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

meeting record: 2005-10-05 RDF-in-XHTML TF telecon

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 12:01:46 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20051004120010.01e9beb8@127.0.0.1>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

The record of today's RDF in XHTML Task Force telecon [1] is now
ready for review.

   [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html

A text snapshot of  $Revision: 1.2 $ of $Date: 2005/10/04 15:51:49 $
follows.

----

RDF-in-XHTML TF

4 Oct 2005

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Oct/0001.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Ralph Swick, Steven Pemberton, Ben Adida, Mark Birbeck

   Regrets
          Jeremy Carroll

   Chair
          Ben

   Scribe
          Ralph

   Previous
          [4]record of 2005-09-27 meeting

      [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Sep/0024.html

   Next Meeting
          11 October

Contents

     * Topics
         1. role attribute
         2. compact URIs
         3. Details of RDF/A syntax, inheritance, etc ...
     * Summary of Action Items

     _____________________________________________________________

role attribute

   ACTION: Ben to reconstruct action on role attribute with help of
   Danbri [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/27-swbp-irc#T14-28-08]
   [DONE]

   -> [11]The ROLE attribute [Ben 2005-10-02]

     [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Oct/0000.html

   Ben: Lisa Seeman has asked to participate in a discussion of Role next
   week
   ... please look at [12]Lisa's document for next week

     [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Oct/att-0002/00-part

   -> [13]Re: The ROLE attribute [Lisa 2005-10-03]

     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Oct/0002.html

   Ben: main question is whether role is syntax for rdf:type or we need a
   separate xhtml2:role that is rdfs:subProperty of rdf:type

   Steven: some examples in the wiki lead me to suggest that we could use
   the role attribute as a shorthand for rdf:type

   Mark: we should consider whether role has any relation to rdf:type
   ... one of the examples had lots of rdf:type properties so Steven
   suggested this shorthand might be nice
   ... but I am having second thoughts
   ... something that plays the role of something else is not necessarily
   of that type
   ... e.g. a toolbar can play the role of a footer but not _be_ a footer
   ... saying a toolbar is a footer might attach all sorts of other
   properties by inference that it might not legitimately have

   Ralph: yes, the client application might want to be able to
   distinguish between rdf:type footer and things of other types that
   simply have that role

   -> [14]discussion of role in meeting record of 2005-08-02

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2005/08/02-swbp-minutes#item04

   -> [15]discussion of role in meeting record of 2005-07-26

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-swbp-minutes.html#item02

   <Steven> Quote: Steven: the danger of the id solution is that id plays
   so many roles that you could accidentally insert an id (to be a link
   target) and suddenly change your RDF
   ... in the rdf:type example, I would have written <section
   role="foaf:Person">
   ... I see Mark doesn't use role much, whereas I use it a lot
   ... why this difference in approach?
   ... maybe role is being though of differently by each of us and we
   should write down what role means

   Steven is quoting from [16]26-swbp-minutes]

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-swbp-minutes.html#item02

   Ralph: can we describe what 'role' does mean?

   Mark: maybe 'role' is the wrong word
   ... in a discussion of several years ago, Raman said that 'class'
   would be a better word but that word was too confusing w.r.t. CSS
   ... I explain 'role' to people more in terms of 'intent' or 'purpose'
   ... i.e. "the purpose of this section ..."
   ... Raman's examples were to explain why a <script> element was
   included
   ... e.g. the javascript in a <script> plays the role of a hint
   ... Raman's use cases imagined a server that adds "role='hint'" to
   legacy scripts that can no longer be interpreted, then a client can
   substitute some other hint
   ... i.e. the intention of this block is X and I know how to do X some
   other way so I can substitute

   Steven: I'm not sure these definitions clash
   ... seems ok to say that something that has a role of a navigation
   element also has that type
   ... [even though] a foaf:Person does have more semantics than a
   navigation element

   Mark: make sure we're not closing off some avenues, particularly with
   the work that Lisa is doing
   ... make sure we're not going to cause something to acquire lots of
   inappropriate properties
   ... perhaps we need another attribute

   Ralph: I'm reluctant to start down the path of additional syntactic
   sugar for common properties; where will that end?

   Mark: would like more feedback from RDF experts on whether the
   semantics of role is consistent with Class

   Ralph: I need help from HTML experts to understand what role is
   intended to mean

   Mark: in the early days we considered role to be like a hint; related
   to appearance

   Steven: yes, but then we expanded its use to provide a facility to
   avoid having to add lots of new elements
   ... e.g. <span role="person"> adds semantics to the span

   Mark: should elements that do add semantics also generate an rdf:type
   triple?
   ... e.g. is <div role="address"> the same as an <address> element?

