None.
13:56:49 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/23-rdfa-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/23-rdfa-irc ←
13:56:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
13:56:53 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 7332 ←
13:56:53 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes ←
13:56:54 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference
13:56:54 <trackbot> Date: 23 June 2011
13:57:14 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started ←
13:57:13 <manu1> Chair: Manu
13:57:15 <manu1> scribenick: manu1
(Scribe set to Manu Sporny)
13:57:17 <manu1> Present: Ted, Knud, Manu, Thomas, Sebastian
13:57:18 <manu1> Guest: Gregg Kellogg, gkellogg
13:57:19 <manu1> Guest: Stephane Corlosquet, scor
13:57:21 <Zakim> +SebastianGermesin
Zakim IRC Bot: +SebastianGermesin ←
13:57:47 <manu1> Regrets: Ivan, Steven, Shane
13:58:34 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
13:58:35 <manu1> zakim, code?
zakim, code? ←
13:58:36 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), manu1 ←
14:00:09 <Zakim> + +1.415.459.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.415.459.aaaa ←
14:01:20 <Zakim> +Knud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Knud ←
14:01:25 <Zakim> + +1.781.866.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.781.866.aabb ←
14:01:42 <manu1> zakim, gregg is aaaa
zakim, gregg is aaaa ←
14:01:42 <Zakim> sorry, manu1, I do not recognize a party named 'gregg'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, manu1, I do not recognize a party named 'gregg' ←
14:01:52 <manu1> zakim, gkellogg is aaaa
zakim, gkellogg is aaaa ←
14:01:52 <Zakim> sorry, manu1, I do not recognize a party named 'gkellogg'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, manu1, I do not recognize a party named 'gkellogg' ←
14:02:10 <manu1> zakim, aaaa is gkellogg
zakim, aaaa is gkellogg ←
14:02:10 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +gkellogg; got it ←
14:02:20 <Zakim> +hta
Zakim IRC Bot: +hta ←
14:02:33 <tomayac> zakim, +hta is me
Thomas Steiner: zakim, +hta is me ←
14:02:36 <Zakim> sorry, tomayac, I do not recognize a party named '+hta'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, tomayac, I do not recognize a party named '+hta' ←
14:03:09 <scor> zakim, who is on the phone?
Stephane Corlosquet: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
14:03:09 <Zakim> On the phone I see SebastianGermesin, ??P18, gkellogg, Knud, +1.781.866.aabb, hta
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see SebastianGermesin, ??P18, gkellogg, Knud, +1.781.866.aabb, hta ←
14:03:11 <tomayac> zakim, hta is me
Thomas Steiner: zakim, hta is me ←
14:03:12 <Zakim> +tomayac; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +tomayac; got it ←
14:03:13 <gkellogg> zakim, +1.415.459.aaaa is me
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, +1.415.459.aaaa is me ←
14:03:13 <Zakim> sorry, gkellogg, I do not recognize a party named '+1.415.459.aaaa'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, gkellogg, I do not recognize a party named '+1.415.459.aaaa' ←
14:03:22 <scor> zakim, aabb is scor
Stephane Corlosquet: zakim, aabb is scor ←
14:03:22 <Zakim> +scor; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +scor; got it ←
14:04:51 <Knud> zakim, mute me
Knud Möller: zakim, mute me ←
14:04:51 <Zakim> Knud should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Knud should now be muted ←
14:04:54 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
zakim, who is on the call? ←
14:04:54 <Zakim> On the phone I see SebastianGermesin, ??P18, gkellogg, Knud (muted), scor, tomayac
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see SebastianGermesin, ??P18, gkellogg, Knud (muted), scor, tomayac ←
14:05:12 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P18
zakim, I am ??P18 ←
14:05:12 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu1; got it ←
14:05:48 <scor> zakim, who is making noise?
