14:48:36 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/12/01-rdfa-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/12/01-rdfa-irc ←
14:48:38 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:48:40 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7332
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 7332 ←
14:48:40 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFa()10:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes ←
14:48:41 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Web Applications Working Group Teleconference
14:48:41 <trackbot> Date: 01 December 2011
14:48:43 <manu1> Guest: Niklas (niklasl) Lindström
14:48:43 <manu1> Guest: Dan (danbri) Brickley
14:59:44 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 11 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has now started ←
14:59:51 <Zakim> +scor
Zakim IRC Bot: +scor ←
14:59:58 <Zakim> +??P16
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P16 ←
15:00:05 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P16
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ??P16 ←
15:00:05 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu1; got it ←
15:00:50 <Zakim> +??P13
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13 ←
15:00:57 <niklasl> zakim, I am ??P13
Niklas Lindström: zakim, I am ??P13 ←
15:00:57 <Zakim> +niklasl; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +niklasl; got it ←
15:02:26 <Zakim> +??P21
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21 ←
15:02:39 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P21
Gregg Kellogg: zakim, I am ??P21 ←
15:02:39 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +gkellogg; got it ←
15:08:06 <Zakim> +??P3
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←
15:08:18 <scor> zakim, who is on the phone?
Stéphane Corlosquet: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
15:08:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see scor, manu1, niklasl, gkellogg, ??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see scor, manu1, niklasl, gkellogg, ??P3 ←
15:08:20 <ShaneM> zakim, ??P3 is ShaneM
Shane McCarron: zakim, ??P3 is ShaneM ←
15:08:20 <Zakim> +ShaneM; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ShaneM; got it ←
15:08:35 <manu1> zakim, who is on the call?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is on the call? ←
15:08:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see scor, manu1, niklasl, gkellogg, ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see scor, manu1, niklasl, gkellogg, ShaneM ←
15:10:26 <manu1> Scribe: scor
(Scribe set to Stéphane Corlosquet)
15:10:57 <manu1> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0190.html
15:11:46 <ShaneM> Regrets: Steven
15:12:00 <scor> TOPIC: Publication of RDFa 1.1 documents
15:12:13 <gkellogg> q+
Gregg Kellogg: q+ ←
15:12:14 <ShaneM> Note that there is a publication moratorium in < 2 weeks
Shane McCarron: Note that there is a publication moratorium in < 2 weeks ←
15:12:24 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
15:12:31 <scor> Can we go ahead and publish RDFa Lite as FPWD?
Can we go ahead and publish RDFa Lite as FPWD? ←
15:13:02 <scor> gkellogg: Shouldn't we discuss ISSUE-119 first? Replacing @about with @resource? Aren't people going to be confused by the several drafts if we publish and then make that change?
Gregg Kellogg: Shouldn't we discuss ISSUE-119 first? Replacing @about with @resource? Aren't people going to be confused by the several drafts if we publish and then make that change? ←
15:13:12 <ShaneM> q+ about publication process
Shane McCarron: q+ about publication process ←
15:13:30 <ShaneM> q+ to talk about publication process
Shane McCarron: q+ to talk about publication process ←
15:13:36 <scor> manu1: I'm really against making the ISSUE-119 change - we already have agreement from schema.org folks for RDFa Lite, tutorials use @about heavily, all of the examples across all of the documents would have to change, it would create confusion on when to use @resource and when to use @about, it's a fairly big best practices change very late in the process, etc.
Manu Sporny: I'm really against making the ISSUE-119 change - we already have agreement from schema.org folks for RDFa Lite, tutorials use @about heavily, all of the examples across all of the documents would have to change, it would create confusion on when to use @resource and when to use @about, it's a fairly big best practices change very late in the process, etc. ←
15:14:00 <scor> gkellogg: Ben didn't seem to have any issue with that
Gregg Kellogg: Ben didn't seem to have any issue with that ←
15:14:01 <ShaneM> ben said: No specific issues come to mind, so if this feels right to the working group, go for it.
Shane McCarron: ben said: No specific issues come to mind, so if this feels right to the working group, go for it. ←
15:16:04 <manu1> Topic: ISSUE-119: Replace @about with @resource in RDFa Lite
15:16:15 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/119
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/119 ←
15:16:32 <scor> manu1: Let's start with a straw poll to see how the group feels about ISSUE-119.
Manu Sporny: Let's start with a straw poll to see how the group feels about ISSUE-119. ←
15:16:32 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Remove @about in RDFa Lite 1.1 and replace it with @resource.
PROPOSED: Remove @about in RDFa Lite 1.1 and replace it with @resource. ←
15:16:36 <manu1> -1
Manu Sporny: -1 ←
15:16:37 <niklasl> +1
Niklas Lindström: +1 ←
15:16:38 <gkellogg> +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
15:16:40 <scor> scor: +1
Stéphane Corlosquet: +1 ←
15:16:49 <scor> q+
q+ ←
15:16:53 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
15:16:55 <manu1> ack shanem
Manu Sporny: ack shanem ←
15:16:55 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to talk about publication process
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to talk about publication process ←
15:17:42 <scor> Shanem: Can we publish in time, do we even have a short name approved?
Shane McCarron: Can we publish in time, do we even have a short name approved? ←
15:17:42 <scor> manu1: we have a short name approved ready for publication
Manu Sporny: we have a short name approved ready for publication ←
15:18:15 <manu1> ack scor
Manu Sporny: ack scor ←
15:20:09 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
15:20:24 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
15:20:50 <scor> manu1: worried about all the RDFa examples and tutorial out there, all use @about extensively
Manu Sporny: worried about all the RDFa examples and tutorial out there, all use @about extensively ←
15:21:06 <scor> the spec also uses @about all over the place
the spec also uses @about all over the place ←
15:21:30 <scor> niklasl: using @resource makes the markup simpler
Niklas Lindström: using @resource makes the markup simpler ←
15:21:39 <gkellogg> q+
Gregg Kellogg: q+ ←
15:21:39 <scor> manu1: how does it make it simpler?
