W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > May 2008

meeting record: 2008-05-29 RDF-in-XHTML Task Force

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:28:55 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20080529122700.052d08b8@127.0.0.1>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, public-swd-wg@w3.org

The record of today's RDFa telecon [1] is available.

  [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-rdfa-minutes.html

A text snapshot follows.

----

                        RDF-in-XHTML Task Force

29 May 2008

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008May/0211.html

   See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2008-05-15

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-rdfa-irc
      [4] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/15-rdfa-minutes.html

Attendees

   Present
          Shane McCarron, Manu Sporny, Ralph, Steven, Mark Birbeck

   Regrets
          Michael Hausenblas, Ben Adida

   Chair
          Manu

   Scribe
          Ralph

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Response to TAG
         2. Test Cases
               o test 105; inner @rel neither CURIE nor LinkType
               o test 106; chaining with empty value in inner @rel
         3. handling of literals in test harness
         4. ISSUE-120
         5. ISSUE-103
         6. CR Transition Scheduling
     * Summary of Action Items
     _____________________________________________________


   ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL transform
   transferred to W3C [recorded in
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
   [CONTINUES]

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01

   ACTION: Manu to reach out to Slashdot and attempt to get RDFa
   integrated into Slashdot. [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
   [CONTINUES]

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action10

   ACTION: [DONE] Mark to move _:a bnode notation to normative section
   [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-rdfa-minutes.html#action05]

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-rdfa-minutes.html#action05

   ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded
   in [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [CONTINUES]

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action12

   ACTION: Michael to determine which useless-triples test cases to
   remove and which to add. [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [CONTINUES]

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action12

Response to TAG

   Steven: I don't really understand [20]DanC's point

     [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008May/0202.html

   Mark: the idea of "Follow your nose" seems to mean "let's leave HTML
   and XHTML untouched but add something else"
   ... but we are changing XHTML1
   ... reading the TAG minutes I get the impression that Tim is open to
   this
   ... others seem to worry about folks who may accidentally use our
   new attributes without intending to do so
   ... we should take a stand that these new attributes should be used
   only for the purpose of generating triples

   Steven: and furthermore, doing this does not change the meaning of
   any existing HTML page
   ... it just formalizes what the page really means

   Manu: is there a concern about the HTML5 series?
   ... at one point they said that while this may be good for XHTML,
   @profile does not exist for HTML5

   Shane: that's not our problem

   Ralph: I agree with Shane

   <Steven> +1

   Shane: I had an off-line discussion with NoahM and perhaps someone
   else
   ... Tim definitely concurred with adding this to core XHTML1
   ... and proposed annotating the namespace document to say this
   ... some were concerned that this means every XHTML document
   currently on the Web then should generate triples
   ... there was a suggestion that there be an announcement mechanism
   that tells parsers they _should_ generate triples

   Ralph: why isn't this a problem for the consumer of the document
   rather than the author of the document?
   ... I agree with Steven's comment that XHTML always has _meant_ this
   ... so the author shouldn't be telling the client whether it should
   or shouldn't generate triples
   ... the client decides that

   Manu: running fuzbot for a while, it seems every page does generate
   triples

   Shane: so fine, and we should update the media type spec to say that
   we now generate triples
   ... this will make it clear that this is a big step

   <markbirbeck> My argument for not requiring @profile or DTDs:

   <markbirbeck> [21]http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license

     [21] http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license

   Steven: I don't agree with the argument that the media type must say
   that the document is used to generate triples

   <markbirbeck> +1 Steven

   Steven: the media type just identifies the type of document; it
   doesn't say how you should process it

   Shane: in the RDF cases, the media type does say [something about]
   how to process it

   Mark: that may be the TAG's point
   ... the question "should we waste time processing this document if
   it doesn't contain RDFa" is one of two
   ... the second is "if we process a document as if it contains RDFa,
   are we acquiring statements that people did not intend to make"?
   ... the second is what the TAG is currently debating
   ... a third question might concern @rel='license'
   ... they're suggesting that we should *not* process @rel='license'
   ... this means that >1M documents won't have this clear semantics
   ... we can make all these documents available to RDFa easily
   ... it's crazy to say none of these documents assert a license
   currently

   Shane: as a group, we've agreed on this here
   ... we only need to address the 'follow your nose' question; it's
   about how discovery works on the Web
   ... related to 302 discussion
   ... the TAG appears to have a whole big environment in mind, of
   which RDFa is a small part, and they want to know how this fits
   ... how does a document containing RDFa say that it contains RDFa?
   ... Tim says "they all do"

   Mark: we think the interpretation of a document [is specified] even
   if the author didn't previously sign a contract
   ... we're saying "here is an RDF interpretation of billions of
   documents that have [already] been published on the Web"
   ... and we hope people will publish even more [data] than they have
   already done

   Ralph: +1

   Shane: it's not about imposing processing; it's about _permitting_
   processing
   ... the TAG's argument is that they don't see an explicit
   instruction and therefore can't map this into their world view

   Ralph: does the TAG not believe that it is sufficient to have
   updated the XHTML1 namespace document?

