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

meeting record: 2008-10-09 RDFa Task Force telecon

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 12:22:07 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20081009122014.0d65fc50@127.0.0.1>
To: public-swd-wg@w3.org,public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

The record of today's RDFa Task Force telecon is now available as

  http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html

A text snapshot follows.

----

                        RDF in XHTML Task Force

09 Oct 2008

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0099.html

   See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2008-10-02

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-irc
      [4] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/02-rdfa-minutes.html

Attendees

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

   Regrets
          Ben Adida, Michael Hausenblas

   Chair
          Manu

   Scribe
          Ralph

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Action Review
         2. RDFa attributes in SVG Tiny
         3. Thoughts on Latest Primer
         4. Axel Polleres' comments
         5. Publishing Issues
         6. Dean Edridge's comments
     * Summary of Action Items
     _____________________________________________________

   Ralph: I'm adding RDFa to the XHTML namespace document (XHTML
   version) too
   ... to get [13]the online GRDDL extractor to work

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/grddl/?docAddr=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F1999%2Fxhtml%2FOverview.xhtml&output=turtleplain

Action Review

   ACTION: [DONE] Ben ask Shane to produce an updated Syntax with
   editorial changes for the WG to review next week [recorded in
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action17]

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action17

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ben to close loop with Danny. [recorded in
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-rdfa-minutes.html#action19]

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-rdfa-minutes.html#action19

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Jeremy to demonstrate GRDDL with XHTML/RDFa once
   the NS URI is set up. [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action03]

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action03

   Ralph: I've been asked to demonstrate that our GRDDL namespace
   markup works via [17]http://www.w3.org/2007/08/grddl

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/grddl

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Manu talk with Jamie McCarthy about an
   AskSlashdot piece [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action04]

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action04

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases
   for Ivan. [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Manu write the perl code for Slashdot. [recorded
   in [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning
   [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa
   Wiki [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15

RDFa attributes in SVG Tiny

   <Steven>
   [25]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/metadata.html#MetadataAttribute
   s

     [25] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/metadata.html#MetadataAttributes

   -> "[26]Late notice: RDFa in SVG 1.2 'tiny'" [Steven 2008-10-09]

     [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0097.html

   Manu: should we suggest they adopt RDFa more closely?

   Mark: they insist on a:b format which is incorrect
   ... it would be a shame to insist on this

   Manu: so ask that they not misuse @property and @typeof

   Shane: I'm planning to send the same comment w.r.t. @role

   Manu: so ask the SVG folk to follow the pattern of RDFa usage set by
   XHTML
   ... if you choose to use these [RDFa] attributes

   Shane: yes, there are modules and those modules should be used --
   and the modules have behavioral characteristics

   Manu: I'll try to write up a draft comment today

   ACTION: Manu to create SVG Tiny draft comment and send to RDFa list
   for feedback before sending to SVG Tiny workgroup. [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]

   -> [28]Dan Brickley's comment on requiring a:b for RDFa in SVG tiny

     [28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0101.html

Thoughts on Latest Primer

   -> "[29]Primer, and regrets for tomorrow [Ben 2008-10-08]

     [29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0093.html

   <msporny> [30]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/

   Manu: Section 4.1 added

   Shane: typo in 4.1; s/2. Distributing and/2. Distributing an/

   Manu: 4.1 looks good to me

   Ralph: me too

   Shane: looks fine

   Steven: yep

   <markbirbeck> s/RDF extensibility is the same that enables/RDF
   extensibility is the same as that which enables/

   <markbirbeck> s/Once an RDF vocabulary created/Once an RDF
   vocabulary is created/

   Mark: typo in 4.1, 2nd sentence; "RDF extensibility is the same that
   enables RDFa extensibility"

   Ralph: just insert "mechanism" after "same"

   Mark: 3rd sentence; "Once an RDF vocabulary /+is+/ created, ..."
   ... not sure this is territory we should get into

   Ralph: I do think this minimal information is needed

   Mark: people who don't know this won't be able to do it from this
   text; they'll need a pointer to more

   Ralph: exactly, the pointer is there in paragraph 2

   Shane: I'm with Ralph

   Mark: we could say a full description is out of scope

   Shane: point to our vocab document? It's also written in RDFa

   Ralph: I favor a minimalist approach in this document

   Mark: the point we're stressing is in the first paragraph
   ... not a show stopper; this text is OK
   ... though I suggest adding "Though it is beyond the scope of this
   document,
   ... before "At a high level"

   <markbirbeck> Maybe: "Although it's beyond the scope of this primer
   to explain the process in detail, here is a high-level description
   of the process to help authors to find more information."