Manu Sporny: how does it make it simpler? ←
15:22:06 <scor> niklasl: @typeof sticks to @about
Niklas Lindström: @typeof sticks to @about ←
15:22:19 <scor> q+
q+ ←
15:22:26 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
15:23:21 <manu1> q+ to say that @about doesn't have the IRI issue.
Manu Sporny: q+ to say that @about doesn't have the IRI issue. ←
15:23:57 <scor> gkellogg: potential confusion about the magnetic behavior of @typeof and @about.
Gregg Kellogg: potential confusion about the magnetic behavior of @typeof and @about. ←
15:24:22 <manu1> ack scor
Manu Sporny: ack scor ←
15:24:23 <scor> gkellogg: there is also the HTML IRI issue, @about is sometimes made redundant.
Gregg Kellogg: there is also the HTML IRI issue, @about is sometimes made redundant. ←
15:25:51 <manu1> scor: Maybe we should take what we learned about @resource, and instead of replacing @about... maybe we should fix @about and remove the magnetic property of @typeof? Probably too much of a change, break too many implementations.
Stéphane Corlosquet: Maybe we should take what we learned about @resource, and instead of replacing @about... maybe we should fix @about and remove the magnetic property of @typeof? Probably too much of a change, break too many implementations. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:25:56 <manu1> ack manu1
Manu Sporny: ack manu1 ←
15:25:57 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to say that @about doesn't have the IRI issue.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to say that @about doesn't have the IRI issue. ←
15:26:55 <scor> manu1: the IRI issue is on href and src, there is nothing we can do to fix that
Manu Sporny: the IRI issue is on href and src, there is nothing we can do to fix that ←
15:27:12 <scor> using @resource is not going to fix that
using @resource is not going to fix that ←
15:27:38 <scor> gkellogg: another way to do that would be put in some IRI escaping
Gregg Kellogg: another way to do that would be put in some IRI escaping ←
15:28:03 <scor> gkellogg: I think there is an issue against that already with HTML5
Gregg Kellogg: I think there is an issue against that already with HTML5 ←
15:28:37 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
15:29:06 <scor> manu1: the way we've been teaching RDFa is that we talk about something, we set the subject with @about
Manu Sporny: the way we've been teaching RDFa is that we talk about something, we set the subject with @about ←
15:29:20 <scor> ... so many tutorial out there using @about
... so many tutorial out there using @about ←
15:29:53 <scor> ... the magnetic @typeof is actually a nice feature.
... the magnetic @typeof is actually a nice feature. ←
15:30:23 <scor> ... though it can come in the way sometimes
... though it can come in the way sometimes ←
15:30:49 <scor> ... I'm concerned this is going to confuse people who already started to implement RDFa
... I'm concerned this is going to confuse people who already started to implement RDFa ←
15:30:55 <scor> q+
q+ ←
15:31:22 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
15:33:04 <scor> niklasl: I see your point. my feeling is that this form of RDFa 1.1 is more intuitive with @resource
Niklas Lindström: I see your point. my feeling is that this form of RDFa 1.1 is more intuitive with @resource ←
15:33:43 <manu1> q+ to note that tutorials don't get deprecated, they just stick around and confuse people.
Manu Sporny: q+ to note that tutorials don't get deprecated, they just stick around and confuse people. ←
15:33:44 <scor> ... of course the tutorial and introductions would become deprecated (they probably include a lot of @rel too)
... of course the tutorial and introductions would become deprecated (they probably include a lot of @rel too) ←
15:33:58 <manu1> ack scor
Manu Sporny: ack scor ←
15:34:44 <manu1> scor: Two things - the old attribute, @instanceof is still present in some tutorials out there - small point. Main point: If people like Gregg or Niklas want to use @resource, they could still use it (except, they wouldn't be able to call their document RDFa 1.1 Lite), right?
Stéphane Corlosquet: Two things - the old attribute, @instanceof is still present in some tutorials out there - small point. Main point: If people like Gregg or Niklas want to use @resource, they could still use it (except, they wouldn't be able to call their document RDFa 1.1 Lite), right? [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:34:46 <ShaneM> q+ to support the position that @about is more meaningful as a name
Shane McCarron: q+ to support the position that @about is more meaningful as a name ←
15:34:49 <manu1> Niklas: That's true.
Niklas Lindström: That's true. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:35:41 <manu1> scor: Are the people learning RDFa 1.1 going to have the same problems as Niklas and Gregg? I don't know. There may be tutorials that go into @resource...
Stéphane Corlosquet: Are the people learning RDFa 1.1 going to have the same problems as Niklas and Gregg? I don't know. There may be tutorials that go into @resource... [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:35:49 <manu1> Niklas: There are tutorials that use @rel today too.
