W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > December 2008

meeting record: 2008-12-04 RDFa telecon

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:28:19 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20081204122643.054793e8@127.0.0.1>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org,public-swd-wg@w3.org

The record of today's RDF-in-XHTML Task Force telecon is available:

   http://www.w3.org/2008/12/04-rdfa-minutes.html

A text snapshot follows.

----

                        RDF-in-XHTML Task Force

04 Dec 2008

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Dec/0005.html

   See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2008-11-20

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/04-rdfa-irc
      [4] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html

Attendees

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

   Regrets
          Michael

   Chair
          Ben

   Scribe
          Ralph

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Action Items
         2. @prefix
     * Summary of Action Items
     _____________________________________________________

   Manu: what happens after end of December? Keep meeting?

   Ralph: SWD WG expects to resolve to ask for SKOS CR transition by 16
   December and then I will ask for a 4-month extension to SWD WG
   charter
   ... this would allow us to formally continue to talk about RDFa
   futures
   ... on a personal level, I think it would be a mistake to change
   RDFa until there is clear support for a proposed change within the
   HTML WG

   Manu: it would be nice to be able to say "here is what we think
   should be done"
   ... especially for the microformats community
   ... we'd be in a stronger position w.r.t. conversations with
   microformats if we said we think @prefix and external profiles are a
   good direction

   Ben: what's the goal of such a statement? would you hope that people
   start to use RDFa with @prefix?

   Manu: yes, I think the community is stuck
   ... this has to do with vocabulary development
   ... the community is currently spending a lot of time on issues that
   RDFa already solves

   Ben: I think it works better to have a proposal with community
   support to present to W3C rather than to expect W3C to pull the
   community

   Shane: we do talk about HTML5 a lot but it doesn't exist yet -- it's
   only a Working Group

   Ben: there are features of HTML5 that browsers do currently deploy

   Shane: none of these deployed features have anything to do with
   microformats

   Ben: call it whatever; we know there is desire to deploy RDFa in
   HTML without @xmlns
   ... in the end, we'll have the same proposal for HTML
   ... so the thing we ought to do is show how to deploy RDFa in HTML4
   now, get it to validate, etc.

   Manu: yep

   <ShaneM> topics - validation in non-xml documents, definition of
   non-prefixed items, changing of default prefix on the fly

   <ShaneM> @prefix SOLVES the problem of validating in non-xml
   documents. it is INDEPENDENT of the other two topics IMHO

   <ShaneM> the ability to extend the collection of non-prefixed terms
   is interesting, but NOT REQUIRED.

   <ShaneM> changing the default prefix on the fly is a CHANGE to RDFa
   overall, independent of whether a document is XML or not, and
   whether it uses @prefix or not

   <ShaneM> hmm - that might not be true. I think you MUST use @prefix
   if you want to change the default CURIE prefix.

   -> [9]Tuesday SWD WG telecon discussion of charter extension

      [9] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#item06

Action Items

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

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

   ACTION: [DONE] Shane to update the errata document to reflect that
   step 6 has extra text about a new subject - also respond to Johan
   who sent private mail, copying the task force. [recorded in
   [11]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action15

   ACTION: [PENDING] Ben to add public-rdfa examples to wiki and think
   of slightly improved top-level organization [recorded in
   [12]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]

     [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action11

   Ben: I've done part of this, still need to update wiki

   ACTION: [PENDING] Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa"
   with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded
   in [13]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]

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

   Ben: I've made a bit of progress on this
   ... reactions to the new wiki layout?

   Manu: new layout is better than the old

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

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

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

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

   Manu: I've been hoping to implement it first :)

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

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

   <msporny> [17]http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/bitmunk-case-study/

     [17] http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/bitmunk-case-study/

   Manu: I wrote a draft but Ivan wants a rewrite
   ... draft explains what our company is doing
   ... Ivan would like this draft posted as a longer story and a
   shorter version for the use case wiki

   ACTION: [PENDING] Manu write the perl code for Slashdot. [recorded
   in [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]

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

   Manu: basically modifying their templates but it's a bit more
   involved
   ... adding SIOC

   Ben: how about roping Steve Williams from digg into this?
   ... perhaps just tell him what you're thinking
   ... digg is also thinking about SIOC
   ... so showing them your vocabulary ideas could be a useful trigger

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@prefix

   Ben: Mark has a draft blog post on @prefix

   Shane: there are several topics and they're independent
   ... we could come up with credible solutions on pieces
   ... 1. defining prefix mappings in non-XML grammars
   ... we've proposed @prefix and a syntax; everyone seems to be
   onboard, with some semantic extensions

   Ralph: do the inheritance rules for @prefix exactly match those for
   @xmlns?

