W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > July 2005

meeting record: 2005-07-12 HTML TF telecon

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:39:26 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

The record [1] of the 12 July SWBPD RDF-in-XHTML Task Force telecon
is now ready.

   [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/12-swbp-minutes

A text snapshot of Revision 1.3 Date: 2005/07/14 14:32:34 follows:


                                 SWBPD HTML TF

12 Jul 2005


      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jul/0007.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/12-swbp-irc


          Ben Adida, Ralph Swick, Mark Birbeck


          Ralph, Ben


     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Action Review
         2. [6]IPTC Meeting Notes
     * [7]Summary of Action Items


   [Ben and Ralph talk about microformats while waiting for others]

IPTC Meeting Notes

   Mark: I met again today with IPTC, followup from Friday meeting;
   they're keen to progress further
   ... [8]Friday meeting was very positive
   ... Misha focussed the discussion on his document first, then we dived
   into details
   ... IPTC wants a small set of relationships between data
   ... they want to make statements about the relationships between other
   ... reification is a big issue for them; they want to give
   [provenance] -- who assigned a 'tag', with what confidence, etc.
   ... they're very open to RDF/A, as long as they get a compact syntax
   ... in their proposed syntax there is a lot of level-mixing
   ... e.g. attributes whose subject is a statement and other attributes
   whose subject is something else
   ... they admitted this could get confusing to people
   ... this can help us, as it's a real meaty application; I felt very
   positive about this
   ... they have a tight timescale; their next meeting is in October and
   they need to publish documents beforehand, thus 3 Oct is their

      [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jul/0006.html

   Ben: how will they do RDF/A without XHTML2?

   Mark: they have several languages;
   ... one is comparable to XHTML2; it marks up a news story
   ... they're not completely convinced that XHTML2 gives them everything
   they need
   ... they have a suite of other languages; e.g. SportsML that sit on
   their base language
   ... then they have another layer that provides alternative formats for
   a document
   ... a wrapper describes the 'package' of formats available
   ... document format to wrap other documents
   ... another format: many documents that make up a news story
   ... 3 document formats. XHTML2 might replace the bottom one, but not
   ... RDF/A was designed as general purpose attribute syntax

   Ben: can RDF/A be added to XHTML1

   Mark: there's been discussion about this.
   ... there are ways to mark up DanBri's examples using XHTML1

   Ben: very interesting to think about this issue. Could it be
   accomplished with XHTML1 that renders correctly in the browser?

   Mark: property is not an XHTML1 attribute, but it could be added as a

   Ben: how is XHTML1 modularization going to interact with validators?

   Mark: there are probably no XHTML 1.1 validators, because there is no
   schema yet
   ... XHTML 1.1 will have modularization, in order to replace XHTML 1.0.
   ... DTDs for XHTML 1.0 will be replaced by XHTML 1.1 schemas
   ... tried using XHTML 1.1 architecture to combine multiple modules and
   add XForms. It didn't work.
   ... Xforms is a bit more complicated of a use case.
   ... currently tidying up XHTML 1.1 modularization. Later XHTML2 using
   same techniques.

   Ben: keep us posted on this; it might help for adoption

   Mark: tricky thing is QNAME issue for predicates.
   ... could argue that there's nothing to stop you using Qnames in REL.
   ... same as "DC.creator"

   Ben: what's the current direction on qnames everywhere?

   Mark: would be great to have qnames and URIs interchangeable. square
   brackets won't fly either.
   ... need to add qabout and qhref
   ... or qcontent

   Ben: in terms of consistency, if we add qabout and qhref do we also
   need qrel?

   Mark: yes
   ... [even though] it would be painful for every attribute to have a

   Ben: if we do settle on the qabout, qhref direction then adding qrel
   would settle the problem

   Mark: and existing rel would be a kind of local identifier
   ... this could provide a neat answer to the backwards compatibility
   ... might also be solvable by putting constraints on the namespace
   prefixes; e.g. insist that the namespace prefixes used within a
   document not match [known] URI schemes
   ... it will become common to sprinkle qnames throughout HTML documents
   in the future
   ... if we do choose the q-attribute route, I prefer 'qcontent' and
   leave 'href' alone

   Ben: any other issues from IPTC discussion?

   Mark: we need to settle our view on reification
   ... we've revised the interpretation of ID so many times in this
   ... though I quite like the idea that ID refers to the _statement_
   ... IPTC does want to be able to say _who_ made a statement, _when_
   the statement was made, how confident they are of the statement, etc.

   Ben: did custom attributes come up?

   Mark: sort of, but I described it as solved
   ... but there is a desire to treat, for example, role= as identifying
   a property/value pair
   ... other things like media-type would benefit from such an approach
   as well
   ... IPTC's requirement is for compactness
   ... they don't like 'property=x content=y' on every element
   ... They've also defined elements ala 'dc:subject' with attributes
   ... very RDF-like
   ... they also have the problem of Schema validation

   Ben: it would be good to summarize our current thinking on these 3
   issues in an email

   Mark: we could use DanBri's samples to help this discussion
   ... I've already noticed some possible improvements after trying to
   write DanBri's examples
   ... IPTC has also promised some examples, including some very big
   ... to help us understand the compactness issue

   ACTION: Ben create a way to track progress on the 3 issues of qnames,
   reification, and custom attributes and elements [recorded in

      [9] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/12-swbp-minutes.html#action01

   Ralph: would Misha be interested in formally joining the WG?

   Mark: perhaps. They're certainly willing to attend some TF telecons.
   ... but they probably won't want to attend every meeting
   ... there may be applications that want to do metadata extraction by
   traversing an infoset via DOM

Summary of Action Items

   ACTION: Ben to coordinate with mark for next week's meeting
   ACTION: danbri record an issue re # vs /
   ACTION: jjc to circulate www conf paper
   ACTION: Ben to put together the "ACID" test for XHTML2 RDF/A
   ACTION: Mark to check edge cases of inheritance in RDF/A
   ACTION: Mark to create an rdf/a wiki
   ACTION: Steven send wording for 23.2 to mailing list
   ACTION: Ben to notify working group of upcoming WD of Note
   ACTION: take a serious look at Mark's bnode proposal summary
   [NEW] ACTION: Ben create a way to track progress on the 3 issues of
   qnames, reification, and custom attributes and elements [recorded in
   [DONE] ACTION: Ben to pull in action items from prev meetings
   [DONE] ACTION: Ben to send email about GRDDL profile approach to
   XHTML2 namespace URL document
   see [12]GRDDL profile for XHTML2 namespace URL document BenA
   [DONE] ACTION: danbri make examples
   [DONE] ACTION: ericm or danbri circulate results of london f2f meeting
   at IPTC
   [End of minutes]

     [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jun/0010.html
     [11] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/12-swbp-minutes.html#action01
     [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jun/0032.html


    $Date: 2005/07/14 14:32:34 $
Received on Thursday, 14 July 2005 14:40:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:19 UTC