Niklas Lindström: There are tutorials that use @rel today too. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:36:05 <scor> niklasl: I think we need to do some kind of outreach
Niklas Lindström: I think we need to do some kind of outreach ←
15:36:15 <gkellogg> q+
Gregg Kellogg: q+ ←
15:36:26 <scor> ... RDFa is quite nascent in a way, many people don't use it yet
... RDFa is quite nascent in a way, many people don't use it yet ←
15:36:35 <scor> q+
q+ ←
15:36:37 <manu1> ack manu1
Manu Sporny: ack manu1 ←
15:36:37 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to note that tutorials don't get deprecated, they just stick around and confuse people.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to note that tutorials don't get deprecated, they just stick around and confuse people. ←
15:38:24 <scor> manu1: it concerns me that we keep making more and more changes, without any proof it is going to make RDFa better
Manu Sporny: it concerns me that we keep making more and more changes, without any proof it is going to make RDFa better ←
15:38:37 <gkellogg> Note that replacing @about with @resource in RDFa 1.1 Lite doesn't change RDFa 1.1 Core
Gregg Kellogg: Note that replacing @about with @resource in RDFa 1.1 Lite doesn't change RDFa 1.1 Core ←
15:38:47 <scor> ... dangerous position to take because we don't know yet the ramifications of these changes
... dangerous position to take because we don't know yet the ramifications of these changes ←
15:39:35 <scor> ... before we got into LC
... before we got into LC ←
15:39:37 <manu1> ack shaneM
Manu Sporny: ack shaneM ←
15:39:37 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to support the position that @about is more meaningful as a name
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to support the position that @about is more meaningful as a name ←
15:40:05 <scor> ShaneM: the name 'about' has a strong meaning, there is value in that
Shane McCarron: the name 'about' has a strong meaning, there is value in that ←
15:40:17 <scor> ... resource is less meaningful and heavily loaded
... resource is less meaningful and heavily loaded ←
15:40:42 <scor> ShaneM: we're not changing RDFa 1.1 here
Shane McCarron: we're not changing RDFa 1.1 here ←
15:40:58 <scor> manu1: we're talking about changing the best practice of RDFa
Manu Sporny: we're talking about changing the best practice of RDFa ←
15:41:36 <scor> ShaneM: it's fine to tell people we've learnt a lesson, and here is a better way of using it
Shane McCarron: it's fine to tell people we've learnt a lesson, and here is a better way of using it ←
15:41:49 <scor> ... the old @about way still works
... the old @about way still works ←
15:42:25 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
15:42:40 <scor> ... from a technical perspective there is nothing that's going to change in the processors
... from a technical perspective there is nothing that's going to change in the processors ←
15:43:07 <scor> gkellogg: Ivan adds some additional output in his distiller to help best practices...
Gregg Kellogg: Ivan adds some additional output in his distiller to help best practices... ←
15:43:12 <ShaneM> I actually think that is a BAD Idea. a processor should not point out that you use things that are outside of lite.
Shane McCarron: I actually think that is a BAD Idea. a processor should not point out that you use things that are outside of lite. ←
15:43:20 <scor> gkellogg: we're not talking about changing RDFa 1.1 at all
Gregg Kellogg: we're not talking about changing RDFa 1.1 at all ←
15:44:08 <scor> ... Lite is there to address some specific concerns and create a simpler profile and inline with schema.org snippets
... Lite is there to address some specific concerns and create a simpler profile and inline with schema.org snippets ←
15:45:04 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
15:45:09 <manu1> ack scor
Manu Sporny: ack scor ←
15:45:12 <scor> ... would it be reasonable to put an issue note in the Lite document, would be a good way to get feedback
... would it be reasonable to put an issue note in the Lite document, would be a good way to get feedback ←
15:45:27 <manu1> scor: I think my issue was covered by Shane.
Stéphane Corlosquet: I think my issue was covered by Shane. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:45:30 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
15:45:38 <manu1> q+ to propose a way forward.
Manu Sporny: q+ to propose a way forward. ←
15:45:40 <ShaneM> +1 to adding a comment in RDFa 1.1 Lite indicating we might want to recommend @resource as a best practice
Shane McCarron: +1 to adding a comment in RDFa 1.1 Lite indicating we might want to recommend @resource as a best practice ←
15:45:53 <scor> niklasl: how about considering adding resource to Lite?
Niklas Lindström: how about considering adding resource to Lite? ←
15:46:06 <manu1> ack manu1
Manu Sporny: ack manu1 ←
15:46:06 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to propose a way forward.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to propose a way forward. ←
15:46:09 <scor> q+
q+ ←
15:47:02 <scor> manu1: hesitant to make changes without community input, so we could indeed put in an issue re @resource
Manu Sporny: hesitant to make changes without community input, so we could indeed put in an issue re @resource ←
15:47:30 <scor> ... re niklasl: adding an additional attribute will make people think it's more complicated that it actually is
... re niklasl: adding an additional attribute will make people think it's more complicated that it actually is ←
15:47:47 <scor> q+
q+ ←
15:48:12 <manu1> ack scor
Manu Sporny: ack scor ←
15:48:18 <scor> ... how about we go ahead and publish Lite with an issue and link to the niklasl email
... how about we go ahead and publish Lite with an issue and link to the niklasl email ←
15:49:40 <manu1> scor: I think I agree with publishing RDFa Lite 1.1 and including an issue.... but this may come across as flip-flopping on the issue.
Stéphane Corlosquet: I think I agree with publishing RDFa Lite 1.1 and including an issue.... but this may come across as flip-flopping on the issue. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
15:49:49 <gkellogg> q+
Gregg Kellogg: q+ ←
15:50:14 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
15:51:14 <scor> gkellogg: natural for this group to learn from micro data where it makes sense
Gregg Kellogg: natural for this group to learn from micro data where it makes sense ←
15:51:32 <scor> ... why is it done that way, why not reusing it?
... why is it done that way, why not reusing it? ←
15:52:48 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Remove @about in RDFa Lite 1.1 and replace it with @resource.
PROPOSED: Remove @about in RDFa Lite 1.1 and replace it with @resource. ←
15:53:02 <manu1> -0.9
Manu Sporny: -0.9 ←
15:53:05 <niklasl> +1
Niklas Lindström: +1 ←
15:53:06 <scor> scor: +0
Stéphane Corlosquet: +0 ←
15:53:10 <gkellogg> +0.5
Gregg Kellogg: +0.5 ←
15:53:14 <scor> q+
q+ ←
15:53:21 <manu1> ack scor
Manu Sporny: ack scor ←
15:53:38 <ShaneM> +0.1
Shane McCarron: +0.1 ←
15:54:50 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 as is.
PROPOSED: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 as is. ←
15:55:04 <gkellogg> +0.5
Gregg Kellogg: +0.5 ←
15:55:05 <manu1> +0.5
Manu Sporny: +0.5 ←
15:55:07 <niklasl> +0.5
Niklas Lindström: +0.5 ←
15:55:13 <scor> scor: +0.1
Stéphane Corlosquet: +0.1 ←
15:55:21 <ShaneM> +0
Shane McCarron: +0 ←
15:55:32 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 with an issue marker specifying that we are considering replacing @about with @resource.
