W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > June 2009

meeting record: 2009-06-11 RDFa Task Force

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:42:05 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20090611124023.03209718@127.0.0.1>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Cc: public-swd-wg@w3.org
The record of today's RDF-in-XHTML Task Force telecon is available as

   http://www.w3.org/2009/06/11-rdfa-minutes.html

Thanks to Manu for scribing.

A text snapshot follows.

----

                       RDFa in XHTML Task Force

11 Jun 2009

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jun/0031.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/11-rdfa-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Manu Sporny, Shane McCarron, Ralph Swick, Ben Adida, Mark
          Birbeck

   Regrets
          Michael Hausenblas

   Chair
          Ben Adida

   Scribe
          Manu Sporny with some fill from Ralph

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Action Items
         2. Test Cases
         3. Target of RDFa Processing
     * Summary of Action Items
     ______________________________________________________


   Previous: [9]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html

      [9] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html

   <Steven> Good; I'm at a vFtF at the moment, so only on irc today

   benadida: need to leave 15 minutes early today
   ... try to get to target of RDFa processing at 1/2 past today

   Manu: I talked with Robert Scoble last week
   ... he's talking about "2010 Web", launching "Building 43
   Initiative"
   ... he'd like to learn more about Semantic Web and would like to do
   an interview
   ... perhaps RDFa could be his first interview
   ... would you be interesting in being interviewed, Ben?

   Ben: sure, nice to keep the current momentum going

   <Ralph> [10]Scobleizer

     [10] http://scobleizer.com/

Action Items

   ACTION: Manu create a wiki page for discussion of issue-214
   [recorded in
   [11]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [DONE]

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12

   [12]http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#Mixing_id_and_about_on
   _the_same_element

     [12] http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#Mixing_id_and_about_on_the_same_element

   ACTION: Ralph find the statement on test suite copyright [recorded
   in [13]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
   [DONE]

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13

   <Ralph> [14]Licenses for W3C Test Suites

     [14] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/04-testsuite-copyright.html

   ACTION: Ben to author wiki page with charter template for RDFa IG.
   Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
   [CONTINUES]

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10

   ACTION: Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa" with
   screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [WITHDRAWN]

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12

   ACTION: Ben to prepare "how to write RDFa" screencast with fragment
   parser [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action05]

   markbirbeck: Do we need to keep track of these items? We do this
   sort of stuff as a natural part of what we do and it eats into the
   conversation time.

   benadida: I will do this and we won't talk about it more until it's
   done.

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

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

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

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

   markbirbeck: I'll try to work on this at SemTech.

   ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [CONTINUES]

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

   markbirbeck: next step in your fragment parser is to generate these
   wizards?

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

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

   ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded
   in [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
   [CONTINUES]

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

   ACTION: Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker instance
   [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [CONTINUES]

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11

   ACTION: Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML namespace
   [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
   [CONTINUES]

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01

   benadida: Anybody else we can ping on the issue tracker thing?

   Ralph: I'll just do it.

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

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

Test Cases

   Manu: let's defer discussion on tests 123, 127, and 128; they're
   related to other design discussions
   ... 124, 125, and 126 are ready for discussion
   ... there's a bug in 124 in the test harness; missing a space
   ... the email is correct

   <Ralph> [26]Suggested test case 0124 [26]

     [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0256.html
     [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0256.html

   benadida: any thoughts on Philips test cases?
   ... I want to be sure we don't overlook
   [27]http://philip.html5.org/demos/rdfa/results.html

     [27] http://philip.html5.org/demos/rdfa/results.html

   ShaneM1: Just want to go make sure they're thorough - looks good so
   far.

   benadida: Can I run the test suite entirely in Javascript? Do we
   have a SPARQL implementation for the Javascript test suite?

   markbirbeck: Had an issue creating the actual parser itself.
   ... I construct JS objects that look like SPARQL and use those.

   benadida: Let's talk about that offline.

Target of RDFa Processing

   benadida: Sam was on the call last week? That was good.
   ... Appreciate all the work done to minimize the issue to the core
   problem.
   ... Here's an idea...