Axel Polleres' comments

   Manu:[31]Axel's comments point to a small bit of confusion on how to
   resolve CURIEs

     [31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0075.html

   Ralph: most of this is editorial but the first part points to a typo

   Shane: yep

   -> [32]Ben's reply

     [32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0081.html

   Shane: I believe everything in Axel's message is taken care of
   ... in 5.5 step 9 there was a suggested addition on which I wanted
   Mark's review

   Mark: I'll try to look at this thread this evening

   Shane: if Mark agrees on this change (see "Mark's agreement and
   explicit wording" in [33]Shane's message) I'll make it, otherwise
   not
   ... some of DERI's comments were good catches

     [33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0082.html

Publishing Issues

   Shane: We should be listing the task force participants, semweb
   participants
   ... and XHTML2 WG

   Ralph: those lists are available, do you need me to send them to
   you?

   Shane: yes.

   ACTION: Ralph send Shane the lists of participants [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]

   Manu: anything else we need?

   Manu: looking at the updated XHTML vocab document, I discovered that
   my code was generating some wrong URIs

   <msporny> [base] == [35]http://example.org/foo.html#bar

     [35] http://example.org/foo.html#bar

   Manu: because the base URI was different from what I expected
   ... when you pass in this base the fragment is included in the base

   <msporny> about="#baz"

   <msporny> [36]http://example.org/foo.html#bar#baz

     [36] http://example.org/foo.html#bar

   ^ an incorrect URI

   Manu: this isn't an issue with RDFa; it's an issue with parser code
   if the parser implementor forgets to strip off fragments

   <ShaneM> current draft:
   [37]http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-rdfa-syntax-20081004/#s_curiepr
   ocessing

     [37] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-rdfa-syntax-20081004/#s_curieprocessing

   Manu: but we don't explicitly mention the need to strip fragments
   from base

   Shane: in section 5.2 we define "the base"
   ... "usually the URL of the document being processed"

   Mark: elsewhere I thought we'd said something about this because
   when you work out the code for @about="" you have to remove the
   fragment
   ... don't we talk about this in the text about HEAD and BODY

   Steven: but this is part of URI spec

   Shane: however, we don't explicitly say it

   Steven: the definition of an empty string string for relative URIs
   is that the fragment gets dropped

   Shane: it's more than this; it's "what does base mean"; we
   concatenate to base

   Mark: no, we resolve relative to base -- not concatenate

   Shane: 5.4 describes what happens when CURIEs are resolved

   Mark: "... any relative URIs will need to be resolved relative to
   the base URI..."

   <markbirbeck> Also, 5.4.2:

   <markbirbeck> Note that it is generally considered a good idea not
   to use relative paths in namespace declarations, but since it is
   possible that an author may ignore this guidance, it is further
   possible that the URI obtained from a CURIE is relative. However,
   since all URIs must be resolved relative to [base] before being used
   to create triples, the use of relative paths should not have any
   effect on processing.

   Ralph: I don't think we need to say anything more than what is
   currently in 5.4

   Shane: the only additional thing we might do is cite the production
   for relative URI

   Mark: however, base can be a relative URI and this would emphasize
   that the resolution algorithm must be applied

   <msporny> URL RFC: Section 5.1: If the

   <msporny> base URI is obtained from a URI reference, then that
   reference must

   <msporny> be converted to absolute form and stripped of any fragment
   component

   <msporny> prior to its use as a base URI.

