W3C

GRDDL Working Group

7 Feb 2007

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
JohnClark, Chimezie_Ogbuji, rreck, HarryH, DanC, Ben_Adida, danja, briansuda, Simone, bwm
Regrets
IanD
Chair
Harry Halpin
Scribe
Chime

Contents


Convene GRDDL WG meeting of 2007-02-07T11:00-0500

<DanC> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0023.html

<HarryH> PROPOSED: to approve GRDDL WG Weekly -- 31 Jan 2007 as a true record: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/att-0017/31-grddl-wg-minutes-edited.html

RESOLUTION: GRDDL WG Weekly minutes from 31 Jan, 2007 approved

[#issue-http-header-links]

<DanC> Ian's action is done to my satisfaction

I think it is close to out of scope

and I'm concerned about outstanding effort (rec tracks and such)

HarryH: doesn't think it is out of scope

<HarryH> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0018.html

<HarryH> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0019.html

DanC: It's a good thing to do. Not sufficiently important to implement

<HarryH> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0020.html

DanC: Asked a few people, some implementers think it is a good thing to do

DanC: Correction: Not sufficiently implemented

<DanC> DanC: I have not yet found inspiration to implement it

HarryH: We have to consider last call timeline

<HarryH> Will people find inspiration to implement before Last Call is finished?

bwm: Had a brief word with Jeremy. No strong opinion on if it is a good thing. Recommends a short time to implement. Will back off if runs into trouble

bwm: How will we test this

bwm: Can we configure the test server to support test cases?

<HarryH> This test-case would require W3C Staff Contact (DanC) to change .htaccess

Test cases are needed if we go forward with this

bwm: Dependencies on IETF

danja: How does this relate to mnot's proposal?

somebody: Link header is registered, the profile is not

danja: In favor of accepting subject to a test case and IETF acceptance

DanC: any volunteers for testing and such?

HarryH: Nervous about .htaccess configuration

bwm: Jeremy suggested creating a test case and configuring .htaccess

DanC: IanD has done everything we asked for this proposal

<scribe> ACTION: bwm (Jeremy) attempt a test-case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action01]

<DanC> (harry, I think this is the chair's call... do you detect a critical mass of support? if so, do a straw poll and/or put the question.)

<bwm> actually 6 yeses, 1 concur and 1 no

<bwm> and one abstain

<DanC> PROPOSED: to add the GRDDL header to the GRDDL spec and test suite, per IanD's proposal [@@link] contingent on IETF registration of Profile header

<HarryH> Chime objects.

DanC: thinks this is a now or never situation

<HarryH> Chime is concerned about testing and dependencies on protocol-level.

<HarryH> PROPOSED: to add the GRDDL header to the GRDDL spec and test suite, per IanD's proposal [@@link] contingent on IETF registration of Profile header and feeedback from bwm/jeremy's test-case creation.

HarryH: add to proposal other dependencies (IETF,e tc)

<DanC> PROPOSED: to add the GRDDL header to the GRDDL spec, per IanD's proposal [@@link] contingent on IETF registration of Profile header, and on succesful test experience

I'm comfortable with a criteria to back out (as it is in the proposal)

<HarryH> Ben Adida - testing for conesnsu?

<HarryH> on that proposal - yes or no?

<benadida> abstain, but sounds good overall

<HarryH> 1 absention, everyone else consensus.

<HarryH> Agreement to drop Ian's proposal if either IETF and test-case runs into difficulties.

<HarryH> RESOLVED: to add the GRDDL header to the GRDDL spec, per IanD's proposal [@@link] contingent on IETF registration of Profile header, and on succesful test experience

<HarryH> RESOLUTION: to add the GRDDL header to the GRDDL spec, per IanD's proposal [@@link] contingent on IETF registration of Profile header, and on succesful test experience

Test cases for GRDDL with XML documents

<HarryH> CVS access?

benadida: No time to add / edit RDF/a test cases

bwm: Has CVS access

<benadida> continued

<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#issue-mt-ns

<HarryH> This issue is still unresolved.

<HarryH> Need to figure out what it would take to resolve it.

[#issue-mt-ns]

<HarryH> What would require to close this?

<HarryH> DanC: faithful-infoset has split off, test case needs to be done.

<HarryH> DanC: has had some inspiration.

<HarryH> Chime: mentions John Clarks' suggestion.

<HarryH> DanC: Make two tests, large test and small test.

<HarryH> DanC: slot for implemenation in test-suite includes flags for options like XInclude

<HarryH> HarryH: flags are controlled by harness commandline

<HarryH> DanC: Suggets two tests.

There are tests which have XInclude directives

<DanC> xinclude test is in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/testlist3

<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/testlist3.html#xinclude

<scribe> ... ongoing conversation about setting up for testing faithful-infoset issues XInclude ..