Stephane Corlosquet: zakim, who is making noise? ←
14:06:02 <Zakim> scor, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: manu1 (54%)
Zakim IRC Bot: scor, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: manu1 (54%) ←
14:06:06 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
14:06:18 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
14:06:20 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:06:21 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
14:06:21 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
14:06:29 <gkellogg> zakim, mute me
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, mute me ←
14:06:29 <Zakim> gkellogg should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg should now be muted ←
14:06:35 <Zakim> -manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu1 ←
14:06:54 <scor> hi Knud :)
Stephane Corlosquet: hi Knud :) ←
14:07:01 <Knud> Hi Stephane!
Knud Möller: Hi Stephane! ←
14:07:17 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
14:07:45 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:07:45 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
14:07:56 <Zakim> -??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P18 ←
14:08:23 <scor> manu1: Any changes or updates to the agenda? Anything that we should discuss? (no changes requested)
Manu Sporny: Any changes or updates to the agenda? Anything that we should discuss? (no changes requested) [ Scribe Assist by Stephane Corlosquet ] ←
14:08:28 <manu1> zakim, code?
zakim, code? ←
14:08:28 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), manu1 ←
14:08:51 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:08:51 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
14:08:52 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
14:09:52 <gkellogg> zakim, unumte me
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, unumte me ←
14:09:52 <Zakim> I don't understand 'unumte me', gkellogg
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'unumte me', gkellogg ←
14:10:00 <gkellogg> zakim, unmute me
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, unmute me ←
14:10:00 <Zakim> gkellogg should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg should no longer be muted ←
14:10:05 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:10:05 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
14:10:19 <manu1> scribenick: manu1
14:10:32 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:10:32 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
14:10:35 <manu1> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jun/0056.html
14:11:56 <manu1> Topic: Introductions - Henri, Gregg, Stéphane
14:12:30 <manu1> Gregg: Hi - been working with RDFa for about 3 years - Ruby parser - took the core of what Ben Adida did and updated it to match the latest specs.
Gregg Kellogg: Hi - been working with RDFa for about 3 years - Ruby parser - took the core of what Ben Adida did and updated it to match the latest specs. ←
14:12:40 <manu1> Gregg: implemented entire RDF stack and SPARQL 1.0 implementation.
Gregg Kellogg: implemented entire RDF stack and SPARQL 1.0 implementation. ←
14:13:46 <manu1> Gregg: Fairly active on RDFa mailing list - also worked with Gracenote major, music label for new packaging for systems for music
Gregg Kellogg: Fairly active on RDFa mailing list - also worked with Gracenote major, music label for new packaging for systems for music ←
14:14:10 <manu1> Gregg: Connected Media Experience - chaired that WG - architect for that for a number of years - worked w/ Manu as IE (because of RDFa aspects)
Gregg Kellogg: Connected Media Experience - chaired that WG - architect for that for a number of years - worked w/ Manu as IE (because of RDFa aspects) ←
14:14:58 <manu1> Gregg: Interest in RDF/RDFa/Linked Data has been all consuming :)
Gregg Kellogg: Interest in RDF/RDFa/Linked Data has been all consuming :) ←
14:15:03 <gkellogg> Blog post on CME and RDF: http://greggkellogg.net/2011/05/06/cme-and-the-semantic-web
Gregg Kellogg: Blog post on CME and RDF: http://greggkellogg.net/2011/05/06/cme-and-the-semantic-web ←
14:15:18 <manu1> Stephane: Started with RDFa 4 years ago - started at DERI - try my best to advocate RDFa in Drupal.
Stephane Corlosquet: Started with RDFa 4 years ago - started at DERI - try my best to advocate RDFa in Drupal. ←
14:15:43 <manu1> Stephane: 2009 - led work to integrate RDFa into Drupal 7 - been deployed on 50,000 sites!