PROPOSED: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 with an issue marker specifying that we are considering replacing @about with @resource. ←
15:55:36 <manu1> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
15:55:36 <scor> scor: +1
Stéphane Corlosquet: +1 ←
15:55:37 <gkellogg> +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
15:55:37 <niklasl> +0.75
Niklas Lindström: +0.75 ←
15:55:42 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
15:55:55 <manu1> RESOLVED: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 with an issue marker specifying that we are considering replacing @about with @resource.
RESOLVED: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 with an issue marker specifying that we are considering replacing @about with @resource. ←
15:56:05 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
15:56:35 <scor> +q about a wiki page
+q about a wiki page ←
15:57:00 <ShaneM> Put a small example in the note. also perhaps mention that it would in no way obviate existing uses of @about?
Shane McCarron: Put a small example in the note. also perhaps mention that it would in no way obviate existing uses of @about? ←
15:57:56 <manu1> Topic: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 as a First Public Working Draft
15:58:09 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
15:58:35 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2011/WD-rdfa-lite-20111128/Overview.html
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2011/WD-rdfa-lite-20111128/Overview.html ←
15:59:26 <niklasl> … http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0119.html
Niklas Lindström: … http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0119.html ←
16:00:32 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
16:01:15 <gkellogg> danbri might have a thought on passing the @about/@resource issue by schema.org members
Gregg Kellogg: danbri might have a thought on passing the @about/@resource issue by schema.org members ←
16:02:53 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 as a First Public Working Draft with the short name 'rdfa-lite' on Thursday, December 8th 2011.
PROPOSED: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 as a First Public Working Draft with the short name 'rdfa-lite' on Thursday, December 8th 2011. ←
16:02:57 <gkellogg> +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
16:02:59 <manu1> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
16:02:59 <niklasl> +1
Niklas Lindström: +1 ←
16:03:05 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
16:03:17 <scor> scor: +1
Stéphane Corlosquet: +1 ←
16:03:19 <manu1> RESOLVED: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 as a First Public Working Draft with the short name 'rdfa-lite' on Thursday, December 8th 2011.
RESOLVED: Publish RDFa Lite 1.1 as a First Public Working Draft with the short name 'rdfa-lite' on Thursday, December 8th 2011. ←
16:03:31 <manu1> Topic: Publish RDFa 1.1 Primer as updated Working Draft
16:03:41 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2011/WD-rdfa-primer-20111128/Overview.html
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2011/WD-rdfa-primer-20111128/Overview.html ←
16:04:31 <scor> manu1: Ivan made the magnetic change in the primer, it is up to date
Manu Sporny: Ivan made the magnetic change in the primer, it is up to date ←
16:04:35 <ShaneM> q+ to propose we push a working draft of core too
Shane McCarron: q+ to propose we push a working draft of core too ←
16:04:40 <scor> ... and it uses vocab pretty heavily
... and it uses vocab pretty heavily ←
16:04:42 <manu1> ack shaneM
Manu Sporny: ack shaneM ←
16:04:47 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to propose we push a working draft of core too
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to propose we push a working draft of core too ←
16:05:01 <scor> ShaneM: how about pushing core
Shane McCarron: how about pushing core ←
16:05:17 <ShaneM> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/Overview-src.html
Shane McCarron: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/Overview-src.html ←
16:07:14 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Publish RDFa 1.1 Primer as an updated Working Draft on Thursday, December 8th 2011.
PROPOSED: Publish RDFa 1.1 Primer as an updated Working Draft on Thursday, December 8th 2011. ←
16:07:20 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
16:07:21 <niklasl> +1
Niklas Lindström: +1 ←
16:07:21 <scor> scor: +1
Stéphane Corlosquet: +1 ←
16:07:22 <manu1> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
16:07:22 <gkellogg> +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
16:07:27 <manu1> RESOLVED: Publish RDFa 1.1 Primer as an updated Working Draft on Thursday, December 8th 2011.
RESOLVED: Publish RDFa 1.1 Primer as an updated Working Draft on Thursday, December 8th 2011. ←
16:07:40 <manu1> Topic: Publish RDFa Core 1.1
16:08:15 <gkellogg> q+ to ask about status of HTML+RDFa 1.1
Gregg Kellogg: q+ to ask about status of HTML+RDFa 1.1 ←
16:08:20 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/Overview-src.html
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/Overview-src.html ←
16:08:37 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
16:08:37 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to ask about status of HTML+RDFa 1.1
Zakim IRC Bot: gkellogg, you wanted to ask about status of HTML+RDFa 1.1 ←
16:09:28 <scor> gkellogg: should the equivalent changes be made to HTML+RDFa 1.1 as well?
Gregg Kellogg: should the equivalent changes be made to HTML+RDFa 1.1 as well? ←
16:10:10 <scor> manu1: it would be more work since it's in the HTML WG
Manu Sporny: it would be more work since it's in the HTML WG ←
16:10:14 <scor> and it's current in LC
and it's current in LC ←
16:10:32 <scor> danbri, there should be a wiki up soon
danbri, there should be a wiki up soon ←
16:10:42 <danbri> ok
Dan Brickley: ok ←
16:11:32 <scor> manu1: the HTML+RDFa has typically been lagging behind
Manu Sporny: the HTML+RDFa has typically been lagging behind ←
16:11:45 <danbri> just attribute naming?
Dan Brickley: just attribute naming? ←
16:12:04 <manu1> q?
Manu Sporny: q? ←
16:12:09 <niklasl> danbri, see http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/119 and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0119.html
Niklas Lindström: danbri, see http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/119 and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0119.html ←
16:12:46 <danbri> wouldn't that break back-compatibility?
Dan Brickley: wouldn't that break back-compatibility? ←
16:13:05 <gkellogg> danbri, not removing from RDFa 1.1 core, just Lite
Gregg Kellogg: danbri, not removing from RDFa 1.1 core, just Lite ←
16:13:59 <niklasl> danbri, no, it has worked like that since RDFa 1.0 - this is "just" about the practice
Niklas Lindström: danbri, no, it has worked like that since RDFa 1.0 - this is "just" about the best practices ←
16:14:30 <scor> s/practice/best practices
16:14:36 <danbri> can one of you send a summary that i can draw schema.org folks' attention to, then? try to make it self-contained as possible...