<DanC> ACTION: Chime to work on details of 2 allowed results of xinclude test [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action02]

<DanC> danc suggests 2 tests that share an input

<HarryH> Back to issue-mt-ns:

<HarryH> how a GRDDL client interacts with a document whose root element is an XSLT literal result element

<HarryH> Jeremy suggests we duck.

<HarryH> Chime: bwm raised concerns with various other contents.

DanC: is fine with issue-mt-ns issues with regards to bwm

<HarryH> ACTION: To review #issue-mt-ns to see if comments still needed. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action03]

bwm: it might be a moot issue

scribe: reading through items in issue-mt-ns ..

<HarryH> whether RDF/XML statements labelled as application/xml constitute a "document whose meaning includes the RDF statement ... we decided "yes" you can sniff root-node.

<HarryH> what happens if data-view:transformation is given on an rdf:RDF root element

<HarryH> DanC: My feeling is spec says that there is another GRDDL result.

<HarryH> DanC: thinks we ignore result from that.

<HarryH> Chime: I think we'd treat it as XML GRDDL Source.

<HarryH> This sounds like a test-case.

DanC: green boxes in spec addresses issue

<DanC> PROPSED: that the current rules address issue-mt-ns

DanC: don't need a test case to decide

bwm: Rules don't call out rdf:RDF so we are fine

<DanC> "If an information resource IR is represented by a conforming RDF/XML document[RDFX], then the RDF graph represented by that document is a GRDDL result of IR"

DanC: implementors may have their own policy

HarryH: we may need more test cases

<HarryH> Chime: Should we mess two test-cases

<HarryH> Chime: is this dependent on mime-types?

<HarryH> Any takers?

DanC: leave testing in 'someday pile'

HarryH: don't want last call dependent on this case

<HarryH> ACTION: HarryH I'll take on this test-case. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action04]

<HarryH> ACTION: Harry to make 2 test-cases for "what happens if data-view:transformation is given on an rdf:RDF root elemen" serving two different media-types [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action05]

<benadida> (I have to run in 5 minutes, seminar.)

HarryH: 3 options..

HarryH: just RDF graph, just the extracted RDF, the merge of both

bwm: test 1: RDF graph itself, test2: just the extracted RDF

<HarryH> all 3 should be written.

DanC: don't multiplex multiple outputs from a *single* test case

<HarryH> PROPOSAL: The current text of the editor's draft adequately addresses #issue-mt-ns

<DanC> PROPSED: that the current rules (1.206) address issue-mt-ns

<HarryH> PROPOSED: The current text and rules of the editor's draft adequately addresses #issue-mt-ns

<benadida> abstain

<HarryH> RESOLVED: The current text and rules of the editor's draft adequately addresses #issue-mt-ns

<HarryH> 2 abstains

<rreck> rreck abstains

<HarryH> BenA and Ron abstrains.

Test cases for GRDDL with XML documents

[#issue-output-formats] whether GRDDL transformations may produce RDF in a format other than RDF/XML

<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#txforms

<DanC> ACTION:DanC to write rules about XSLT 1.0 processing context [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action06]

<DanC> ACTION:BenA to write a sample hGRDDL transformation [WITHDRAWN] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action07]

DanC: GRDDL agent protocol trace give enough guidance to implementors for issue-output-formats

<DanC> (enough... I hope)

bwm: does test server does con-neg?

bwm: change test manifest to allow a test to do content negotiation for a particular mime-type

bwm: replace URI with bnode (place holder for URI and mime-type)

DanC: why not add a field for accept header

<HarryH> Just keep me public-grddl-wg updated with progress,.

[#issue-base-param]

[#issue-mt-ns]

bwm: manifest (for tests) any mechanical linkage between the hosted HTML and ...

DanC: there is a makefile

<HarryH> makefile gets RDF out of HTML test file html

[#issue-base-param]

I thought base-param issue was closed

<DanC> baseURI.rdf revision 1.2 date: 2007/02/07 15:12:09

<DanC> revision 1.3 date: 2007/02/07 14:20:14 baseURI.html bwm: Fixed grddl:transformation attribute to point to correct transform

<HarryH> Anyone want to check this?

<HarryH> ACTION: DanC to double-check bwm's test-case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action08]

Primer Document

the text has been sent to the listserv

<HarryH> Jan 31st.

<DanC> GRDDL XML use case http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jan/0086.html

<HarryH> ACTION: HarryH to check that into primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action09]

GRDDL Spec: General issues

<DanC> ACTION: Chime to propose some primer text for the hl7 case [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action10]

<HarryH> Chime: Concern about terms in rules.

<HarryH> Chime: In particular, rules that generating functions.

<scribe> log:includes

<HarryH> Chime: Thinks logi:uri/log:includes need more explanation as they are generating, i.e. logical functions

<HarryH> DanC: Not sure what Chime means, thinks they "refer to two terms in a graph"

<HarryH> Chime: Produces example where one part of relation is a string

<HarryH> DanC: String is in graph

<HarryH> DanC: Explanation in separate file?

<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec_rules

<HarryH> Chime: Documentation is a proof.