   <Ralph> [28]The target of RDFa processing rules

     [28] http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#The_target_of_RDFa_processing_rules

   benadida: There is an idea that Mark has floated, which is to have
   an RDFa core processing rules document.
   ... It can be on an abstract document structure/tree.
   ... The way we make that happen in the long term, may be to not do
   that first, but write an RDFa for HTML5 document that is what Henri
   suggested.
   ... Parse with html5lib and then work on the DOM - see if we can get
   a spec written up doing that...
   ... We can have specific rules for DOMs that have namespace support
   and those that don't.
   ... We can then see where the triples differ between html5lib and
   xhtml.

   markbirbeck: Idea sounds okay, but the spec is already general.
   ... It says it can work on SAX and "child nodes" - so I think we're
   talking about namespace processing.
   ... Things like processing lower-case attributes.
   ... I think we can produce an HTML5 spec pretty quickly.
   ... This idea has come up before, before XHTML+RDFa

   <Ralph> [[

   <Ralph> Processing need not follow the DOM traversal technique
   outlined here, although the effect of following some other manner of
   processing must be the same as if the processing outlined here were
   followed. The processing model is explained using the idea of DOM
   traversal which makes it easier to describe (particularly in
   relation to the [evaluation context]).

   <Ralph> ]]

   <Ralph> -- [29]http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_model

     [29] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_model

   <Ralph> (that's a pretty DOM-centric way of being "general" :) ]

   markbirbeck: We should tightly control the general processing rules
   because there is a deep understanding in this group about what we're
   trying to achieve.
   ... If we can write the HTML5+RDFa spec, it's a quicker way of
   getting these issues hammered out.

   benadida: The rules don't have to be re-written in any significant
   way, but we do have to focus on how we get to the DOM.
   ... First parse with html5lib - then use RDFa processing rules to
   process that DOM.

   <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about processing rules

   ShaneM1: It's difficult to divorce the technical issues from the
   political/personal issues.
   ... I'm fundamentally opposed to repeating text in normative
   specifications.
   ... It creates divergence.
   ... If processing rules are generic enough - and that was the
   intention with the current set of rules.
   ... if the rules aren't sufficiently generic, we must fix it in the
   underlying REC.

   benadida: I can live with that - we should revise XHTML+RDFa spec if
   the generic rules change.
   ... We should have one version of the rules.

   <Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to prefer that the text match as closely
   as possible

   Ralph: It's a shame if we have to have the text replicated in
   several places.
   ... if the choice is to have HTML WG to go off on a divergent path
   because we insist that they only reference an external document
   ... or if we can give them the text to place into their document.
   ... We should give them the text (which is not preferrable
   technically).
   ... as we were drafting our spec, early language didn't get some of
   this stuff right and we tweaked the text.
   ... The fewer tweaks we make, the better off we will be to limit the
   introduction of new bugs
   ... We should preserve as much of the text of the original spec as
   possible.
   ... What if we discover more bugs?
   ... How much of this should we change?

   ShaneM1: Isn't that what the errata process is for?

   Ralph: Depends upon the nature of the change.
   ... We shouldn't make design changes - only errata type changes are
   allowed. We should start from that position.

   ShaneM1: Errata is something we can publish immediately - in order
   to keep the specs in steps... as we discover problems, we should
   publish errata
   ... important to try and minimize changes, but we've already
   discovered one issue that is critical - case sensitivity of CURIEs.
   ... That's not minor.

   markbirbeck: Slightly different way of coming at this -
   modularization idea is absolutely right.
   ... He says we should fix this in the core, but there is no RDFa
   core.
   ... Maybe we'll have a first, and second implementation.
   ... We might want to do an RDFa 1.1 - don't know how this fits with
   the processes.
   ... We might be able to produce a new version of the spec that
   includes XHTML and HTML family languages.
   ... If it's HTML5, run html5lib and skip to core processing rules.
   ... If it's XHTML, run X and skip to core processing rules.
   ... Because it's an update on our current spec, we don't introduce
   fragmentation.

   <ShaneM1> +1 on mark's suggestion assuming we have the ability to
   introduce material about HTML into the RDFa Syntax specification.

   markbirbeck: In terms of the process, maybe this would be smoother
   approach.

   Manu: one of the biggest issues I have is generating more documents
   for people to review
   ... we have a list of issues that are pretty clear at this point
   ... Sam Ruby and Philip agree these are all the issues currently
   known
   ... so premature to decide on how to write an HTML+RDFa document
   until we've addressed these issues
   ... Mark's idea on "RDFa in HTML Languages" could be a way to avoid
   divergence
   ... separate test suites will be needed for HTML4+RDFa, HTML5+RDFa,
   ...; this grows exponentially
   ... I don't think we're far from being able to generate an RDFa 1.1
   spec that addresses the current issue list

   <ShaneM1> FWIW it is possible to have the same test suite exercise
   multiple languages.

   benadida: Two quick things.
   ... ideally this RDFa 1.1 approach would take some time.
   ... We should provide some alternative to microdata
   ... I'm worried that doing another REC would take a long time, and
   it's not the sort of thing that the HTML5 folks would include in
   their document.

