See also: IRC log
<DanC> scribe: chimezie
<DanC> minutes 6 Jun
<HarryH> PROPOSED: to approve GRDDL WG -- 6 Jun 2007 as a true record
<DanC> 2nd
<HarryH> APPROVED http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/att-0046/SV_MEETING_TITLE_--_6_Jun_2007.htm as true minutes
<HarryH> PROPOSED: to meet again Wed, 20 June 11:00-0400. scribe volunteer?
<HarryH> BrianS is scribe next week.
<HarryH> ACTION: danja to review primer [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action01]
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to brief Harry on schedule noodling and consider withdrawing danja's action
<jjc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0041
<DanC> JJC: the primer uses eRDF, which isn't up-to-date w.r.t. our base-uri/redirect investigations
<DanC> ... IanD's markup uses rel="profile", but I prefer something more like rel="alternate-profile-uri"
<HarryH> ACTION: jjc to fix glean-profile to work with redirects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action02]
<HarryH> ACTION: jjc to ping ianD to get eRDF to work with updated GRDDL agents. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action03]
<HarryH> h17 profile isn't there.
<john-l> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0066.html
john-l: made progress on excel example in primer
HarryH: there will be problems if jane's schedule output RDF graph is modified
HarryH: I'm not sure what is broken about jane's schedule
<DanC> (I suggest a "make check" for the primer that checks everything.)
jjc: lacking ns declaration
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0042.html
jjc: hotel data is now working (but output file might be wrong)
jjc: easy to update output file
<HarryH> ACTION: jjc to fix janeschedule to best of his ability. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action04]
<HarryH> ACTION: jjc to update hotel-data [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action05]
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to suggest a primer-qa session after this meeting
<HarryH> ACTION: HarryH to double-check XSL location for HL7. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action06]
<jjc> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc29/glean-HL7-CDA.xslt
<jjc> 404s
that XSLT has been moved into test repository
-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/hl7-rim-to-pomr.xslt
DanC: what is the timing for the primer track
<HarryH> ACTION: HarryH to double-check primer SPARQL queries. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action07]
jjc: publish primer next week?
DanC: june 20 decision on primer?
<HarryH> Let's try our best to get Primer ready for publication as a note by next week?
jjc: outstanding primer actions are relatively trivial
<jjc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0038
<jjc> has one critical edit
<jjc> suggest ignore first non-critical edit, the second non-critical comment is addressed
<DanC> I think I see suggested text in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0081.html by dbooth 29 May
<DanC> "Use of a
<DanC> namespace on the root element represents a declaration that the document
<DanC> conforms to the semantics of that namespace as defined by the namespace
<DanC> owner"
scribe: conversation continues about TAG conversation about namespace and enforced semantics
<HarryH> "It is good practice that Use of a
<HarryH> namespace on the root element represents a declaration that the document
<HarryH> conforms to the semantics of that namespace as defined by the namespace
<HarryH> owner."
where does that authority come from?
i'm not aware of any spec which mandates conformance of a namespace by its use
<Zakim> jjc, you wanted to ask where this sentence goes in primer?
<Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to ask whether this statement really reflect the wg decision
i agree, wholeheartedly
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note "When a namespace URI owner provides a namespace document, it is authoritative for the namespace." -- http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#namespace-document
Murray: we should be careful about talking about semantics that must be followed from the use of a namespace, especially if there is nothing to quote and no precedent
that quote doesn't mention semantics
which works
-> http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#namespace-document
<DanC> (I want it at the end of the primer, as a sort of "what to watch out for")
HarryH: is the primer the best place for the example?
<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc29/primer.html#scheduling
<HarryH> Under "referencing via profile document"
<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc29/primer.html#hl7
dbooth: happy to help wording - avoiding 'semantics'
<DanC> (I think the one-sentence version doesn't work for the primer. either tell the story or don't.)
we *do* give the rdf namespace special consideration (with our base rule) but we don't apply this generally
<jjc> note: excel example will not work - it uses a urn: namespace
<john-l> What's wrong with that?
DanC: in the freddy/ralph example, ralph should not have been surprised by the change to the GRDDL mechanisms in the namespace
<jjc> nothing, but we can't add a namespaceTransformation to it
<john-l> Oh, it won't work for this case.
<john-l> I thought you meant it wouldn't work in general. :)
<dbooth> Whether or not the GRDDL results reflect the FULL semantics of the document is a totally different question.
jjc: the example is useful for a healthwarning. It might impact our schedule
<DanC> (david, do you think you could make a 4-paragraph version of the freddie/ralph story as section of the primer?)
are we in agreement to add this story to the primer?