Stephane Corlosquet: 2009 - led work to integrate RDFa into Drupal 7 - been deployed on 50,000 sites! ←
14:16:18 <manu1> Stephane: I do other RDF-related work in Drupal. Also contributed 2 chapters to a Drupal book, being published this month or next month - one of the chapters is on RDFa in Drupal 7. "The Definitive Guide to Drupal 7" by Apress - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1430231351/
Stephane Corlosquet: I do other RDF-related work in Drupal. Also contributed 2 chapters to a Drupal book, being published this month or next month - one of the chapters is on RDFa in Drupal 7. "The Definitive Guide to Drupal 7" by Apress - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1430231351/ ←
14:16:49 <gkellogg> zakim, mute me
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, mute me ←
14:16:49 <Zakim> gkellogg should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg should now be muted ←
14:17:06 <manu1> Manu: Henri Bergius is currently on vacation until the 26th, but will be joining us soon. He is focused on integrating structured data and semantics into content management systems as part of the IKS project: http://www.iks-project.eu/ . He has done quite a bit of work with JavaScript, RDFa and JSON-LD.
Manu Sporny: Henri Bergius is currently on vacation until the 26th, but will be joining us soon. He is focused on integrating structured data and semantics into content management systems as part of the IKS project: http://www.iks-project.eu/ . He has done quite a bit of work with JavaScript, RDFa and JSON-LD. ←
14:17:30 <manu1> Topic: TAG discussion on RDFa/Microdata
14:17:42 <manu1> Link to TAG discussion: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/06/16-minutes.html
Link to TAG discussion: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/06/16-minutes.html ←
14:18:12 <tomayac> manu1, could you clarify what of this discussion is public?
Thomas Steiner: manu1, could you clarify what of this discussion is public? ←
14:20:09 <manu1> Manu: Basically, the TAG had asked Ivan, myself and Thomas Roessler to be there to advise them in a technical capacity regarding a letter that they're preparing to send to the RDFa Working Group and the HTML Working group. The letter notes that having two specifications (RDFa and Microdata) that do effectively the same thing is a problem. They seem to intend to launch a group to discover if two specifications are, in fact, necessary and to see if there is a path forward that merges the specifications in some way. You can learn more by going to the link and reading the public minutes about the TAG discussion last week.
Manu Sporny: Basically, the TAG had asked Ivan, myself and Thomas Roessler to be there to advise them in a technical capacity regarding a letter that they're preparing to send to the RDFa Working Group and the HTML Working group. The letter notes that having two specifications (RDFa and Microdata) that do effectively the same thing is a problem. They seem to intend to launch a group to discover if two specifications are, in fact, necessary and to see if there is a path forward that merges the specifications in some way. You can learn more by going to the link and reading the public minutes about the TAG discussion last week. ←
14:22:15 <tomayac> thanks for the clarification, manu1
Thomas Steiner: thanks for the clarification, manu1 ←
14:22:56 <tomayac> still i feel like proactively tweeting about the situation is wrong. reactively responding seems more adequate. can you confirm?
Thomas Steiner: still i feel like proactively tweeting about the situation is wrong. reactively responding seems more adequate. can you confirm? ←
14:23:40 <manu1> Manu: Yes, that's correct Thomas. We should stay silent until they have officially sent the letter, they were supposed to do that yesterday, but they hadn't. So, I don't know the current status - but we should expect to get something to the effect of what's discussed in the minutes (referenced above).
Manu Sporny: Yes, that's correct Thomas. We should stay silent until they have officially sent the letter, they were supposed to do that yesterday, but they hadn't. So, I don't know the current status - but we should expect to get something to the effect of what's discussed in the minutes (referenced above). ←
14:23:41 <manu1> Stephane: What does the TAG do?
Stephane Corlosquet: What does the TAG do? ←
14:23:50 <manu1> Manu: The W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) is supposed to coordinate on issues related to the architecture of the Web. It is their job to make sure that all specifications coming out of W3C are technically consistent. They also advise the Director of W3C on whether or not Technical publications should go to Official Recommendation status. In this case, they are questioning whether two specifications that effectively do the same thing should /both/ become Recommendations. There is discussion that this decision should be made by people that are not biased.
Manu Sporny: The W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) is supposed to coordinate on issues related to the architecture of the Web. It is their job to make sure that all specifications coming out of W3C are technically consistent. They also advise the Director of W3C on whether or not Technical publications should go to Official Recommendation status. In this case, they are questioning whether two specifications that effectively do the same thing should /both/ become Recommendations. There is discussion that this decision should be made by people that are not biased. ←
14:29:04 <gkellogg> Gregg: I believe Google's position is that people get RDFa markup wrong; specifying prefixes is part of the problem.
