None.
13:58:52 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-rdfa-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-rdfa-irc ←
13:58:54 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
13:58:56 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 7332 ←
13:58:56 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes ←
13:58:57 <trackbot> Meeting: RDFa Working Group Teleconference
13:58:57 <trackbot> Date: 28 October 2010
13:59:08 <manu1> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0279.html
13:59:11 <manu1> Chair: Manu
13:59:23 <manu1> Present: Benjamin, Ivan, Knud, Manu, Steven, Nathan, Shane
14:00:05 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started ←
14:00:06 <Zakim> +??P36
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P36 ←
14:00:24 <Zakim> + +3539149aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +3539149aaaa ←
14:00:24 <Zakim> - +3539149aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: - +3539149aaaa ←
14:00:24 <Zakim> + +3539149aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +3539149aaaa ←
14:00:54 <Zakim> +??P43
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P43 ←
14:01:05 <manu1> zakim, I am ?P43
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ?P43 ←
14:01:05 <Zakim> sorry, manu1, I do not see a party named '?P43'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, manu1, I do not see a party named '?P43' ←
14:01:08 <manu1> zakim, I am P43
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am P43 ←
14:01:08 <Zakim> sorry, manu1, I do not see a party named 'P43'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, manu1, I do not see a party named 'P43' ←
14:01:12 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P43
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ??P43 ←
14:01:12 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu1; got it ←
14:01:16 <Knud> zakim, I am aaaa
Knud Möller: zakim, I am aaaa ←
14:01:16 <Zakim> +Knud; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Knud; got it ←
14:01:23 <Knud> zakim, mute me
Knud Möller: zakim, mute me ←
14:01:23 <Zakim> Knud should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Knud should now be muted ←
14:01:23 <nathan> zakim, I am ??P36
Nathan Rixham: zakim, I am ??P36 ←
14:01:24 <Zakim> +nathan; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nathan; got it ←
14:01:25 <Zakim> +ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM ←
14:01:45 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the call? ←
14:01:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see nathan, Knud (muted), manu1, ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see nathan, Knud (muted), manu1, ShaneM ←
14:05:17 <Zakim> +??P26
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P26 ←
14:05:17 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
Steven Pemberton: zakim, dial steven-617 ←
14:05:18 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Steven; the call is being made ←
14:05:18 <Zakim> +Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: +Steven ←
14:05:44 <Benjamin> zakim, I am ??P26
Benjamin Adrian: zakim, I am ??P26 ←
14:05:44 <Zakim> +Benjamin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Benjamin; got it ←
14:06:02 <Benjamin> zakim, mute me
Benjamin Adrian: zakim, mute me ←
14:06:02 <Zakim> Benjamin should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Benjamin should now be muted ←
14:09:54 <manu1> Scribe: Nathan
(Scribe set to Nathan Rixham)
14:10:01 <manu1> scribenick: nathan
14:10:46 <nathan> Topic: XHTML+RDFa preparation for LC
14:12:11 <nathan> ShaneM: I'm available over the next couple of weeks to get LC ready
Shane McCarron: I'm available over the next couple of weeks to get LC ready ←
14:14:09 <nathan> manu1: Knud and Thomas Steiner will have comments in by weekend, try to get a straw poll next thursday, Stephen and Ivan to send via mailing list as away next week
Manu Sporny: Knud and Thomas Steiner will have comments in by weekend, try to get a straw poll next thursday, Stephen and Ivan to send via mailing list as away next week ←
14:15:09 <nathan> manu1: provisional LC publishing date Tuesday 9th November
Manu Sporny: provisional LC publishing date Tuesday 9th November ←
14:15:15 <nathan> manu1: Any objections to this approach and schedule?
Manu Sporny: Any objections to this approach and schedule? ←
14:15:15 <nathan> No objections noted.
No objections noted. ←
14:15:17 <nathan> Topic: RDFa Core Test Suite
14:16:16 <nathan> manu1: thinking this time around we can spend less time discussing test suite on telecon and encourage test submission via mailing list and github from implementers
Manu Sporny: thinking this time around we can spend less time discussing test suite on telecon and encourage test submission via mailing list and github from implementers ←
14:16:36 <ShaneM> q+ to talk about test suite control
Shane McCarron: q+ to talk about test suite control ←
14:17:02 <nathan> manu1: implementers can / will naturally provide review and feedback for Test Suite, no need for us to spend precious telecon time on that.