<HarryH> ACTION: HarryH will put in small paragraph mentioning possibility of namespace transforms re DBooth's comment. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action08]
<HarryH> ack
jjc: it would be a good idea to add this to the primer - even if it is a minor edit
<Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to note that whether the GRDDL results reflect any or all of the semantics of the document is a different question
<Zakim> jjc, you wanted to summarize
jjc: changing from embeddedRDF to inlineRDF - clash in primer
<DanC> agenda request: library
<DanC> +1 change those tests, provided we re-approve them.
jjc: we replace references to embeddedRDF to go to inlineRDF instead (refactoring)
<DanC> name one such test somebody, please?
DanC: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/grddl-tests#embedded-rdf1
<DanC> tx
<jjc> http://www.w3.org/2003/g/inline-rdf
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to think out loud about getting coherent test results after this change
<jjc> http://www.w3.org/2003/g/xml-attributes parsing error
DanC: conservative route would be to add new tests
DanC: liberal thing is to assume anyone who passed the old test, passes the new one
jjc: libxslt is less functional than saxon / 4suite XML - interesting implementation resport
so we 1) update test editor's draft with approval for embedded-rdf* removed and material updated 2) ping dave ?
<DanC> (I'm pleased with john's updates to http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/test_results ; I nominate him to coordinate)
<HarryH> ACTION: chime to update editor's draft with new test material for embedded RDF. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action09]
<DanC> (I'm leaning more and more toward renaming the tests.)
<HarryH> ACTION: john-l to ping Dave Beckett about embeddedRDF. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action10]
<HarryH> PROPOSED ACTION: Chime to rename embedded RDF tests in Editor's Draft and test files to inline RDF.
<HarryH> ACTION: Chime to rename embedded RDF tests in Editor's Draft and test files to inline RDF. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action11]
<jjc> http://www.w3.org/2003/g/inline-rdf
jjc: the new transform URI
<jjc> rel="profile" href=".."
<jjc> rel="alternate-profile-uri" href="..."
<jjc> consensus for first version
<dbooth> Two kinds of variability in the pre-processing: 1. Variability that is *needed* to correctly process different kinds of documents; 2. Variability that is the result of the pre-processing being underspecified, which *can* be fixed by defining a default pre-processing model. Thus I am quite interested in what the GRDDL WG would say the XProc.
<Zakim> dbooth, you wanted to note two kinds of variability in the pre-processing
<HarryH> Ask Dom re ACTION: DanC to remove base param from online GRDDL service and home2rss.xsl
<HarryH> ACTION: HH to remove or clarify base param in eRDF transformation [WITHDRAW] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action12]
<DanC> JJC: I think the eRDF base situation is similar to the RDFa situation
jjc: looks like there was a bug in the GRDDL service (Dom')
<jjc> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/base
<DanC> (hunting for a version # in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/base ... oh well...)
jjc: the intent was for it to be commentary on the spec (informative)
DanC: there was dialog about collision between xml:base and XHTML Base
<dbooth> I think it would be unwise to make it normative, in case there is conflict with other specs, such as RFC 3986.
<dbooth> appendix sounds fine to me
DanC: will an informative appendix work?
<john-l> ACTION: john-l to review http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/base [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action13]
jjc: this is not WRT an outstanding comment - with the exception of dbooth's
<HarryH> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0069
jjc: we haven't discussed messaging pipeline situation via email
dbooth: base uri issue - dealt with adequately
dbooth: is an XML message a representation or an IR with itself as a representation?
dbooth: had a suggestion for the latter
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0096.html
<DanC> (if the "pipeline is part of base param" hypothesis is false, then somebody should agenda+ something)
jjc: we need more discussion on this
jjc: dbooth should clarify what is still pending
<HarryH> ACTION: Dbooth to clarify precisely what parts of his XML message passing example still need to be addressed and how he suggests addressing them. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action14]
dbooth: other issue - pipeline scenario brings up ambiguity problem
scribe: i.e., dbooth-3
HarryH: ambiguity problem is not resolved to dbooths satisfaction
dbooth: problem with conformance vocabulary - not a problem with test cases
scribe: conversation continues about how suggestions should be presented to the WG
<HarryH> CTION: john to produce new EARL output including #error1 [DONE]
<scribe> ACTION: john to produce new EARL output including #error1 [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action15]
<scribe> ACTION: chimezie to update test manifest to include statements about features exercised by each test [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action16]
<HarryH> Simone - are you happy with continuing with logo work with SWEO, i.e. Ben Nowack?
<HarryH> OK.
<HarryH> ACTION: HH to e-mail GRDDL Logo contest announcement - semantic web at w3.org. (pending SWEO coordination) [WITHDRAWN] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/13-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action17]
<Simone> http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/Logos
<Simone> at this address we may see our logos
<Simone> with dods
<Simone> already on SWEO materials
<DanC> ah... so you're satisfied that SWEO is considering the suggestions you made.
<HarryH> So task is in fact already actively continuing with SWEO.
<HarryH> Happy Simone?
<Simone> yes, the 3 dods are accepded also by benjamin
<HarryH> Sounds great.
<Simone> yes, it's fine :)
<HarryH> Meeting adjourned.
rssagent, actions
<HarryH> Primer work.