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

Re: Telecon Agenda - Thursday 22 October 2009, 1500 UTC

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:32:01 +0100
Message-ID: <640dd5060910220332q131e054dxd98c24fe1a3db67@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Hi Ivan,

It's not about 'enjoying' technical discussions over process-related
ones. If that were the case we wouldn't have any specifications. :)

But I think we need to consider whether RDFa in HTML has to be the
same as RDFa in XHTML, for the reasons I'll explain.

It may not have been obvious, but my list of topics prioritises the
main objections to RDFa from the proponents of Microdata.

Some background:

In my view, Microdata is a political proposal, cobbled together over a
weekend, for reasons best known to the author. (I have my own
theories, but that's not important.)

However, what if instead of using his editor powers to add whatever he
liked to HTML5, Hixie had proposed some changes to RDFa.

For example, in Microdata, you have to mark each item with @item. Even
if there is no 'type' for the item, you still need the attribute. Some
people might like that, and you could easily do the same with
@typeof="" in RDFa.

Except I looked at RDFa and discovered that @typeof="" doesn't
actually produce a bnode, when it should.

Hence putting that errata at the top of the list.

Additionally, in Microdata you can express relationships using full
URIs; what if Hixie had proposed to this group that we support that? I
for one would have agreed with him. I know Steven would too, since he
has mentioned the consistency of URIs and CURIEs in all attributes, a
few times in the past, long before Microdata was proposed.

So I suggest that although Hixie hasn't actually proposed it, we don't
do anyone any favours if we pretend that it's not important.

I won't go through all of my list, because I just wanted to explain
why these two were at the top, when in the past we've been
prioritising things like @profile; it's because I believe we are
sophisticated enough in our approach to embrace other people's
proposals...even if they haven't made them. :)

As to where we should do this; I think we should do it in RDFa+HTML.
We should put some effort into a backwards-compatible solution for
'URIs everywhere', and so what if RDFa in HTML 'leapfrogs' RDFa in



Mark Birbeck, webBackplane



webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number
05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street,
London, EC2A 4RR)

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> I am sorry to act as a new kid on the block. I am one, after all, as far
> as this group is concerned:-)
> I would like to have a clear agreement of what _this_ group wants to
> achieve. If we are talking about errata, that is one thing. But some of
> the issues in this list heading for an updated recommendation, some sort
> of an RDFa 1.1, because it definitely adds functionality. Although each
> of us prefers to have discussions on the technical contents, we have to
> have a clear decision on what can be realistically achieved in the
> remaining two months that this group is chartered for, and what are the
> possibilities and plans for beyond that.
> And to be more blunt: I do not believe it is realistic to plan for an
> RDFa1.1 for this WG. As I said on the RDFa API thread, with the
> publication path to follow, with a CR, ie, implementation requirements,
> etc, the remaining 2 months is simply not enough.
> Again, much I would prefer to dive into the technical discussions, well,
> we have to talk about formalities...
> Sorry:-)
> Ivan
> Mark Birbeck wrote:
>> Hi Manu,
>> I was going to flag up some of the work items that I think we need to
>> be keeping an eye on, and also suggest an order of priority.
>> The first is that @typeof="" should generate a bnode. I think we
>> discussed this, and even agreed an errata, but I can't find the
>> reference, so I thought I'd better raise it again.
>> Second is the use of 'URIs anywhere'; I think this is important for
>> the consistency of RDFa, and would also allow anyone who doesn't like
>> using CURIEs, or who wants to publish 'self-contained' markup snippets
>> that don't have prefix mappings, to do so.
>> After that, I think the discussion about a technique for bundling
>> tokens is next. That has been called the @profile discussion, but of
>> course that might not be the way to do it. But whatever we decide on,
>> I think this is important work for some of the people that are
>> starting to define vocabularies for authors to use, such as Yahoo!,
>> Google, the Good Relations vocabulary, and so on.
>> And then finally, the DOM API; I do think we need to do this, but I
>> think it comes lower down the list than these other things.
>> I'm proposing this list, so that each week, as we have our calls, if
>> there is any time left for features and design, we can make sure that
>> we allocate the discussion in order of agreed priority. So this is my
>> list -- does anyone else have such a list? And does anyone want to
>> disagree with the suggested order?
>> Regards,
>> Mark
>> --
>> Mark Birbeck, webBackplane
>> mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com
>> http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck
>> webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number
>> 05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street,
>> London, EC2A 4RR)
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> We have a telecon tomorrow, the agenda is below. Please review and
>>> add any items that you feel need to be discussed.
>>> ==========
>>> Thursday, October 22nd, 2009
>>> 1500 UTC, W3C Zakim bridge
>>> tel:+1.617.761.6200 conference code RDFA
>>> irc://irc.w3.org:6665/#rdfa
>>> Duration: 60 minutes
>>> Scribe: Zakim, pick a victim
>>> ==========
>>> Agenda:
>>> 1) Action Items
>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/10/15-rdfa-minutes.html#ActionSummary
>>> 2) Discuss and approve Shane's errata text
>>>   * Reserved word values and case-sensitivity[1]
>>>   * Updated errata on XMLLiteral values and canonical XML
>>> 3) 9 new Unreviewed XHTML Test Cases
>>>   * http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/test-suite/
>>>   * TCs: 134, 140, 142, 147, 154
>>> -- manu
>>> [1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Oct/0010.html
>>> --
>>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
>>> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>> blog: The Pirate Bay and Building an Equitable Culture
>>> http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2009/08/30/equitable-culture/
> --
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 10:33:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:33 UTC