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Gregg Kellogg: I believe Google's position is that people get RDFa markup wrong; specifying prefixes is part of the problem. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
14:29:40 <scor> Stephane: RDFa is also suffering from all the more complex RDFa 1.0 snippets available online, which gives people this impression of overly complex syntax.
Stephane Corlosquet: RDFa is also suffering from all the more complex RDFa 1.0 snippets available online, which gives people this impression of overly complex syntax. [ Scribe Assist by Stephane Corlosquet ] ←
14:31:12 <manu1> Thomas: At some point, I'll try to contact more Google folks to see what happened...
Thomas Steiner: At some point, I'll try to contact more Google folks to see what happened... ←
14:31:20 <manu1> Sebastian: What can we do to put the thought "RDFa 1.1 is simpler than 1.0"? is there a plan?
Sebastian Germesin: What can we do to put the thought "RDFa 1.1 is simpler than 1.0"? is there a plan? ←
14:32:46 <scor> convert microdata snippets in RDFa 1.1 and compare the differences
Stephane Corlosquet: convert microdata snippets in RDFa 1.1 and compare the differences ←
14:33:58 <manu1> Sebastian: Why don't we show why RDFa 1.1 is better than RDFa 1.0
Sebastian Germesin: Why don't we show why RDFa 1.1 is better than RDFa 1.0 ←
14:34:03 <scor> manu wrote a blog post about that: http://manu.sporny.org/2011/rdfa-microdata-features/ covers some of this
Stephane Corlosquet: manu wrote a blog post about that: http://manu.sporny.org/2011/rdfa-microdata-features/ covers some of this ←
14:34:31 <manu1> manu1: Yes, we do need to show people that the RDFa 1.1 markup for schema.org is just as simple, if not more simple in some cases. Michael Hausenblas and Richard Cyganiak at DERI have already started a project like this:
Manu Sporny: Yes, we do need to show people that the RDFa 1.1 markup for schema.org is just as simple, if not more simple in some cases. Michael Hausenblas and Richard Cyganiak at DERI have already started a project like this: ←
14:34:32 <manu1> https://github.com/mhausenblas/schema-org-rdf
https://github.com/mhausenblas/schema-org-rdf ←
14:34:37 <manu1> manu1: I took a first stab at markup examples here:
Manu Sporny: I took a first stab at markup examples here: ←
14:34:52 <manu1> https://github.com/mhausenblas/schema-org-rdf/tree/master/examples/Thing and https://github.com/mhausenblas/schema-org-rdf/tree/master/examples/Thing/Person
https://github.com/mhausenblas/schema-org-rdf/tree/master/examples/Thing and https://github.com/mhausenblas/schema-org-rdf/tree/master/examples/Thing/Person ←
14:36:37 <manu1> Manu: It would be great if we help Michael with the examples, and if we blog about this effort.
Manu Sporny: It would be great if we help Michael with the examples, and if we blog about this effort. ←
14:37:52 <manu1> ACTION: Sebastian to write a blog post summarizing why RDFa 1.1 is better than RDFa 1.0
ACTION: Sebastian to write a blog post summarizing why RDFa 1.1 is better than RDFa 1.0 ←
14:37:52 <trackbot> Created ACTION-84 - Write a blog post summarizing why RDFa 1.1 is better than RDFa 1.0 [on Sebastian Germesin - due 2011-06-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-84 - Write a blog post summarizing why RDFa 1.1 is better than RDFa 1.0 [on Sebastian Germesin - due 2011-06-30]. ←
14:38:11 <gkellogg> Sure, I'll help with examples.
