Pemberton: zakim, cal steven-617 ←
14:33:47 <Zakim> I don't understand 'cal steven-617', Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'cal steven-617', Steven ←
14:33:55 <manu> PROPOSAL: Remove the recurse flag from the Syntax Processing rules in RDFa Core.
PROPOSED: Remove the recurse flag from the Syntax Processing rules in RDFa Core. ←
14:33:56 <Steven> zakim, call steven-617
Steven Pemberton: zakim, call steven-617 ←
14:33:56 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Steven; the call is being made ←
14:33:58 <Zakim> +Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: +Steven ←
14:34:01 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
14:34:02 <manu> Manu: +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
14:34:03 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
14:34:05 <Benjamin> +1
Benjamin Adrian: +1 ←
14:34:07 <Steven> +1
Steven Pemberton: +1 ←
14:35:16 <manu> RESOLVED: Remove the recurse flag from the Syntax Processing rules in RDFa Core.
RESOLVED: Remove the recurse flag from the Syntax Processing rules in RDFa Core. ←
14:35:36 <manu> Topic: ISSUE-46: Automatic conversion of plain literals into IRIs
14:35:46 <manu> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/46
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/46 ←
14:35:52 <ShaneM> I have made the changes to the source.
Shane McCarron: I have made the changes to the source. ←
14:36:44 <Steven> q+
Steven Pemberton: q+ ←
14:37:10 <manu> Manu explains the plain literal vs. IRI issue.
Manu explains the plain literal vs. IRI issue. ←
14:37:13 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:37:18 <ivan> ack Steven
Ivan Herman: ack Steven ←
14:37:37 <manu> <meta property="ogp:url" content="http://example.org/person#webid" />
<meta property="ogp:url" content="http://example.org/person#webid" /> ←
14:37:55 <manu> Steven: I have nothing against the principle, but I do have feelings about how we should do it.
Steven Pemberton: I have nothing against the principle, but I do have feelings about how we should do it. ←
14:37:59 <manu> ack steven
ack steven ←
14:38:01 <manu> ack ivan
ack ivan ←
14:38:14 <manu> Ivan: My approach - the way we would do that is to exclude literals that contain spaces
Ivan Herman: My approach - the way we would do that is to exclude literals that contain spaces ←
14:38:25 <manu> Ivan: I know that in IRI, you can have space, but SPARQL has already excluded that
Ivan Herman: I know that in IRI, you can have space, but SPARQL has already excluded that ←
14:38:41 <manu> Ivan: I'd only support absolute URIs with a scheme that is officially registered by IETF.
Ivan Herman: I'd only support absolute URIs with a scheme that is officially registered by IETF. ←
14:39:03 <manu> q+ to say how we could do this via default language RDFa Profile.
q+ to say how we could do this via default language RDFa Profile. ←
14:39:20 <manu> Steven: you have to keep the list of IRIs up to date, right?
Steven Pemberton: you have to keep the list of IRIs up to date, right? ←
14:39:33 <ShaneM> q+ to speak against this change
Shane McCarron: q+ to speak against this change ←
14:39:39 <manu> Ivan: There is a regular expression that can support this stuff.
Ivan Herman: There is a regular expression that can support this stuff. ←
14:39:45 <manu> Ivan: The regex is pretty easy
Ivan Herman: The regex is pretty easy ←
14:40:00 <manu> Ivan: We could encode this as a regex.
Ivan Herman: We could encode this as a regex. ←
14:40:11 <manu> Ivan: not a big deal to implement it.
Ivan Herman: not a big deal to implement it. ←
14:40:27 <manu> Steven: If I said that I would have less problems with this if datatype="iri" what would you say?
Steven Pemberton: If I said that I would have less problems with this if datatype="iri" what would you say? ←
14:40:34 <manu> Ivan: The use case isn't to add datatype="iri"
Ivan Herman: The use case isn't to add datatype="iri" ←
14:40:45 <manu> Steven: We're doing this to program around a bug in someone elses markup.