   Shane: there are two ways to update the namespace document; prose
   and with the GRDDL profile
   ... the prose is more interesting to me
   ... you go from the media type to the namespace document, not to the
   modularization document
   ... we should propose to the TAG that we will follow Tim's
   recommendation and update the namespace document, both the prose and
   the machine-readable and all documents of type XHTML1 have RDF
   triples

   Ralph: +1

   Steven: +1

   <Steven> "Published specification:

   <Steven> The text/html media type is now defined by W3C
   Recommendations;

   <Steven> the latest published version is ..."

   <Steven> (That's from the rfc for text/html)

   ACTION: Shane draft a TAG response along the lines of "we will
   update the namespace document, both the prose and the
   machine-readable and all documents of type XHTML1 have RDF triples"
   [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-rdfa-minutes.html#action06]

Test Cases

   <msporny> [23]http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/rdfa-test-harness/

     [23] http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/rdfa-test-harness/

-- test 105; inner @rel neither CURIE nor LinkType

   Manu: oops, seems I broke the test case harness

   <msporny> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

   <msporny> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML+RDFa 1.0//EN"
   "[24]http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd">

     [24] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd

   <msporny> <html xmlns="[25]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"

     [25] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml

   <msporny> xmlns:dc="[26]http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">

     [26] http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/

   <msporny> <head>

   <msporny> <title>Test 0105</title>

   <msporny> </head>

   <msporny> <body>

   <msporny> <div about="" rel="dc:creator">

   <msporny> <a rel="myfoobarrel" href="ben.html">Ben</a> created this
   page.

   <msporny> </div>

   <msporny> </body>

   <msporny> </html>

   <msporny> ASK WHERE {

   <msporny>
   <[27]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/0
   105.xhtml> <[28]http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator> _:a .

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/0105.xhtml%3E
     [28] http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator%3E

   <msporny> }

   Manu: _:a should be changed to ?a
   ... we should verify that the object is a bnode
   ... so needs a FILTER

   <msporny> ASK WHERE {

   <msporny>
   <[29]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/0
   105.xhtm

     [29] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/0105.xhtm

   <msporny> l> <[30]http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator> ?a .

     [30] http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator%3E

   <msporny> FILTER IsBlank(?a)

   <msporny> }

   Mark: to be a full test, we should check that there's not a triple
   with myfoobarrel as a predicate

   Manu: we can't do that in a single query

   Mark: could use NOT

   Manu: I'll investigate
   ... there are other tests that don't verify the absence of a triple

   Mark: do we need @about="" ?

   Steven: doesn't do any harm

   RESOLUTION: test 105 accepted, with change to check for absence of
   myfoobarrel triple

   <ShaneM> +1

-- test 106; chaining with empty value in inner @rel

   <msporny> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

   <msporny> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML+RDFa 1.0//EN"
   "[31]http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd">

     [31] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd

   <msporny> <html xmlns="[32]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"

     [32] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml

   <msporny> xmlns:dc="[33]http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">

     [33] http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/

   <msporny> <head>

   <msporny> <title>Test 0106</title>

   <msporny> </head>

   <msporny> <body>

   <msporny> <div about="" rel="dc:creator">

   <msporny> <a rel="" href="manu.html">Manu</a> created this page.

   <msporny> </div>

   <msporny> </body>

   <msporny> </html>

   <msporny> ASK WHERE {

   <msporny>
   <[34]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/0
   106.xhtml> <[35]http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator> ?a .

     [34] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/0106.xhtml%3E
     [35] http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator%3E

   <msporny> FILTER IsBlank(?a)

   <msporny> }

   Manu: add similar absence test to 106

   Ralph: no predicate to check for absence in this case

   Mark: a parser might blindly generate a predicate URI of
   [36]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml

     [36] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml

   <Steven> Is there an empty CURIE?

   Ralph: even though that wouldn't be a [semantically] valid predicate
   name

   Mark: yep

   <markbirbeck> I was thinking of the xhv namespace, Ralph.