Dan Brickley: can one of you send a summary that i can draw schema.org folks' attention to, then? try to make it self-contained as possible... ←
16:14:45 <ShaneM> I propose we wait on updating the core
Shane McCarron: I propose we wait on updating the core ←
16:14:51 <scor> niklasl will work on a wiki page with examples
niklasl will work on a wiki page with examples ←
16:14:58 <niklasl> yes
Niklas Lindström: yes ←
16:15:13 <danbri> (is this the same thing microdata calls 'itemid' btw?)
Dan Brickley: (is this the same thing microdata calls 'itemid' btw?) ←
16:15:17 <gkellogg> scribe: gkellogg
(Scribe set to Gregg Kellogg)
16:15:24 <manu1> Topic: ISSUE-115: Fragment ID explanation is misleading
16:15:33 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/115
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/115 ←
16:16:02 <gkellogg> manu: clarify that @id is different from @about
Manu Sporny: clarify that @id is different from @about ←
16:16:11 <niklasl> (.. yes, basically; this would make Lite more isomorphic with microdata AFAIK)
Niklas Lindström: (.. yes, basically; this would make Lite more isomorphic with microdata AFAIK) ←
16:16:30 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2011/WD-rdfa-lite-20111128/Overview.html#about
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2011/WD-rdfa-lite-20111128/Overview.html#about ←
16:16:46 <gkellogg> … They are not the same thing. Instead, we changed language in section 2.2
… They are not the same thing. Instead, we changed language in section 2.2 ←
16:17:28 <gkellogg> … not the same as TAG issue with fragids. TAG issue is if @id and @about are in the same "entity space". Does it identify a concept or an element.
… not the same as TAG issue with fragids. TAG issue is if @id and @about are in the same "entity space". Does it identify a concept or an element. ←
16:17:59 <gkellogg> … sebastian was talking about a different issue. Reworded to clarify that it's not a "clickable link"
… sebastian was talking about a different issue. Reworded to clarify that it's not a "clickable link" ←
16:18:12 <gkellogg> … just an editorial issue.
… just an editorial issue. ←
16:19:04 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0025.html
Manu Sporny: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0025.html ←
16:19:16 <gkellogg> … We implemented his "B" suggestion, so his issue has been addressed.
… We implemented his "B" suggestion, so his issue has been addressed. ←
16:19:50 <manu1> Topic: ISSUE-108: Refine/deprecate Link relations
16:20:15 <manu1> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/108
Manu Sporny: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/108 ←
16:20:48 <gkellogg> manu: we were going to use IETF link relations list, then we found out HTML5 defers to Microformats community.
Manu Sporny: we were going to use IETF link relations list, then we found out HTML5 defers to Microformats community. ←
16:21:03 <gkellogg> … They, in turn, use an open Wiki, which changes all the time.
… They, in turn, use an open Wiki, which changes all the time. ←
16:21:32 <manu1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0170.html
Manu Sporny: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Nov/0170.html ←
16:21:33 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
16:21:35 <gkellogg> … We didn't feel that the list of Microformats link relations was stable enough to put in RDFa 1.1 Core spec.
… We didn't feel that the list of Microformats link relations was stable enough to put in RDFa 1.1 Core spec. ←
16:22:21 <gkellogg> … Ivan, in an email, suggests that we have a different set for XHTML and HTML5.
… Ivan, in an email, suggests that we have a different set for XHTML and HTML5. ←
16:22:32 <gkellogg> … In RDFa Core, we should have "described by"
… In RDFa Core, we should have "described by" ←
16:23:09 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
16:23:13 <gkellogg> … RDFa has just the one, XHTML+RDFa has the existing
… RDFa has just the one, XHTML+RDFa has the existing ←
16:23:16 <niklasl> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Rdfa#rel.3D.22license.22
Niklas Lindström: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Rdfa#rel.3D.22license.22 ←
16:23:19 <ShaneM> Our relations are here: http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/
Shane McCarron: Our relations are here: http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/ ←
16:23:44 <niklasl> rel="license" This is the most basic and fundamental part of CC's usage of RDFa, and is always included in the HTML offered, regardless of whether users fill out the "Additional Information" section.
Niklas Lindström: rel="license" This is the most basic and fundamental part of CC's usage of RDFa, and is always included in the HTML offered, regardless of whether users fill out the "Additional Information" section. ←
16:23:44 <gkellogg> niklasl: CC uses @rel="license", hoped they would use cc:license
Niklas Lindström: CC uses @rel="license", hoped they would use cc:license ←
16:24:34 <ShaneM> q+ to remind that the role relation is critical
Shane McCarron: q+ to remind that the role relation is critical ←
16:24:39 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
16:24:39 <gkellogg> manu: we need to crawl to see what actual link relations are used on the web.
Manu Sporny: we need to crawl to see what actual link relations are used on the web. ←
16:24:42 <manu1> ack shanem
Manu Sporny: ack shanem ←
16:24:42 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to remind that the role relation is critical
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to remind that the role relation is critical ←
16:24:57 <gkellogg> shanem: we also have the role spec, which depends on @rel="role"
Shane McCarron: we also have the role spec, which depends on @rel="role" ←
16:25:03 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
16:25:32 <gkellogg> niklasl: we discussed using XHV as the default @vocab
Niklas Lindström: we discussed using XHV as the default @vocab ←
16:26:06 <gkellogg> … This would allow any use of rel values to generate IRIs against that vocabulary.
… This would allow any use of rel values to generate IRIs against that vocabulary. ←
16:26:19 <gkellogg> … Makes it easier to maintain separately, without requiring processor update.
… Makes it easier to maintain separately, without requiring processor update. ←
16:26:23 <ShaneM> +1 to just saying XVH is the default vocabulary
Shane McCarron: +1 to just saying XVH is the default vocabulary ←
16:26:24 <manu1> q+ to support niklasl's position.