Steven Pemberton: We're doing this to program around a bug in someone elses markup. ←
14:41:17 <manu> Ivan: The bug isn't really a "bug" - it's shared by some very large companies supporting RDFa.
Ivan Herman: The bug isn't really a "bug" - it's shared by some very large companies supporting RDFa. ←
14:41:34 <manu> Ivan: I realize that this is not ideal - the reason to have rel goes away, it's a modelling bug, etc.
Ivan Herman: I realize that this is not ideal - the reason to have rel goes away, it's a modelling bug, etc. ←
14:42:04 <manu> Ivan: There are two approaches to this - everybody else has to educate themselves and do it properly, or we have to make a step that makes the RDF data that is harvested really nice.
Ivan Herman: There are two approaches to this - everybody else has to educate themselves and do it properly, or we have to make a step that makes the RDF data that is harvested really nice. ←
14:42:11 <manu> Ivan: Education doesn't really work.
Ivan Herman: Education doesn't really work. ←
14:42:25 <manu> ack manu
ack manu ←
14:42:25 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to say how we could do this via default language RDFa Profile.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to say how we could do this via default language RDFa Profile. ←
14:42:49 <manu> We could add something like this: rdfa:allowedScheme "http"
We could add something like this: rdfa:allowedScheme "http" ←
14:42:53 <manu> and this: rdfa:allowedScheme "ftp"
and this: rdfa:allowedScheme "ftp" ←
14:42:55 <manu> and this: rdfa:allowedScheme "mailto"
and this: rdfa:allowedScheme "mailto" ←
14:43:14 <manu> ack shanem
ack shanem ←
14:43:14 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to speak against this change
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to speak against this change ←
14:43:40 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:43:49 <manu> Manu: We have a default language profile, we could embed stuff in there.
Manu Sporny: We have a default language profile, we could embed stuff in there. ←
14:44:27 <manu> Shane: I agree with Steven - this is a problem - if RDF says that an object literal isn't a resource, then it isn't a resource.
Shane McCarron: I agree with Steven - this is a problem - if RDF says that an object literal isn't a resource, then it isn't a resource. ←
14:44:38 <manu> Shane: We are just an RDF serialization, we shouldn't change the rules.
Shane McCarron: We are just an RDF serialization, we shouldn't change the rules. ←
14:44:42 <manu> ack ivan
ack ivan ←
14:45:07 <manu> Ivan: If it were only one company, I'd agree with you
Ivan Herman: If it were only one company, I'd agree with you ←
14:45:31 <manu> Ivan: but it's more than just one company - it's one of the toughest things for many people to understand and accept.
Ivan Herman: but it's more than just one company - it's one of the toughest things for many people to understand and accept. ←
14:45:41 <manu> Ivan: that there is a difference between a URI as a string and a URI as an identifier.
Ivan Herman: that there is a difference between a URI as a string and a URI as an identifier. ←
14:45:53 <ShaneM> I note that the TAG debates this at least twice a year.
Shane McCarron: I note that the TAG debates this at least twice a year. ←
14:45:54 <manu> Ivan: This is a generic issue, that we know is around RDF.
Ivan Herman: This is a generic issue, that we know is around RDF. ←
14:46:06 <manu> Ivan: If I take a serialization like turtle, TURTLE is made for RDF people.
Ivan Herman: If I take a serialization like turtle, TURTLE is made for RDF people. ←
14:46:30 <manu> Ivan: TURTLE makes the differentiation very familiar to people with RDF.
Ivan Herman: TURTLE makes the differentiation very familiar to people with RDF. ←
14:46:47 <manu> Ivan: RDFa has a different constituency - it's not primarily done only for RDF people.
Ivan Herman: RDFa has a different constituency - it's not primarily done only for RDF people. ←
14:47:05 <manu> Ivan: It's primarily for people that don't know much about RDF.