   [yep, I copied the wrong text!]

   Manu: we could test that there is no triple containing "Manu" as an
   object

   Mark: yes, that's more sensible for both 106 and 105

   RESOLUTION: test 106 accepted, with change to check for absence of
   triples containing manu.html as either subject or object

handling of literals in test harness

   Manu: we currently have 4 tests that fail; 100-103 because the
   literals are compared character by character

   <msporny> <div />

   Manu: even though the test is correct, the harness considers ''' and
   '"' to be different

   <msporny> <div></div>

   Manu: also, our test doesn't cover the case that <div /> and
   <div></div> are equivalent
   ... I propose that we add two versions of each test; one in short
   form and one in long form

   Ralph: sounds reasonable to me to duplicate the tests for the
   convenience of implementors

   <msporny> ASK WHERE {

   <msporny> <[37]http://www.example.org>
   <[38]http://example.org/rdf/example> 'Some text here in <strong
   xmlns="[39]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
   xmlns:svg="[40]http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">bold</strong> and an svg
   rectangle: <svg:svg xmlns="[41]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
   xmlns:svg="[42]http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><svg:rect
   svg:height="100"
   svg:width="200"/></svg:svg>'^^<[43]http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-
   syntASK WHERE {

     [37] http://www.example.org%3E/
     [38] http://example.org/rdf/example%3E
     [39] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
     [40] http://www.w3.org/2000/svg
     [41] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
     [42] http://www.w3.org/2000/svg
     [43] http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntASK

   <msporny> <[44]http://www.example.org>
   <[45]http://example.org/rdf/example> 'Some text here in <strong
   xmlns="[46]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
   xmlns:svg="[47]http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">bold</strong> and an svg
   rectangle: <svg:svg xmlns="[48]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
   xmlns:svg="[49]http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><svg:rect
   svg:height="100"
   svg:width="200"/></svg:svg>'^^<[50]http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-
   syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> .

     [44] http://www.example.org%3E/
     [45] http://example.org/rdf/example%3E
     [46] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
     [47] http://www.w3.org/2000/svg
     [48] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
     [49] http://www.w3.org/2000/svg
     [50] http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral%3E

   <msporny> }

   <msporny> ax-ns#XMLLiteral> .

   <msporny> }

   Manu: ^ SPARQL for test 100
   ... this is nearly impossible [for a human] to read

   <msporny> ASK WHERE {

   <msporny> <[51]http://www.example.org>
   <[52]http://example.org/rdf/example> 'Some text here in <strong
   xmlns="[53]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
   xmlns:svg="[54]http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">bold</strong> and an svg
   rectangle: <svg:svg xmlns="[55]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
   xmlns:svg="[56]http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><svg:rect
   svg:height="100"
   svg:width="200"/></svg:svg>'^^<[57]http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-
   syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> .

     [51] http://www.example.org%3E/
     [52] http://example.org/rdf/example%3E
     [53] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
     [54] http://www.w3.org/2000/svg
     [55] http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
     [56] http://www.w3.org/2000/svg
     [57] http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral%3E

   <msporny> }

   Manu: the idea would be to include UNION statements where '"' is
   exchanged for '''

   <msporny> </svg:rect>

   Manu: and has both self-closed and explicit close tags
   ... for the convenience of both sax-based and DOM-based parsers
   ... any objections?

   [no objections]

   Manu: I propose to update test 100-103 to add all four cases

   Shane: I don't really object but I point out it's an "interesting"
   combinatorial problem to add all the cases to the SPARQL

   Manu: modified proposal; only add those requested by implementors

   Shane: also add a comment to the tests so when new implementors come
   along they know why they might be failing

   <msporny> PROPOSE: Add implementors valid XML Literals to TC 100-103
   and add comments to tell other implementors that the tests may fail
   due to XML Literal issues.

   <msporny> PROPOSE: Add valid cases of XML Literals as requested by
   implementers to TC 100-103 and add comments to tell other
   implementors that the tests may fail due to XML Literal issues.

   <Steven> ok

   RESOLUTION: Add valid cases of XML Literals as requested by
   implementers to TC 100-103 and add comments to tell other
   implementors that the tests may fail due to XML Literal issues.