Manu Sporny: q+ to support niklasl's position. ←
16:26:32 <manu1> ack manu1
Manu Sporny: ack manu1 ←
16:26:32 <Zakim> manu1, you wanted to support niklasl's position.
Zakim IRC Bot: manu1, you wanted to support niklasl's position. ←
16:27:03 <gkellogg> manu: support that position, as it's backwards compatible, but we will start generating more "junk" triples.
Manu Sporny: support that position, as it's backwards compatible, but we will start generating more "junk" triples. ←
16:27:29 <gkellogg> q+
q+ ←
16:28:00 <gkellogg> niklasl: we don't talk about fixing stylesheet, for example.
Niklas Lindström: we don't talk about fixing stylesheet, for example. ←
16:28:18 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
16:29:07 <manu1> gkellogg: Jeni has mentioned a concern - one of the problems with generating triples for link relations is that the semantics for HTML are against the document and not against the current subject. A separate spec like GRDDL might generate triples based on rel relations with the subject being about the document.
Gregg Kellogg: Jeni has mentioned a concern - one of the problems with generating triples for link relations is that the semantics for HTML are against the document and not against the current subject. A separate spec like GRDDL might generate triples based on rel relations with the subject being about the document. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
16:29:20 <niklasl> q+ to consider default vocal a "black list"
Niklas Lindström: q+ to consider default vocal a "black list" ←
16:29:21 <manu1> gkellogg: They could co-exist, but you may get two different sets of triples out.
Gregg Kellogg: They could co-exist, but you may get two different sets of triples out. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
16:29:24 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
16:29:24 <Zakim> niklasl, you wanted to consider default vocal a "black list"
Zakim IRC Bot: niklasl, you wanted to consider default vocal a "black list" ←
16:29:27 <gkellogg> … this does allow something to be inferred if there are two triples.
… this does allow something to be inferred if there are two triples. ←
16:29:57 <gkellogg> niklasl: We could consider having a "black list", and exclude some rel values from generating triples.
Niklas Lindström: We could consider having a "black list", and exclude some rel values from generating triples. ←
16:30:34 <gkellogg> manu: we're in a territory where we'll have to examine on a case-by-case basis.
Manu Sporny: we're in a territory where we'll have to examine on a case-by-case basis. ←
16:30:49 <gkellogg> … differences between HTML and CC on rel="license"
… differences between HTML and CC on rel="license" ←
16:30:58 <gkellogg> … no easy solutions.
… no easy solutions. ←
16:31:07 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
16:31:12 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
16:31:14 <gkellogg> … multiple ways to interpret
… multiple ways to interpret ←
16:31:50 <gkellogg> niklasl: if you use @about, or some other chaining operation, it seems clear what the author's intent is.
Niklas Lindström: if you use @about, or some other chaining operation, it seems clear what the author's intent is. ←
16:32:43 <ShaneM> q+ to clarify aboiuyt head
Shane McCarron: q+ to clarify aboiuyt head ←
16:32:48 <gkellogg> … proposal remains to define the default @vocab as XHV. Place these things in <head>, and unless there's an @about, it has the same meaning as HTML.
… proposal remains to define the default @vocab as XHV. Place these things in <head>, and unless there's an @about, it has the same meaning as HTML. ←
16:32:57 <manu1> ack shanem
Manu Sporny: ack shanem ←
16:32:57 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to clarify aboiuyt head
Zakim IRC Bot: ShaneM, you wanted to clarify aboiuyt head ←
16:33:26 <gkellogg> shanem: If I have @rel="stylesheet" in <head>, there's an implicit @about="".
Shane McCarron: If I have @rel="stylesheet" in <head>, there's an implicit @about="". ←
16:34:56 <gkellogg> niklasl: implicit @about in <head> has no meaning, unless you also us an @typeof. Adding @about="" doesn't change anything.
Niklas Lindström: implicit @about in <head> has no meaning, unless you also us an @typeof. Adding @about="" doesn't change anything. ←
16:35:20 <gkellogg> manu: that would make @rel always generate a triples. If there is no term mapping, it is always attached to the XHV namespace.
Manu Sporny: that would make @rel always generate a triples. If there is no term mapping, it is always attached to the XHV namespace. ←
16:35:46 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
16:35:54 <gkellogg> shanem: This group does have access to change XHV document.
Shane McCarron: This group does have access to change XHV document. ←
16:36:02 <gkellogg> … HTML WG does too.
… HTML WG does too. ←
16:36:04 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
16:36:34 <gkellogg> niklasl: this also raises the necessity to define describedby in XHV, making it the same as the POWDER URI.
Niklas Lindström: this also raises the necessity to define describedby in XHV, making it the same as the POWDER URI. ←
16:37:05 <gkellogg> … needs owl:sameAs, also need to put in default profiles.
… needs owl:sameAs, also need to put in default profiles. ←
16:37:39 <gkellogg> manu: terms still have use in the default profile.
Manu Sporny: terms still have use in the default profile. ←
16:37:46 <gkellogg> q+
q+ ←
16:37:50 <niklasl> We may want to put this in the XHTML Vocab document - xhv:describedby owl:sameAs powder:describedby
Niklas Lindström: We may want to put this in the XHTML Vocab document - xhv:describedby owl:sameAs powder:describedby ←
16:38:17 <gkellogg> niklasl: if we only use default profile, this would be useful.
Niklas Lindström: if we only use default profile, this would be useful. ←
16:38:31 <gkellogg> … I'd like to see it in the XHV vocab.
… I'd like to see it in the XHV vocab. ←
16:38:32 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
16:38:58 <gkellogg> shanem: we can define terms, in spite of @vocab.
Shane McCarron: we can define terms, in spite of @vocab. ←
16:39:41 <gkellogg> … placing them in XHV is a _fine_ thing to do. For "describedby" in particular, I'd make a term in the default profile.
… placing them in XHV is a _fine_ thing to do. For "describedby" in particular, I'd make a term in the default profile. ←
16:39:43 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
16:40:11 <manu1> gkellogg: If we do make XHV the default vocabulary, we need to emit a vocab triple for it, or we need to add some other rules in the expansion text.