Gregg Kellogg: Sure, I'll help with examples. ←
14:38:25 <gkellogg> Microformats examples might be good too
Gregg Kellogg: Microformats examples might be good too ←
14:38:26 <manu1> ACTION: Gregg to write up a couple of RDFa 1.1 examples for schema.org
ACTION: Gregg to write up a couple of RDFa 1.1 examples for schema.org ←
14:38:26 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Gregg
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - Gregg ←
14:39:19 <scor> manu1: no problem
Manu Sporny: no problem [ Scribe Assist by Stephane Corlosquet ] ←
14:42:01 <gkellogg> Manu: There may be an opportunity here to create an RDFa Basic for use cases like schema.org, Google, Facebook, Mozilla, Opera and the rest of the folks that have said that they'd like RDFa to be simpler. RDFa Advanced could be for backwards compatability and for those that need features like @prefix, @profile and other more advanced functionality needed by folks like data.gov, Drupal, UK Government, PaySwarm, etc.
Manu Sporny: There may be an opportunity here to create an RDFa Basic for use cases like schema.org, Google, Facebook, Mozilla, Opera and the rest of the folks that have said that they'd like RDFa to be simpler. RDFa Advanced could be for backwards compatability and for those that need features like @prefix, @profile and other more advanced functionality needed by folks like data.gov, Drupal, UK Government, PaySwarm, etc. [ Scribe Assist by Gregg Kellogg ] ←
14:42:07 <gkellogg> I'd like to see @profile in RDFa Basic
Gregg Kellogg: I'd like to see @profile in RDFa Basic ←
14:42:55 <gkellogg> zakim, unmute me
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, unmute me ←
14:42:55 <Zakim> gkellogg should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg should no longer be muted ←
14:43:32 <manu1> Gregg: May we should consider type coercion rules like in JSON-LD in RDFa Profiles and having @profile in a basic version of RDFa?
Gregg Kellogg: May we should consider type coercion rules like in JSON-LD in RDFa Profiles and having @profile in a basic version of RDFa? ←
14:44:14 <gkellogg> Maybe limited set of NCName'd profiles, such as hCard, ...
Gregg Kellogg: Maybe limited set of NCName'd profiles, such as hCard, ... ←
14:45:34 <manu1> Manu: The WHATWG folks really didn't like the idea of having to dereference an external profile when parsing RDFa. RDFa Basic, if approved by Google, Mozilla, Opera, etc., would remove many of the things they have had an issue with while RDFa Advanced would ensure backwards compatibility and some of the more advanced RDFa features. Keep in mind that this is only worth doing if it'll create convergence between the structured data languages. No need to have two conformance levels if Google, Mozilla, and Opera don't have any desire to implement the simpler version of RDFa.
Manu Sporny: The WHATWG folks really didn't like the idea of having to dereference an external profile when parsing RDFa. RDFa Basic, if approved by Google, Mozilla, Opera, etc., would remove many of the things they have had an issue with while RDFa Advanced would ensure backwards compatibility and some of the more advanced RDFa features. Keep in mind that this is only worth doing if it'll create convergence between the structured data languages. No need to have two conformance levels if Google, Mozilla, and Opera don't have any desire to implement the simpler version of RDFa. ←
14:45:44 <manu1> Stephane: Would slimmed down version include RDFa Default Profile?
Stephane Corlosquet: Would slimmed down version include RDFa Default Profile? ←
14:45:49 <manu1> Manu: Yes, RDFa Basic could allow you to use CURIEs, but only in the Default Profile. This effectively enforces hard coded prefixes in RDFa Basic. That is, if you want to re-bind prefixes or use profiles, you must use RDFa Advanced.
Manu Sporny: Yes, RDFa Basic could allow you to use CURIEs, but only in the Default Profile. This effectively enforces hard coded prefixes in RDFa Basic. That is, if you want to re-bind prefixes or use profiles, you must use RDFa Advanced. ←
14:45:56 <manu1> Stephane: What is the reason to use advanced configuration?
Stephane Corlosquet: What is the reason to use advanced configuration? ←
14:48:56 <manu1> Stephane: Remember that WHATWG and Google also said that they had issues w/ @property and @rel too.
Stephane Corlosquet: Remember that WHATWG and Google also said that they had issues w/ @property and @rel too. ←
14:49:14 <manu1> Stephane: Keep @property and take out @rel?