[58]ISSUE-120; nested @rel where inner @rel is neither CURIE nor link
type

     [58] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/120

   Manu: I believe we've resolved this

   Shane: the resolution was a minor change in the document ~1 month
   ago

   Mark: this was a case of reading the text two possible ways, where
   one way was really awkward
   ... the problem I thought people were raising was that although the
   second [myfoobarrel] line does not generate a triple, it may also
   cause the first [dc:creator] line to not generate a triple
   ... we should be more explicit that the nested element does complete
   the first triple even though it doesn't contain a valid @rel
   ... I argued this was clear in the spec by interpretation of step 5
   ... the wording is changed to refer to the presence of @rel
   attribute rather than to a @rel value

   <msporny> PROPOSE: Resolve ISSUE-120 having made a minor change to
   the Syntax Document specifying that the presence of a @rel generates
   an incomplete triple

   <msporny> PROPOSE: Resolve ISSUE-120 having made a minor change to
   the Syntax Document specifying that the presence of a @rel is
   sufficient to complete and incomplete triple.

   <ShaneM>
   [59]http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/rdfa-syntax/Over
   view.mhtml.diff?r1=1.228&r2=1.229

     [59] http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/rdfa-syntax/Overview.mhtml.diff?r1=1.228&r2=1.229

   RESOLUTION: Resolve ISSUE-120 having made a minor change to the
   Syntax Document specifying that the presence of a @rel is sufficient
   to complete an incomplete triple.

   <msporny> [60]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/103

     [60] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/103

[61]ISSUE-103; a URI-centric approach to CURIEs

     [61] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/103

   Manu: our [62]email discussion boils down to "let's not change
   anything"

     [62] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008May/thread.html#msg182

   -> [63]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/103 ISSUE-103 a
   URI-centric approach to CURIEs

     [63] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/103

   Shane: the argument is that CURIEs are _not_ URIs
   ... the implication of being a URI is that they could be used over
   the wire, but they can't be used over the wire

   Mark: and we've suggested that languages that currently use QNAMEs
   could migrate over time to using CURIEs

   Shane: in the TAG's recent CURIE Last Call comments they say that
   the CURIE syntax is too rich for use in SPARQL

   Steven: and we're trying to fix that limitation in other languages

   <msporny> PROPOSE: Resolve ISSUE-103, CURIEs are not URI schemes,
   they are a macro expansion mechanism. No need to change the Syntax
   document.

   <Steven> There are queries you would like to make that SPARQL cannot
   do, and CURIEs fix that

   Mark: I'd like my email comment to be included; this is QName-like

   <msporny> PROPOSE: Resolve ISSUE-103, CURIEs are not URI schemes,
   they are a macro expansion mechanism. No need to change the Syntax
   document. CURIEs are also QName-like, allowing legacy languages to
   migrate forward cleanly.

   Ralph: +1

   <markbirbeck> +1

   RESOLUTION: ISSUE-103 closed, CURIEs are not URI schemes, they are a
   macro expansion mechanism. No need to change the Syntax document.
   CURIEs are also QName-like, allowing legacy languages to migrate
   forward cleanly.

CR Transition Scheduling

   Ralph: in SWD WG meeting, Ben was asked to confirm that the XHTML2
   WG will be able to resolve a CR transition request by Tuesday 10
   June

   Shane: yes, XHTML2 WG will be able to resolve this by 11 June

   Steven: but there's an XForms WG meeting on the 11th

   Shane: XHTML2 WG will be able to resolve CR transition request by 17
   June
   ... and we should discuss the CR exit criteria

   Steven: I propose "2 implementations that pass all tests"

   Shane: we've had a request that there also be an XSLT implementation
   ... however, I do not believe that such an implementation is
   possible

   Steven: the minimum requirement is that there are 2 implementations
   of all features, and they don't all even have to be in one
   implementation

   [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Shane draft a TAG response along the lines of "we will
   update the namespace document, both the prose and the
   machine-readable and all documents of type XHTML1 have RDF triples"
   [recorded in
   [64]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-rdfa-minutes.html#action06]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL
   transform transferred to W3C [recorded in
   [65]http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Manu to reach out to Slashdot and attempt to get
   RDFa integrated into Slashdot. [recorded in
   [66]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki
   [recorded in
   [67]http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Michael to determine which useless-triples test
   cases to remove and which to add. [recorded in
   [68]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]

     [65] http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01
     [66] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action10
     [67] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
     [68] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action12

   [DONE] ACTION: Mark to move _:a bnode notation to normative section
   [recorded in
   [69]http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-rdfa-minutes.html#action05]

     [69] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-rdfa-minutes.html#action05

   [End of minutes]
     _____________________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2008 17:27:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 29 May 2008 17:27:31 GMT