Manu Sporny: implementers can / will naturally provide review and feedback for Test Suite, no need for us to spend precious telecon time on that. ←
14:17:16 <manu1> ack shanem
Manu Sporny: ack shanem ←
14:17:16 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to talk about test suite control
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to talk about test suite control ←
14:18:15 <nathan> ShaneM: I agree with process, think that if you're submitting a test case you should submit it for all host languages (XHTML1, HTML4 and HTML5)
Shane McCarron: I agree with process, think that if you're submitting a test case you should submit it for all host languages (XHTML1, HTML4 and HTML5) ←
14:19:39 <nathan> ShaneM: there was a bottleneck last time for getting tests in to the manifest, would be good to have this bottleneck cleared this time
Shane McCarron: there was a bottleneck last time for getting tests in to the manifest, would be good to have this bottleneck cleared this time ←
14:20:22 <nathan> manu1: manifests are all on github and are easily managed, manifests contain full details of each test, clarification on bottleneck?
Manu Sporny: manifests are all on github and are easily managed, manifests contain full details of each test, clarification on bottleneck? ←
14:21:13 <nathan> ShaneM: perhaps bottleneck has been cleared previously.. how are you suggesting I add a test case?
Shane McCarron: perhaps bottleneck has been cleared previously.. how are you suggesting I add a test case? ←
14:21:29 <nathan> manu1: normal github process - check out source code, commit changes, request pull, etc
Manu Sporny: normal github process - check out source code, commit changes, request pull, etc ←
14:21:43 <nathan> ShaneM: okay, great
Shane McCarron: okay, great ←
14:22:57 <ShaneM> (maybe reserve the right to have test issues raised to a call?)
Shane McCarron: (maybe reserve the right to have test issues raised to a call?) ←
14:23:08 <nathan> manu1: clarify, we are removing discussion of tests from telecons and moving to mailing list process, tests can be discussed on telecon if they're generating conflict and cannot be resolved on the list.
Manu Sporny: clarify, we are removing discussion of tests from telecons and moving to mailing list process, tests can be discussed on telecon if they're generating conflict and cannot be resolved on the list. ←
14:23:47 <nathan> Topic: RDFa API
14:23:53 <nathan> scribenick: manu1
(Scribe set to Manu Sporny)
14:24:29 <manu1> Nathan: There are several issues w/ RDFa API while implementing over the last 2-3 months
Nathan Rixham: There are several issues w/ RDFa API while implementing over the last 2-3 months ←
14:24:39 <manu1> Nathan: Some of them are small issues, fairly easy to fix
Nathan Rixham: Some of them are small issues, fairly easy to fix ←
14:24:54 <manu1> Nathan: Some of them require a restructuring around DataStore - good chunk of time to sort that out.
Nathan Rixham: Some of them require a restructuring around DataStore - good chunk of time to sort that out. ←
14:25:03 <manu1> Nathan: Perhaps we can clear up some of the smaller issues today?
Nathan Rixham: Perhaps we can clear up some of the smaller issues today? ←
14:25:15 <manu1> Nathan: I sent an e-mail to mailing list yesterday about this
Nathan Rixham: I sent an e-mail to mailing list yesterday about this ←
14:25:21 <nathan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0310.html
Nathan Rixham: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0310.html ←
14:25:53 <manu1> Nathan: We have no way in the API at the moment to see if two nodes are equal.
Nathan Rixham: We have no way in the API at the moment to see if two nodes are equal. ←
14:26:09 <manu1> Subtopic: ISSUE-49 RDFNode type, equality and canonicalization
14:26:23 <manu1> Nathan: It's a simple proposal, add a .equals() method to RDFNode.
Nathan Rixham: It's a simple proposal, add a .equals() method to RDFNode. ←
14:26:47 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
14:26:54 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
14:26:56 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
14:27:51 <manu1> Nathan: Second sub-issue is how do we canonicalize?
Nathan Rixham: Second sub-issue is how do we canonicalize? ←
14:29:05 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/49
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/49 ←
14:30:11 <ivan> Nathan means, we should canonicalize according to NT, like so: <http://dfasfasd.asdfasda>
Ivan Herman: Nathan means, we should canonicalize according to NT, like so: <http://dfasfasd.asdfasda> ←
14:30:32 <manu1> Manu: I'm concerned that we're making a decision to officially support N-Triples.