Stephane Corlosquet: Keep @property and take out @rel? ←
14:49:24 <manu1> Manu: That's true, but we are trying to do multiple things here: 1) Have a stripped down version of RDFa for Google, Facebook and the browser vendors, 2) Ensure backwards compatibility for RDFa 1.0 via RDFa Advanced, 3) Provide more advanced functionality for the RDF folks and the Microformats community via RDFa Advanced 4) Ensure that RDFa Basic is upwards-compatbile with RDFa Advanced. If we change the processing rules such that they're different for RDFa Basic vs. RDFa Advanced, we will break downwards compatibility in a pretty big way.
Manu Sporny: That's true, but we are trying to do multiple things here: 1) Have a stripped down version of RDFa for Google, Facebook and the browser vendors, 2) Ensure backwards compatibility for RDFa 1.0 via RDFa Advanced, 3) Provide more advanced functionality for the RDF folks and the Microformats community via RDFa Advanced 4) Ensure that RDFa Basic is upwards-compatbile with RDFa Advanced. If we change the processing rules such that they're different for RDFa Basic vs. RDFa Advanced, we will break downwards compatibility in a pretty big way. ←
14:50:53 <Knud> I agree: different versions of RDFa need to be downwards compatible.
Knud Möller: I agree: different versions of RDFa need to be downwards compatible. ←
14:50:58 <manu1> Stephane: Already pulled out @resource and @rev - bc is already broken... right?
Stephane Corlosquet: Already pulled out @resource and @rev - bc is already broken... right? ←
14:50:58 <manu1> Manu: In a way, yes - if people use Advanced RDFa attributes in documents, and a basic RDFa processor attempts to extract data - there is a chance that the triples generated are going to be different. For example, if they use @prefix to re-define a prefix in the RDFa Default Profile, or use @resource to overwrite an @href value.
Manu Sporny: In a way, yes - if people use Advanced RDFa attributes in documents, and a basic RDFa processor attempts to extract data - there is a chance that the triples generated are going to be different. For example, if they use @prefix to re-define a prefix in the RDFa Default Profile, or use @resource to overwrite an @href value. ←
14:52:52 <manu1> Topic: Last Call comment deadline in HTML WG
14:53:08 <manu1> Manu: Microdata and RDFa Last Call comments due by early August
Manu Sporny: Microdata and RDFa Last Call comments due by early August ←
14:53:10 <manu1> Manu: Should we start logging issues that we have with Microdata? There is a chance that some people don't understand the issues and it would be good to have them on the record. Thoughts?
Manu Sporny: Should we start logging issues that we have with Microdata? There is a chance that some people don't understand the issues and it would be good to have them on the record. Thoughts? ←
14:54:32 <manu1> Gregg: I think we should definitely log issues related to RDF w/ Microdata.
Gregg Kellogg: I think we should definitely log issues related to RDF w/ Microdata. ←
14:55:16 <manu1> Gregg: Goals of Microdata and RDFa were different - RDF generated by Microdata should be made easier to process by RDF tools.
Gregg Kellogg: Goals of Microdata and RDFa were different - RDF generated by Microdata should be made easier to process by RDF tools. ←
14:56:45 <manu1> Stephane: A few people have already pointed out some bugs - for example: The ways URIs are generated for RDF properties.
Stephane Corlosquet: A few people have already pointed out some bugs - for example: The ways URIs are generated for RDF properties. ←
15:00:00 <manu1> Manu: I think that we should make our concerns with Microdata known as LC comments.
Manu Sporny: I think that we should make our concerns with Microdata known as LC comments. ←
15:01:21 <manu1> Gregg: I think we need to comment - there is no good reason for doing two things. Corollary: Types of triples generated in Microdata should not diverge from what RDF has been doing.
Gregg Kellogg: I think we need to comment - there is no good reason for doing two things. Corollary: Types of triples generated in Microdata should not diverge from what RDF has been doing. ←
15:01:29 <SebastianGermesin> +1 for commeting
Sebastian Germesin: +1 for commeting ←
15:01:40 <gkellogg> +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
Formatted by CommonScribe