   Manu: why would we not be able to put out an RDFa 1.1 draft spec in
   2 weeks?
   ... we wouldn't expect this to be included immediately in HTML5

   <ShaneM1> process issue - we don't have charter to say anything
   about HTML in a draft

   benadida: How do we address text duplication between XHTML+RDFa and
   HTML5?

   markbirbeck: You're effectively deprecating RDFa 1.0 with RDFa 1.1.
   ... The major differences are going to be case sensitivity, maybe
   @prefix and @token.

   Ralph: You're going to have to work with the HTML WG.
   ... You must work with HTML WG RDFa 1.1

   benadida: I think we do agree on RDFa working on a model like this -
   first html5lib then generic RDFa processing rules.

   Manu: I think we're saying that something produces a tree-like
   model, and then the RDFa processing rules operate on that tree-like
   model.

   ShaneM1: Ralph - you said we have to work with HTML WG, I don't
   think we can say anything about HTML in an updated RDFa 1.1

   Ralph: We are not going to get permission to publish RDFa 1.1
   without working with HTML WG.

   markbirbeck: I disagree with Manu's point that we should have more
   discussion before publishing something.
   ... In the end, commit-then-review may be the way to go forward.

   <ShaneM1> Remember that "proposals have momentum"

   markbirbeck: It is a convenient way of discussing things.

   Ralph: Feel free to do what you want with the editors draft, but
   they're not going to get WD status.

   markbirbeck: I think we're mainly discussing how to stop the
   fragmentation of the text.
   ... There is already some fragmentation - Shane's document and
   Philip's document...
   ... Why can't we create a document and then use it as a discussion
   point.
   ... Perhaps we should focus on generating something to the HTML5
   community to show them that we're working on these issues.
   ... It also stops fragmentation.

   Manu: What are we calling that document?

   markbirbeck: We talked about RDFa Core.

   Ralph: RDF Core means "the core RDF spec itself"

   markbirbeck: RDFa Core would contain nothing but the core processing
   rules.
   ... Maybe the other approach is to have one RDFa spec, but for that
   spec to be continually updated.
   ... Maybe the document should contain XHTML, HTML, SVG Tiny.
   ... Maybe it should include Data+RSS from Yahoo?
   ... Everything being deferred to the core section of the document?

   <Steven> I have to go now (not that I have done any more than lurk)

   markbirbeck: Maybe this document is more than just RDFa+XHTML...

   ShaneM1: My question is since the short name is rdfa-syntax - if we
   change the operational title, is it a process issue?

   Ralph: It could be done, but there are other issues.
   ... The longer we go trying to operate as an independent task force
   - the worse it will look for us.

   markbirbeck: We could talk about this on the mailing lists - which
   we've done.
   ... We could also generate a document to talk about.
   ... We should make this document look like what we'd like it to be.

   ShaneM1: Maybe Mark and I can work on a structure of the document
   offline?
   ... Our target audience might not find it acceptable.

   markbirbeck: We may want to focus on an "RDFa" document instead of
   several "RDFa in X" documents.

   Ralph: The RDFa IG notion is on the table - and that group will be
   involved in decisions on RDFa moving forward.

   markbirbeck: Where do LinkedData people come in?

   Ralph: They don't have a formal group yet, if pressed, they could be
   part of SWIG.
   ... SWIG has a practice of creating Task Forces - Healthcare/Life
   Science came out of that.

   markbirbeck: Wonder if there is a case for stating that RDFa has a
   place in Linked Data.

   Ralph: Good thought, but no formal structure for Linked Data.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Ben to prepare "how to write RDFa" screencast with
   fragment parser [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action05]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to author wiki page with charter template for
   RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases
   for Ivan. [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning
   [recorded in
   [33]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff
   [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in
   [35]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
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph find the statement on test suite copyright
   [recorded in
   [37]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker
   instance [recorded in
   [38]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML
   namespace [recorded in
   [39]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in
   [40]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]

     [31] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10
     [32] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09
     [33] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
     [34] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
     [35] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13
     [36] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14
     [37] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13
     [38] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
     [39] http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01
     [40] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15

   [DONE] ACTION: Manu create a wiki page for discussion of issue-214
   [recorded in
   [41]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]

     [41] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12

   [WITHDRAWN] ACTION: Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa"
   with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded
   in [42]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [End of minutes]
     _____________________________________________________

     [42] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [43]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([44]CVS log)
    $Date: 2009/06/11 16:40:27 $

     [43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [44] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2009 16:42:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 11 June 2009 16:42:31 GMT