Ivan Herman: It's primarily for people that don't know much about RDF. ←
14:47:14 <manu> Ivan: Whether they do it right or wrong, they don't care
Ivan Herman: Whether they do it right or wrong, they don't care ←
14:47:23 <Zakim> -ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: -ShaneM ←
14:47:24 <manu> Ivan: At the end of the day, RDF people will not get the right RDF triples.
Ivan Herman: At the end of the day, RDF people will not get the right RDF triples. ←
14:47:38 <Zakim> +ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM ←
14:48:06 <manu> q+ to ask whether or not http://example.org is commonly a string vs. IRI
q+ to ask whether or not http://example.org is commonly a string vs. IRI ←
14:48:23 <manu> Ivan: one of the approaches that mark had in his mail is to limit it to the meta element.
Ivan Herman: one of the approaches that mark had in his mail is to limit it to the meta element. ←
14:48:27 <ShaneM> if we are going this way, then I would prefer Manu's strategy of declaring interesting shortcut schemes
Shane McCarron: if we are going this way, then I would prefer Manu's strategy of declaring interesting shortcut schemes ←
14:48:49 <manu> Ivan: I can live with things the way they are
Ivan Herman: I can live with things the way they are ←
14:49:05 <manu> ack manu
ack manu ←
14:49:05 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to ask whether or not http://example.org is commonly a string vs. IRI
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to ask whether or not http://example.org is commonly a string vs. IRI ←
14:49:35 <manu> datatype=""
datatype="" ←
14:52:28 <manu> Steven: Why do we have to embed Facebook's mistake in the language.
Steven Pemberton: Why do we have to embed Facebook's mistake in the language. ←
14:52:50 <manu> Manu: It's a very good point.
Manu Sporny: It's a very good point. ←
14:53:03 <manu> Ivan: My goal is to get as much of the data out there, collectable in proper RDF as possible.
Ivan Herman: My goal is to get as much of the data out there, collectable in proper RDF as possible. ←
14:53:23 <manu> Ivan: If half of the web community is uneducated, we have to live with that, and we have to try and understand what they want to do.
Ivan Herman: If half of the web community is uneducated, we have to live with that, and we have to try and understand what they want to do. ←
14:53:46 <manu> Ivan: I realize this is intellectually ugly - the other alternative is to not care about how this stuff is being marked up right now.
Ivan Herman: I realize this is intellectually ugly - the other alternative is to not care about how this stuff is being marked up right now. ←
14:54:16 <manu> Steven: Why is this bad RDF? The property states that the resource is a URL that just happens to be a string. It's one level more of indirection.
Steven Pemberton: Why is this bad RDF? The property states that the resource is a URL that just happens to be a string. It's one level more of indirection. ←
14:55:03 <manu> Ivan: What will happen is that we will push the ugliness elsewhere - people will define various vocabularies - proper ontologies will say you should have a URI reference, but the people that are generating the RDF generating strings instead of URIs
Ivan Herman: What will happen is that we will push the ugliness elsewhere - people will define various vocabularies - proper ontologies will say you should have a URI reference, but the people that are generating the RDF generating strings instead of URIs ←
14:55:18 <manu> Ivan: We can map to any RDF that we want.
Ivan Herman: We can map to any RDF that we want. ←
14:55:39 <Benjamin> q+ to ask why not add just an informal developer hint to the spec about how to be facebook compatible
Benjamin Adrian: q+ to ask why not add just an informal developer hint to the spec about how to be facebook compatible ←
14:55:55 <manu> Ivan: It's the way we interpret the XHTML+RDFa when we generate the triples.
Ivan Herman: It's the way we interpret the XHTML+RDFa when we generate the triples. ←
14:56:06 <ivan> ack Benjamin
Ivan Herman: ack Benjamin ←
14:56:06 <Zakim> Benjamin, you wanted to ask why not add just an informal developer hint to the spec about how to be facebook compatible
Zakim IRC Bot: Benjamin, you wanted to ask why not add just an informal developer hint to the spec about how to be facebook compatible ←
14:56:08 <manu> Steven: This is very creaky to me - trying to figure out what a proper URI is.