   Mark: the algorithm is _always_ 'resolve this path relative to this
   other path'
   ... we don't have to say base is absolute; we just have to say that
   everything is resolved according to this algorithm
   ... the markup need not contain an absolute URI in @base but by the
   time one gets to applying the RFC algorithm, the base URI will
   become absolute

   Manu: I'm worried that we don't have a test case
   ... we should add a test that has @base with a fragment
   ... and a relative @about

   <msporny> base="[38]http://example.org/test.html#foo"

     [38] http://example.org/test.html#foo

   <msporny> about="#baz"

   Mark: this is the same scenario as navigating to a document with a
   fragment in the URI
   ... the base URI of the document is the URI without the fragment

   <msporny> The URL that should be generated should be:
   "[39]http://example.org/test.html#baz"

     [39] http://example.org/test.html#baz

   Shane: what spec says that the base in that scenario doesn't have a
   fragment?

   Ralph: I don't see that it matters whether the fragment happened to
   have been stored with the base or not; it's clear that after
   applying the resolution algorithm any fragment given with the base
   drops out

   Shane: so @about="" should resolve to a URI without a fragment?

   Ralph, Mark: yes

   Shane: ah, so we need a test case for that
   ... actually, it's the absence of @about we should test, because
   @about="" does get run through the resolver

   ACTION: Manu to create two TCs to test fragment identifiers dropped
   during URI resolution against [base] [recorded in
   [40]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]

Dean Edridge's comments

   -> "[41]Re: Treatment of RDFa in TAG Finding on Self-describing Web
   and feed back on RDFa in XHTML1.1" [Dean Edridge 2008-10-03]

     [41] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Oct/0027.html

   Shane: DOCTYPE was moved to Appendix C _informative_

   <ShaneM>
   [42]http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-rdfa-syntax-20081004/#docconf

     [42] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-rdfa-syntax-20081004/#docconf

   Ralph: we have considered this issue before and there is no new
   evidence presented

   Shane: the additional evidence is HTML5
   ... we could point out that Appendix C says that _if_ the author
   _does_ want to DTD validate, here's how to do it

   Steven: it seems that they want any document without a DOCTYPE to be
   interpreted as HTML5
   ... a formal reply should come from Ben, as Chair, saying we've
   discussed this already and we're not seeing any new information

   Shane: we already sent him that answer and he wasn't happy so it
   needs to come from the Chair, and point also to Appendix C

   Steven: and in 4.1 Document Conformance, we have "There SHOULD be a
   @version attribute ..."

   [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Manu to create SVG Tiny draft comment and send to RDFa
   list for feedback before sending to SVG Tiny workgroup. [recorded in
   [43]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [NEW] ACTION: Manu to create two TCs to test fragment identifiers
   dropped during URI resolution against [base] [recorded in
   [44]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
   [NEW] ACTION: Ralph send Shane the lists of participants [recorded
   in [45]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/09-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to close loop with Danny. [recorded in
   [46]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-rdfa-minutes.html#action19]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Jeremy to demonstrate GRDDL with XHTML/RDFa once
   the NS URI is set up. [recorded in
   [47]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action03]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Manu talk with Jamie McCarthy about an AskSlashdot
   piece [recorded in
   [48]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action04]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases
   for Ivan. [recorded in
   [49]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Manu write the perl code for Slashdot. [recorded
   in [50]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning
   [recorded in
   [51]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in
   [52]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki
   [recorded in
   [53]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in
   [54]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]

     [46] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-rdfa-minutes.html#action19
     [47] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action03
     [48] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action04
     [49] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09
     [50] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
     [51] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
     [52] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13
     [53] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14
     [54] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15

   [DONE] ACTION: Ben ask Shane to produce an updated Syntax with
   editorial changes for the WG to review next week [recorded in
   [55]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action17]

     [55] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/02-rdfa-minutes.html#action17

   [End of minutes]
     _______________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [56]scribe.perl version 1.133
    ([57]CVS log)
    $Date: 2008/10/09 16:20:37 $

     [56] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [57] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2008 16:23:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 9 October 2008 16:23:22 GMT