Manu Sporny: I'm concerned that we're making a decision to officially support N-Triples. ←
14:30:48 <manu1> q+ to discuss NTriples for RDFTriples.
q+ to discuss NTriples for RDFTriples. ←
14:31:12 <manu1> Ivan: No, we're just stating a canonicalization format.
Ivan Herman: No, we're just stating a canonicalization format. ←
14:31:15 <manu1> ack manu
ack manu ←
14:31:15 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to discuss NTriples for RDFTriples.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to discuss NTriples for RDFTriples. ←
14:33:02 <manu1> Manu: I know we're talking canonicalization, but we're also saying that we're going to serialize to NTriples to do that and provide an API hook to serialize to NT.
Manu Sporny: I know we're talking canonicalization, but we're also saying that we're going to serialize to NTriples to do that and provide an API hook to serialize to NT. ←
14:33:07 <manu1> Nathan: That's correct.
Nathan Rixham: That's correct. ←
14:34:41 <manu1> Ivan: This is what happens in rdflib
Ivan Herman: This is what happens in rdflib ←
14:35:02 <manu1> Ivan: rdflib will create NTriples to serialize the string.
Ivan Herman: rdflib will create NTriples to serialize the string. ←
14:35:04 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
14:35:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see nathan, Knud (muted), manu1, ShaneM, Benjamin (muted), Steven, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see nathan, Knud (muted), manu1, ShaneM, Benjamin (muted), Steven, Ivan ←
14:35:07 <Zakim> On IRC I see ShaneM, RRSAgent, Benjamin, Knud, Steven, trackbot, Zakim, manu1, ivan, nathan
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ShaneM, RRSAgent, Benjamin, Knud, Steven, trackbot, Zakim, manu1, ivan, nathan ←
14:35:29 <manu1> Nathan: The other issues is the NoInterfaceObject, which means typeof() will return "undefined"
Nathan Rixham: The other issues is the NoInterfaceObject, which means typeof() will return "undefined" ←
14:35:44 <manu1> Nathan: There is no way to know if a plain literals is what it is.
Nathan Rixham: There is no way to know if a plain literals is what it is. ←
14:36:08 <manu1> Nathan: We also need a way to expose which interface is implemented. nodeType property or something of that sort.
Nathan Rixham: We also need a way to expose which interface is implemented. nodeType property or something of that sort. ←
14:37:38 <Benjamin> I like and support these changes
Benjamin Adrian: I like and support these changes ←
14:37:41 <manu1> Ivan: We should call toNT() something like toCanonical()
Ivan Herman: We should call toNT() something like toCanonical() ←
14:39:49 <manu1> General agreement that the changes that Nathan proposes are good and the group wants to make them.
General agreement that the changes that Nathan proposes are good and the group wants to make them. ←
14:40:21 <manu1> Subtopic: ISSUE-55 Specifying that implementations must implement TypedLiteralConverters for all xsd numerical types
14:40:28 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/55
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/55 ←
14:41:38 <manu1> Nathan: Basically, we should support all the basic xsd: number types
Nathan Rixham: Basically, we should support all the basic xsd: number types ←
14:41:54 <manu1> Manu: So, the default context in RDFa API should provide all these type converters by default?
Manu Sporny: So, the default context in RDFa API should provide all these type converters by default? ←
14:42:36 <manu1> Nathan: Yes, RDFa implementations MUST support typed literal converters for basic xsd: numerical types
Nathan Rixham: Yes, RDFa implementations MUST support typed literal converters for basic xsd: numerical types ←
14:42:44 <manu1> Ivan: What about dates?
Ivan Herman: What about dates? ←
14:43:00 <manu1> Nathan: Supporting xsd:date is already in the spec.
Nathan Rixham: Supporting xsd:date is already in the spec. ←
14:43:09 <manu1> Nathan: We support xsd:date xsd:dateTime etc.
Nathan Rixham: We support xsd:date xsd:dateTime etc. ←
14:43:28 <manu1> Nathan: This change is specifically about numerical types.
Nathan Rixham: This change is specifically about numerical types. ←
14:44:18 <manu1> Manu: How do we get rid of typed literal converters?
Manu Sporny: How do we get rid of typed literal converters? ←
14:44:22 <manu1> Nathan: That's another issue in the issue tracker.