   Steven: address is one of those few elements that do carry an aura of
   semantics
   ... title is a better example; we have said that <title> is the same
   as <meta property='title'>

   Ben: do we all agree that there is some semantics here that could be
   as light as xhtml2:role or as strong as rdf:type?
   ... we're trying to figure out how strong a statement we're making
   with role

   Steven: yes; it's clear that role does specify semantic information.
   We're trying to clarify its role w.r.t. RDF

   ACTION: Ben summarize the question of semantics of the HTML role
   attribute and solicit feedback from RDF experts [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html#action01]


compact URIs

   Ben: my concern is not href with CURI -- people who use that construct
   need to know that old browsers won't recognize CURIs; the bigger
   concern is other attributes like rel that use qnames

   Mark: I think it's OK; if CURI is a superset of QName then if QName
   works in rel a CURI will also work
   ... e.g. in XHTML2 we're specifying that role='next' is shorthand for
   'role=xhtml:next'

   Ben: aren't we requiring additional syntax for CURIs?

   Mark: only to resolve the ambiguity in the datatype that accepts both
   URIs and CURIs
   ... the tricky bit is that we have one syntax for rel (only CURI) and
   another syntax for href (either URI or CURI)

   Ben: so rel='cc:license' would be ok but
   rel='http://creativecommons.org/license' is not ok?

   Mark: right
   ... two different syntax for rel and href -- it would be nice if there
   were only one syntax but that creates a backwards compatibilty issue

   Ben: if there were some magic that let old browsers understand CURIs
   in href, we'd want to use that magic

   Ralph: two syntaxes is more cognitive load for users but compatibility
   gets higher priority for me

   Mark: with what are we trying to maintain compatibility?
   ... what exactly would be the issue with "rel='[next]'"
   ... we've already said that existing XHTML1 documents might not be
   XHTML2 documents

   Ralph: I think that's going to be a big issue (XHTML1 doc not being a
   valid XHTML2 doc)

   Ben: summarizing current proposal; rel is CURI only and about, href
   are either URI or CURI
   ... so change from earlier discussions is that rel, rev, property,
   role are upgraded to CURI

   Ralph: I suggest polling the XHTML WG and SWBPD WG more formally
   ... I have just polled the W3C Staff about this CURI idea

   Steven: HTML WG has already discussed; [19]Discussion of Qnames and
   URIs [Member only]

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2005/09/21-html-minutes.html#item07

   Mark: I am writing a document summarizing CURIs
   ... IPTC has already adopted this as a solution
   ... they had initially wanted W3C to change the definition of QName

   ACTION: Mark write CURI specification by 10 Oct [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html#action02]


Details of RDF/A syntax, inheritance, etc ...

   Ben: see my notes in [21]Mark, Ralph, and Ben meet up

     [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Sep/0026.html

   Ben: let's table this until next week when I hope to have more
   examples to flesh out these inheritance ideas
   ... let's also consider [22]Jeremy's concerns about reification

     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Oct/0009.html

   -> [23]CC use case [Jeremy 2005-10-04]

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

   Ralph: I think reification plays an important role in helping people
   use RDF but it certainly has been confusing to users and there is
   considerable opinion that it should be dropped from RDF

   Mark: Reuters feels that reification is very important
   ... provenance; who has made a statement, when they said it, etc.

   Ralph: one of the original use cases for reification was to support
   PICS; see [24]PICS Rating Vocabularies in XML/RDF
   ... I'd like to see other big use cases

     [24] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-pics

   ACTION: Jeremy consider Creative Commons 'who made this license' use
   case w.r.t. reification [DONE]
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html#action04]

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html#action04

   Ben: [26]Jeremy's example is not something that Creative Commons would
   adopt in the way he proposes as it changes too much

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

   ACTION: Ralph and Ben to augment the [27]issues list 
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/27-swbp-irc#T14-30-04]
   [CONTINUES]

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-current-issues

   <Ralph> I claim some progress

   ACTION: Ben to put together the "ACID" test for XHTML2 RDF/A
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-swbp-minutes.html#action02]
   [CONTINUES]

   ACTION: Mark to check edge cases of inheritance in RDF/A
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-swbp-minutes.html#action06]
   [CONTINUES]

   [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Ben summarize the question of semantics of the HTML role
   attribute and solicit feedback from RDF experts
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html#action01]

   [NEW] ACTION: Mark write CURI specification by 10 Oct
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html#action02]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to put together the "ACID" test for XHTML2 RDF/A
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-swbp-minutes.html#action02]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark to check edge cases of inheritance in RDF/A
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-swbp-minutes.html#action06]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph and Ben to augment the issues list
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/27-swbp-irc#T14-30-04]

   [DONE] ACTION: Ben to reconstruct action on role attribute with help
   of Danbri
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/27-swbp-irc#T14-28-08]

   [DONE] ACTION: Jeremy consider Creative Commons 'who made this
   license' use case w.r.t. reification [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2005/10/04-swbp-minutes.html#action04]

   [End of minutes]


   Change History:
$Log: 04-swbp-minutes.html,v $
Revision 1.2  2005/10/04 15:51:49  swick
Cleanup for publication

     _____________________________________________________________


    $Revision: 1.2 $ of $Date: 2005/10/04 15:51:49 $
Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2005 16:02:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:00 GMT