<DanC> "# log http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#. @@explain log:uri in terms of [WEBARCH]"

<HarryH> Chime: wants human-readable text as well.

<HarryH> SPARQL Query patterns describe rule parts

Primer Document

<DanC> ACTION: IanD to sort out SPARQL Query [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action11]

<HarryH> Fabien?

<DanC> HH: I made some progress on ACTION: Harry to add Jane schedule to RDFa

<FabienG> Yes

<HarryH> Slight issue with your XSLT.

<HarryH> See my e-mail and example, see if you can help me sort this:

<HarryH> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0043.html

<HarryH> Fabien, can you take my action over here?

<FabienG> I saw your email, I haven't check the details but I think my XSLT is missing that case.

<HarryH> Just fix that and we're in business for RDFa in Primer.

<HarryH> Primer a note or should we go through W3C Rec?

<HarryH> DanC - want document to teach you GRDDL easy to find.

<FabienG> I should have a day off Sunday, I will try to find the time to adress that if I have electricity.

<HarryH> FabienG if you don't have electriciy or I see no actions I can check in changes.

<HarryH> I'll just wait till after Sunday - comments from Ronald and new use-case from Ian.

<HarryH> ACTION: Danja to read primer and give us thumbs up or thumbs down. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action12]

<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc29/primer.html Revision 1.37 2007/02/07 15:09:22

<FabienG> Yes, if I ever happen to be in the critical path, just short-cut me.

<HarryH> Fabien, can you make it to next meeting?

<HarryH> live over telecon?

<DanC> Fabien, any strong feelings on whether to take the use cases document to REC or to WG Note?

<DanC> I lean, mildly, toward WG Note for workload reasons.

<DanC> we can wait for you to think about it a bit

<HarryH> I'd like to see it Rec due to GRDDL Charter including use-cases.

<john-l> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0038.html for some review of that document (new today).

<FabienG> I have no strong feeling: I don't realize what difference it makes for a use case document.

<DanC> John's use case review: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Feb/0038.html

<briansuda> i can

<FabienG> I won't be able to make it to the next telecon, I will be in the plane on my way back to France.

<HarryH> ACTION: Danja and BrianSuda to read Use-Case Document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action13]

<DanC> ok, noted, Fabien

GRDDL Spec: General issues

<HarryH> # ACTION: Fabien to post to sawsdl list relevant questions about RDF mapping and relationship to GRDDL [CLOSED]

<DanC> ACTION: Fabien to post to sawsdl list relevant questions about RDF mapping and relationship to GRDDL [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action14]

<HarryH> ACTION: DanC to add a sample implementation appendix to the GRDDL spec [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action15]

<HarryH> ACTION: John and Danja to read and give thumbs up and down for Spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action16]

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: bwm (Jeremy) attempt a test-case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: DanC to double-check bwm's test-case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Danja and BrianSuda to read Use-Case Document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action13]
[NEW] ACTION: Danja to read primer and give us thumbs up or thumbs down. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action12]
[NEW] ACTION: Harry to make 2 test-cases for "what happens if data-view:transformation is given on an rdf:RDF root elemen" serving two different media-types [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: HarryH I'll take on this test-case. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: HarryH to check that into primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: John and Danja to read and give thumbs up and down for Spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action16]
[NEW] ACTION: To review #issue-mt-ns to see if comments still needed. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action03]
 
[PENDING] ACTION: Chime to work on details of 2 allowed results of xinclude test [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action02]
 
[DONE] ACTION: Chime to propose some primer text for the hl7 case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action10]
[DONE] ACTION: DanC to add a sample implementation appendix to the GRDDL spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action15]
[DONE] ACTION: DanC to write rules about XSLT 1.0 processing context [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action06]
[DONE] ACTION: Fabien to post to sawsdl list relevant questions about RDF mapping and relationship to GRDDL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action14]
[DONE] ACTION: IanD to sort out SPARQL Query [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action11]
 
[DROPPED] ACTION: BenA to write a sample hGRDDL transformation [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action07]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
$Date: 2007/02/07 18:10:16 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/DanC/somebody/
Succeeded: s/usecase/test-case/
Succeeded: s/result test/small test/
Succeeded: s/WGs to/WGs do/
Found Scribe: Chime
Found ScribeNick: chimezie
WARNING: No scribe lines found matching ScribeNick pattern: <chimezie> ...
Default Present: JohnClark, Chimezie_Ogbuji, rreck, HarryH, DanC, Ben_Adida, danja, briansuda, Simone, bwm
Present: JohnClark Chimezie_Ogbuji rreck HarryH DanC Ben_Adida danja briansuda Simone bwm
Regrets: IanD
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/weekly-agenda
WARNING: Date not understood: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 22:27:57 +0000  (16:27 CST)
Got date from IRC log name: 7 Feb 2007
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/02/07-grddl-wg-minutes.html
People with action items: briansuda bwm chime danc danja harry harryh issue-mt-ns john review to

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]