Nathan Rixham: That's another issue in the issue tracker. ←
14:44:57 <manu1> From the issue: support types like these (xsd:int/double/decimal/unsigned* positive* etc.)
From the issue: support types like these (xsd:int/double/decimal/unsigned* positive* etc.) ←
14:46:09 <manu1> General agreement from the group that we want to support this mechanism.
General agreement from the group that we want to support this mechanism. ←
14:47:42 <manu1> Subtopic: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings
14:48:20 <manu1> Nathan: What is the value for a plain literal when you have special characters? Should the output be encoded into JavaScript?
Nathan Rixham: What is the value for a plain literal when you have special characters? Should the output be encoded into JavaScript? ←
14:48:30 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/58
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/58 ←
14:49:00 <manu1> Ivan: What is the rule in RDFa? We copy the bytes verbatim unicode?
Ivan Herman: What is the rule in RDFa? We copy the bytes verbatim unicode? ←
14:49:04 <manu1> Shane: Yes, that is correct.
Shane McCarron: Yes, that is correct. ←
14:49:19 <nathan> Primarily, if we have the following triple:
Nathan Rixham: Primarily, if we have the following triple: ←
14:49:19 <nathan> <#nbsp> <http://example.com/lit> "Hello \n\tWorld." .
Nathan Rixham: <#nbsp> <http://example.com/lit> "Hello \n\tWorld." . ←
14:49:19 <nathan> Do we expect the related call to object.toString() and/or object.value to return
Nathan Rixham: Do we expect the related call to object.toString() and/or object.value to return ←
14:49:19 <nathan> "Hello \n\tWorld."
Nathan Rixham: "Hello \n\tWorld." ←
14:49:19 <nathan> or
Nathan Rixham: or ←
14:49:20 <nathan> "Hello
Nathan Rixham: "Hello ←
14:49:22 <nathan> World."
Nathan Rixham: World." ←
14:49:23 <manu1> Shane: Actually, it's not in unicode, we don't change the document encoding - we copy directly.
Shane McCarron: Actually, it's not in unicode, we don't change the document encoding - we copy directly. ←
14:50:02 <manu1> Manu: It's the second one.
Manu Sporny: It's the second one. ←
14:50:17 <manu1> Shane: The data isn't transformed, if you need to transform it, you have to do it - JSON-encode it, whatever.
Shane McCarron: The data isn't transformed, if you need to transform it, you have to do it - JSON-encode it, whatever. ←
14:50:24 <manu1> Nathan: Great, that works.
Nathan Rixham: Great, that works. ←
14:51:24 <manu1> General agreement that we do not attempt to encode the plain literal data in any way, we pass the data through.
General agreement that we do not attempt to encode the plain literal data in any way, we pass the data through. ←
14:52:59 <manu1> Subtopic: ISSUE-57: TypedLiteralConverter Failures and Exceptions
14:53:01 <nathan> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/57
Nathan Rixham: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/57 ←
14:54:01 <manu1> Nathan: I'm proposing that we don't generate any exceptions.
Nathan Rixham: I'm proposing that we don't generate any exceptions. ←
14:54:05 <manu1> Manu: I agree that we shouldn't generate any exceptions.
Manu Sporny: I agree that we shouldn't generate any exceptions. ←
14:57:08 <manu1> Nathan: There is a third option - null or undefined.
Nathan Rixham: There is a third option - null or undefined. ←
14:57:18 <manu1> Nathan: Having out-of-band information may be messy.
Nathan Rixham: Having out-of-band information may be messy. ←
14:57:36 <manu1> Nathan: When you use complex types, it could become messy.
Nathan Rixham: When you use complex types, it could become messy. ←
14:57:58 <manu1> Nathan: Just returning the same thing that was passed in may be impossible.
Nathan Rixham: Just returning the same thing that was passed in may be impossible. ←
14:59:18 <manu1> Manu: Perhaps we should use 'undefined' instead of 'null'
Manu Sporny: Perhaps we should use 'undefined' instead of 'null' ←
14:59:24 <ShaneM> I can't imagine a type literal that would need to map to undefined?