Steven Pemberton: This is very creaky to me - trying to figure out what a proper URI is. ←
14:56:32 <manu> Benjamin: We shouldn't not add a bug fix of someone else to the spec - we should be compatible with most of the data - could we add an informal hint to developers.
Benjamin Adrian: We shouldn't not add a bug fix of someone else to the spec - we should be compatible with most of the data - could we add an informal hint to developers. ←
14:56:42 <manu> Ivan: They know that, Benjamin.
Ivan Herman: They know that, Benjamin. ←
14:57:00 <manu> Benjamin: They won't change it, sure - but we can educate developers so that others may not make the same mistake.
Benjamin Adrian: They won't change it, sure - but we can educate developers so that others may not make the same mistake. ←
14:57:04 <ShaneM> q+ to followup on ben's comment
Shane McCarron: q+ to followup on ben's comment ←
14:57:15 <manu> Benjamin: And we do that without changing the spec.
Benjamin Adrian: And we do that without changing the spec. ←
14:58:27 <manu> Shane: We could provide guidance in the wiki on this.
Shane McCarron: We could provide guidance in the wiki on this. ←
14:58:30 <manu> q+ to end the telecon
q+ to end the telecon ←
14:58:33 <manu> ack shanem
ack shanem ←
14:58:33 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to followup on ben's comment
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to followup on ben's comment ←
14:58:57 <manu> Steven: Perhaps if we can identify the properties should be IRIs via plain literals
Steven Pemberton: Perhaps if we can identify the properties should be IRIs via plain literals ←
14:59:05 <manu> Steven: Could we state something about this in the RDFa Profile?
Steven Pemberton: Could we state something about this in the RDFa Profile? ←
14:59:23 <manu> Steven: If you follow-your-nose to the property, it could say what the appropriate range is?
Steven Pemberton: If you follow-your-nose to the property, it could say what the appropriate range is? ←
15:00:09 <manu> Ivan: You could have declarations in the vocabulary document, yes.
Ivan Herman: You could have declarations in the vocabulary document, yes. ←
15:00:32 <manu> Shane: only some of the OGP properties take resources.
Shane McCarron: only some of the OGP properties take resources. ←
15:01:11 <manu> ack manu
ack manu ←
15:01:12 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to end the telecon
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, you wanted to end the telecon ←
15:03:06 <manu> Steven: I don't mind if we have processing instructions in RDFa Profile that say ogp:url should be a IRI
Steven Pemberton: I don't mind if we have processing instructions in RDFa Profile that say ogp:url should be a IRI ←
15:03:12 <manu> Ivan: There are two issues here.
Ivan Herman: There are two issues here. ←
15:03:15 <manu> Manu: Let's continue the discussion on the mailing list, however it sounds like we do not have consensus currently to add this into the spec as currently proposed.
Manu Sporny: Let's continue the discussion on the mailing list, however it sounds like we do not have consensus currently to add this into the spec as currently proposed. ←
15:06:43 <Zakim> -ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: -ShaneM ←
15:06:45 <ivan> zakim, drop me
Ivan Herman: zakim, drop me ←
15:06:45 <Zakim> -manu
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu ←
15:06:45 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan is being disconnected ←
15:06:46 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
15:06:46 <Zakim> -Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: -Steven ←
15:06:47 <Zakim> -Benjamin
Zakim IRC Bot: -Benjamin ←
15:06:48 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended ←
15:06:50 <Zakim> Attendees were manu, +63.12.057.5aaaa, ShaneM, Benjamin, Steven, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were manu, +63.12.057.5aaaa, ShaneM, Benjamin, Steven, Ivan ←
Formatted by CommonScribe