W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re 2: Telecon Agenda - April 5th 2012, 1500 UTC

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 11:44:53 +0200
Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F36B2AAC-605B-424D-8272-B246195AF080@w3.org>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
An additional point. Maybe we should publish a new version of the Primer draft. I have made some fairly significant changes lately, have adopted RDFa Lite, etc... it would be good if the real public references in /TR (eg, referred to from rdfa.info) were really using the latest version.

It requires a bit of administration with the webmaster, but nothing we cannot handle...

Ivan

On Apr 2, 2012, at 10:07 , Ivan Herman wrote:

> Manu,
> 
> I *hope* I can make it; I have some double bookings!
> 
> There are to other issues, that should be decided.
> 
> * http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/133
> 
>  It seems that there is an inconsistency in the spec, between the general (though normative) description and the formal processing steps. More exactly, the processing steps are not fully correct on one detail (see the mail). The tests, therefore the implementations, are based on the general description, ie, the processing steps should be updated.
> 
>  I do have a version of rdfa-core on my machine that has the necessary changed; I have never uploaded it via cvs, because it would require WG decision.
> 
> * http://www.w3.org/mid/99E2EC0D-5496-4FA3-9BF9-723473BA73C4@w3.org and the thread starting at 
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Feb/0064.html
> 
>  The issue is what the URI is for the 'licence' term: should it be 'cc' (that the whole world expect) or 'xhv', which was the old one? If we decide to move to 'cc', a number of test cases have to be changed (and implementations updated). We may also decide to make a split here, and use the 'xhv' for XHTML1 and 'cc' for everything else (to keep backward compatibility).
> 
> As for the Proposed Rec: we will have to have some strategy to get enough W3C member votes in for the proposal. This WG is staffed by many IE-s, which sort of backfires at this point...
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Ivan
> 
> On Apr 2, 2012, at 03:55 , Manu Sporny wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> The purpose of the call this week will be to get a bearing on where we
>> are in the Candidate Recommendation phase and to identify outstanding
>> issues, implementation status, and prepare for the Proposed
>> Recommendation phase.
>> 
>> Below is the preliminary agenda for our telecon. If you have any
>> additions or modifications to the agenda, please send them to the
>> mailing list or mention them on the telecon before we get started.
>> 
>> ==========
>> Thursday, April 5th, 2012
>> Time: 1400 UTC, 7am San Francisco, 10am Boston, 3pm London
>> W3C Zakim bridge, telecon code: RDFA (7332)
>>  SIP: zakim@voip.w3.org
>>  Phone US: +1.617.761.6200
>> irc://irc.w3.org:6665/#rdfa
>> Duration: 60 minutes
>> Scribe: Shane, Ivan, Ted, Steven, Niklas, Manu, Gregg
>> ==========
>> 
>> Agenda
>> ------
>> 
>> 1. Implementation status
>> 2. Outstanding issues
>>  * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Mar/0081.html
>>  * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Mar/0082.html
>> 3. Proposed Recommendation preparation
>> 
>> -- manu
>> 
>> --
>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
>> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>> blog: PaySwarm Website for Developers Launched
>> http://digitalbazaar.com/2012/02/22/new-payswarm-alpha/
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf







Received on Monday, 2 April 2012 09:43:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:20 GMT