Shane McCarron: I can't imagine a type literal that would need to map to undefined? ←
14:59:34 <manu1> Ivan: What's the style in webapps programming? 'null' or 'undefined'
Ivan Herman: What's the style in webapps programming? 'null' or 'undefined' ←
15:00:02 <manu1> Nathan: This is a slightly different case - normally you'd be dealing w/ booleans, strings, integers, etc.
Nathan Rixham: This is a slightly different case - normally you'd be dealing w/ booleans, strings, integers, etc. ←
15:00:15 <manu1> Nathan: I think this is unique to the RDF API.
Nathan Rixham: I think this is unique to the RDF API. ←
15:02:25 <Zakim> -Benjamin
Zakim IRC Bot: -Benjamin ←
15:02:45 <manu1> Manu: What about if you want to express "\0"? Typed literal converter should return 'null' in this case.
Manu Sporny: What about if you want to express "\0"? Typed literal converter should return 'null' in this case. ←
15:03:24 <manu1> <> foaf:name "\0" .
<> foaf:name "\0" . ←
15:03:52 <ShaneM> <> foaf:name "\NULL"^mytype:pointer
Shane McCarron: <> foaf:name "\NULL"^mytype:pointer ←
15:03:56 <nathan> Nathan: We do have the concept of rdf:nil
Nathan Rixham: We do have the concept of rdf:nil [ Scribe Assist by Nathan Rixham ] ←
15:04:17 <manu1> <> foaf:name "^^mytype:null" .
<> foaf:name "^^mytype:null" . ←
15:05:05 <manu1> <> foaf:name "^^mytype:undefined" .
<> foaf:name "^^mytype:undefined" . ←
15:07:04 <manu1> Manu: I think we should use 'undefined'
Manu Sporny: I think we should use 'undefined' ←
15:07:22 <manu1> Nathan: I think we should use 'null'
Nathan Rixham: I think we should use 'null' ←
15:07:47 <manu1> Shane: In XML, you have nil-able values - it's perfectly legal, null would be used in that case.
Shane McCarron: In XML, you have nil-able values - it's perfectly legal, null would be used in that case. ←
15:08:05 <manu1> Shane: We should marshall it as something - maybe the empty string, not "null" or something like that.
Shane McCarron: We should marshall it as something - maybe the empty string, not "null" or something like that. ←
15:08:10 <manu1> Ivan: empty string is different.
Ivan Herman: empty string is different. ←
15:08:43 <manu1> Nathan: Could you implement 'undefined' in Python?
Nathan Rixham: Could you implement 'undefined' in Python? ←
15:08:53 <manu1> Ivan: I may be able to use 'None'
Ivan Herman: I may be able to use 'None' ←
15:09:19 <manu1> Shane: You can explicitly check to see if its None, as you can in Perl.
Shane McCarron: You can explicitly check to see if its None, as you can in Perl. ←
15:09:33 <manu1> Ivan: This is a common idiom in Python.
Ivan Herman: This is a common idiom in Python. ←
15:09:35 <manu1> Ivan: 'None' in Python is a keyword and you can check directly for its value.
Ivan Herman: 'None' in Python is a keyword and you can check directly for its value. ←
15:09:40 <manu1> General agreement that a failed conversion for valueOf() should be communicated in-band - using something like 'null' or 'undefined'. Nathan will ask WebApps for guidance for the type used.
General agreement that a failed conversion for valueOf() should be communicated in-band - using something like 'null' or 'undefined'. Nathan will ask WebApps for guidance for the type used. ←
15:09:42 <manu1> q+ to end the telecon
q+ to end the telecon ←
15:10:51 <manu1> ack manu1
ack manu1 ←
15:10:51 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to end the telecon
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to end the telecon ←
15:14:03 <Zakim> -Steven
Zakim IRC Bot: -Steven ←
15:14:04 <Zakim> -nathan
Zakim IRC Bot: -nathan ←
15:14:06 <Zakim> -Knud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Knud ←
15:14:10 <Zakim> -ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: -ShaneM ←
15:14:11 <Zakim> -manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu1 ←
15:14:12 <ivan> zakim, drop me
Ivan Herman: zakim, drop me ←
15:14:12 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan is being disconnected ←
15:14:14 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended ←
15:14:16 <Zakim> Attendees were +3539149aaaa, manu1, Knud, nathan, ShaneM, Steven, Benjamin, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were +3539149aaaa, manu1, Knud, nathan, ShaneM, Steven, Benjamin, Ivan ←
Formatted by CommonScribe