Gregg Kellogg: If we do make XHV the default vocabulary, we need to emit a vocab triple for it, or we need to add some other rules in the expansion text. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
16:40:34 <manu1> gkellogg: We need to consider what happens when we make XHV the default vocabulary on expansion.
Gregg Kellogg: We need to consider what happens when we make XHV the default vocabulary on expansion. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
16:40:58 <gkellogg> shanem: XVH doc uniquely unsuitable for "follow your nose"
Shane McCarron: XVH doc uniquely unsuitable for "follow your nose" ←
16:41:12 <ShaneM> Current definition from XHV chapter:
Shane McCarron: Current definition from XHV chapter: ←
16:41:12 <ShaneM> <dt id="chapter" about="#chapter" property='rdfa:term' lang='' xml:lang='' typeof="rdf:Property">chapter</dt> <dd about="#chapter" property="rdfs:comment" datatype="xsd:string"><span property='rdfa:uri' lang='' xml:lang='' content='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#chapter'>chapter</span> refers to a resource serving as a chapter in a collection. </dd>
Shane McCarron: <dt id="chapter" about="#chapter" property='rdfa:term' lang='' xml:lang='' typeof="rdf:Property">chapter</dt> <dd about="#chapter" property="rdfs:comment" datatype="xsd:string"><span property='rdfa:uri' lang='' xml:lang='' content='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#chapter'>chapter</span> refers to a resource serving as a chapter in a collection. </dd> ←
16:41:58 <gkellogg> manu: always generate triples for @rel, either as term definition, or XHV.
Manu Sporny: always generate triples for @rel, either as term definition, or XHV. ←
16:44:07 <niklasl> term ::= NCNameStartChar termChar*
Niklas Lindström: term ::= NCNameStartChar termChar* ←
16:44:12 <niklasl> termChar ::= ( NameChar - ':' ) | '/'
Niklas Lindström: termChar ::= ( NameChar - ':' ) | '/' ←
16:44:54 <gkellogg> shanem: @rel="food:name", and "food" isn't defined, it would be ignored.
Shane McCarron: @rel="food:name", and "food" isn't defined, it would be ignored. ←
16:45:43 <ShaneM> <xs:simpleType name='AbsIRI'> <xs:restriction base='xs:string'> <xs:pattern value="[\i-[:]][\c-[:]]+:.+" /> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType>
Shane McCarron: <xs:simpleType name='AbsIRI'> <xs:restriction base='xs:string'> <xs:pattern value="[\i-[:]][\c-[:]]+:.+" /> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> ←
16:45:46 <gkellogg> … never mind.
… never mind. ←
16:45:49 <niklasl> @rel="urn:example:stuff"
Niklas Lindström: @rel="urn:example:stuff" ←
16:46:10 <ShaneM> <xs:simpleType name="TERM"> <xs:restriction base="xs:Name"> <xs:pattern value="[\i-[:]][/\c-[:]]*" /> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType>
Shane McCarron: <xs:simpleType name="TERM"> <xs:restriction base="xs:Name"> <xs:pattern value="[\i-[:]][/\c-[:]]*" /> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> ←
16:46:16 <gkellogg> … TERM isn't an NC name, it's NCName + '/'..
… TERM isn't an NC name, it's NCName + '/'.. ←
16:47:17 <niklasl> .. we were also explicit about excluding ":" in term, which saves us here :)
Niklas Lindström: .. we were also explicit about excluding ":" in term, which saves us here :) ←
16:47:19 <gkellogg> manu: it's true for every use, not just @rel?!?
Manu Sporny: it's true for every use, not just @rel?!? ←
16:47:52 <gkellogg> … @property, @rel will always generate a triple.
… @property, @rel will always generate a triple. ←
16:48:18 <gkellogg> … @typeof will always have a type. Also @rev.
… @typeof will always have a type. Also @rev. ←
16:48:26 <gkellogg> q+
q+ ←
16:48:58 <manu1> ack gkellogg
Manu Sporny: ack gkellogg ←
16:50:04 <manu1> gkellogg: I think we want to have XHV as the default vocabulary. I'm concerned about being so permissive in generating triples. The safest thing to do for HTML5 is to not generate anything - it makes us more compatible with other GRDDL-like processing.
Gregg Kellogg: I think we want to have XHV as the default vocabulary. I'm concerned about being so permissive in generating triples. The safest thing to do for HTML5 is to not generate anything - it makes us more compatible with other GRDDL-like processing. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
16:50:32 <manu1> gkellogg: I think we should use describedby in RDFa Profile... maybe a small set of terms defined for HTML5... but not the full link relation set we've used to date.
Gregg Kellogg: I think we should use describedby in RDFa Profile... maybe a small set of terms defined for HTML5... but not the full link relation set we've used to date. [ Scribe Assist by Manu Sporny ] ←
16:51:11 <gkellogg> manu: two proposals, 1) make XHV default, 2) no default, just terms defined in default profile.
Manu Sporny: two proposals, 1) make XHV default, 2) no default, just terms defined in default profile. ←
16:51:37 <manu1> PROPOSAL: Make the XHTML Vocabulary the default vocabulary for RDFa Core 1.1.
PROPOSED: Make the XHTML Vocabulary the default vocabulary for RDFa Core 1.1. ←
16:51:40 <manu1> -1
Manu Sporny: -1 ←
16:51:44 <gkellogg> gkellogg: -1
Gregg Kellogg: -1 ←
16:51:50 <niklasl> +1
Niklas Lindström: +1 ←
16:51:58 <ShaneM> +0
Shane McCarron: +0 ←
16:52:32 <scor> +0
Stéphane Corlosquet: +0 ←
16:52:38 <ShaneM> I am opposed to having XHTML and HTML5 with different interprations of core concepts such as license
Shane McCarron: I am opposed to having XHTML and HTML5 with different interprations of core concepts such as license ←
16:55:28 <ShaneM> Core default initial context contains terms such as describedby, license, role...
Shane McCarron: Core default initial context contains terms such as describedby, license, role... ←
16:55:35 <gkellogg> manu: should we have two default profile docs, one for Core, and another for "HTML" languages, with legacy XHV link relations.
Manu Sporny: should we have two default profile docs, one for Core, and another for "HTML" languages, with legacy XHV link relations. ←
16:56:01 <gkellogg> shanem: clarification, if there's a term defined, I can't override that, true?
Shane McCarron: clarification, if there's a term defined, I can't override that, true? ←
16:56:52 <gkellogg> manu: this argues that we should be careful as what we define as default terms in the profile.
Manu Sporny: this argues that we should be careful as what we define as default terms in the profile. ←
16:57:11 <gkellogg> … this could clash with schema.org, for example, attributes if @vocab is used.
… this could clash with schema.org, for example, attributes if @vocab is used. ←
16:58:09 <danbri> do any terms clash currently?
Dan Brickley: do any terms clash currently? ←
16:58:19 <gkellogg> manu: three profiles, RDF Core (described by, license, role), one for HTML+RDFa, which is empty, plus another for XHTML+RDFa, which is backwards compatible.
Manu Sporny: three profiles, RDF Core (described by, license, role), one for HTML+RDFa, which is empty, plus another for XHTML+RDFa, which is backwards compatible. ←
16:59:21 <manu1> PROPOSAL: RDFa 1.1 will have 3 default profiles, RDFa Core 1.1 will contain the terms 'describedby', 'license', and 'role', HTML+RDFa will not have any terms, XHTML+RDFa will have all terms required for backwards compatability.
PROPOSED: RDFa 1.1 will have 3 default profiles, RDFa Core 1.1 will contain the terms 'describedby', 'license', and 'role', HTML+RDFa will not have any terms, XHTML+RDFa will have all terms required for backwards compatability. ←
16:59:45 <gkellogg> gkellogg: +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
16:59:53 <manu1> +1
Manu Sporny: +1 ←
17:00:00 <ShaneM> +1
Shane McCarron: +1 ←
17:00:05 <niklasl> +0
Niklas Lindström: +0 ←
17:00:10 <manu1> (clarification: XHTML+RDFa means XHTML1+RDFa)
Manu Sporny: (clarification: XHTML+RDFa means XHTML1+RDFa) ←
17:00:14 <gkellogg> Current XHV doc: http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/
Current XHV doc: http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/ ←
17:00:16 <ShaneM> A CURIE is comprised of two components, a prefix and a reference. The prefix is separated from the reference by a colon (:). In general use it is possible to omit the prefix, and so create a CURIE that makes use of the 'default prefix' mapping; in RDFa the 'default prefix' mapping is http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#. It's also possible to omit both the prefix and the colon, and so create a CURIE that contains just a reference which makes use of the 'no p
Shane McCarron: A CURIE is comprised of two components, a prefix and a reference. The prefix is separated from the reference by a colon (:). In general use it is possible to omit the prefix, and so create a CURIE that makes use of the 'default prefix' mapping; in RDFa the 'default prefix' mapping is http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#. It's also possible to omit both the prefix and the colon, and so create a CURIE that contains just a reference which makes use of the 'no p ←
17:00:53 <ShaneM> rel=":license"
Shane McCarron: rel=":license" ←
17:01:07 <gkellogg> shanem: this always refers to XHV.
Shane McCarron: this always refers to XHV. ←
17:01:20 <niklasl> q+
Niklas Lindström: q+ ←
17:01:36 <gkellogg> … Role spec might care about this too. Should encourage to use ":foo" to be unambiguous.
… Role spec might care about this too. Should encourage to use ":foo" to be unambiguous. ←
17:01:52 <gkellogg> manu: might be confusing for role spec authors.
Manu Sporny: might be confusing for role spec authors. ←
17:02:08 <manu1> ack niklasl
Manu Sporny: ack niklasl ←
17:02:45 <gkellogg> niklasl: I'm a bit wary about predefined terms, because of their precedence, which could interfere with @vocab.
Niklas Lindström: I'm a bit wary about predefined terms, because of their precedence, which could interfere with @vocab. ←
17:02:50 <ShaneM> The Role Attribute module specification says "The datatype used for @role permits the use of a TERM, a CURIE, or a full URI. RDFa defines a TERM as an item from a vocabulary, and defines how a vocabulary is constructed. The default vocabulary for use with@role is defined in [XHTML-VOCAB]. A host language may define a different default vocabulary."
Shane McCarron: The Role Attribute module specification says "The datatype used for @role permits the use of a TERM, a CURIE, or a full URI. RDFa defines a TERM as an item from a vocabulary, and defines how a vocabulary is constructed. The default vocabulary for use with@role is defined in [XHTML-VOCAB]. A host language may define a different default vocabulary." ←
17:03:05 <manu1> RESOLVED: RDFa 1.1 will have 3 default profiles, RDFa Core 1.1 will contain the terms 'describedby', 'license', and 'role', HTML+RDFa will not have any terms, XHTML+RDFa will have all terms required for backwards compatability.
RESOLVED: RDFa 1.1 will have 3 default profiles, RDFa Core 1.1 will contain the terms 'describedby', 'license', and 'role', HTML+RDFa will not have any terms, XHTML+RDFa will have all terms required for backwards compatability. ←
17:03:32 <Zakim> -scor
Zakim IRC Bot: -scor ←
17:04:05 <Zakim> -ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: -ShaneM ←
17:04:07 <Zakim> -manu1
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu1 ←
17:04:15 <Zakim> -gkellogg
Zakim IRC Bot: -gkellogg ←
17:04:21 <Zakim> -niklasl
Zakim IRC Bot: -niklasl ←
17:04:23 <Zakim> SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFa()10:00AM has ended ←
17:04:25 <Zakim> Attendees were scor, manu1, niklasl, gkellogg, ShaneM
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were scor, manu1, niklasl, gkellogg, ShaneM ←
Formatted by CommonScribe