   Shane: I was looking at default namespaces as they relate to CURIEs
   ... that's a separate topic

   Ben: there seemed to be some different between HEAD and BODY rules
   ... did I read too much into the discussion?
   ... given that HTML allows metadata in HEAD ...

   Shane: at that time we were talking about using <link @rel='prefix'
   ...> and that's a separable issue

   Ben: so current @prefix thinking is that inheritance works exactly
   like @xmlns?

   Shane: yes

   Ben: I think we could agree on a syntax like @prefix='a=URI1 b=URI2
   ...'

   Manu: there was a notion that @prefix might hold more than just what
   is in this document
   ... there was also a question of what happens in @prefix='URI'
   ... i.e. default prefixes, or a vocabulary that could be pulled-in
   to define other prefixes

   Ben: pulling in another vocabulary wouldn't conflict with this
   syntax

   <ShaneM> [23]http://rdfa.info/wiki/RDFainHTML4#Prefix_Mappings

     [23] http://rdfa.info/wiki/RDFainHTML4#Prefix_Mappings

   Shane: the wiki page supports these sorts of extensions
   ... could debate whether it makes sense to redefine the default
   prefix

   Ben: I agree the three items under 'Future Handling' can be
   considered separately
   ... Mark was thinking about something that would pull in a local
   vocabulary for one section of a document

   Shane: want to separate the topics; validating v. changing the
   extensibility model of RDFa

   Ben: I believe there is consensus on the first bullet;
   @prefix='prefix=URI'
   ... I don't see consensus on the second bullet @prefix='=URI'

   Manu: microformats added bullets 2 and 3 because we didn't feel
   @profile was the place to extend RDFa functionality
   ... this is more in the 3rd bullet; extensibility via @prefix or via
   @profile
   ... the issue of setting the default namespace is in both worlds

   Ben: if we want to make it easy to markup common formats, such as a
   page on a social network, will we want to be able to pull terms from
   multiple vocabularies?
   ... if so, the way to simplify this is not by defining lots of
   prefixes but to include pre-packages bundles of terms

   Manu: so maybe the 2nd bullet is unnecessary

   Ben: yes, 2nd could be subsumed in 3rd
   ... but 2nd is also a trivial generalization of 1st bullet
   ... however, this also makes @prefix do more than @xmlns [which we
   might not want]
   ... I like simplifying the social network bundle of terms case

   Manu: I can't think of a strong use case for bullet 2 given that we
   implement 1 and 3

   Ben: right, could have a bundle that only uses 1 vocabulary, so
   little marginal value to bullet 2

   Manu: bullet 2 came before we'd thought out bullet 3 completely

   Shane: I don't agree with Mark's approach; I think it's overly
   simplistic
   ... it doesn't takes advantage of the essential RDF-ness of the
   environment
   ... and it doesn't really address the microformat case in a way that
   makes it easy to extend XMDT

   <ShaneM>
   [24]http://rdfa.info/wiki/RDFa_Vocabularies#Discovering_new_unprefix
   ed_CURIEs

     [24] http://rdfa.info/wiki/RDFa_Vocabularies#Discovering_new_unprefixed_CURIEs

   Shane: Manu wrote a separate proposal ^^
   ... making it easy to markup microformat definitions in a way that
   defines vocabulary terms
   ... whatever we do here should be grounded in RDF

   Ralph: yay Shane!

   Shane: unless he's changed his approach, Mark was defining a way to
   map prefixes to URIs
   ... this is using xmlns to define macros, rather than using RDF to
   define vocabularies
   ... vocabulary terms need to be grounded in URIs to allow a
   follow-your-nose processing engine to follow the URIs

   Ben: the intermediate document could be RDF

   Shane: but Mark hasn't proposed this

   Manu: Mark was just showing a technically nifty way to use @prefix
   to expand terms without having to consult an external document
   ... but we recognize it would also be helpful to be able to provide
   an external RDF document that defines prefixes
   ... I think Mark was opposed to having to load these external
   documents

   Shane: I understand why it might be unattractive to _have_ to load
   an external document to understand unprefixed CURIEs
   ... RDF interpretation requires dereferencing prefix mappings, which
   I maintain has to be done anyway

   Ben: Mark was talking about bundles of vocabularies which seems to
   me to require external documents

   Shane: Mark had a syntax for doing this inline in the document, but
   I don't know why you'd want to bundle this into every document
   ... Mark did write that this _can_ be embedded locally if there was
   a consistent syntax

   Ben: I see little value in such embedding

   Shane: our debate should be about how to derive the meaning, not
   about the syntax

   Ben: so I think we have consensus about @prefix='p1=u1 p2=u2 ...'
   ... and that @prefix='=u1' seems not to have value
   ... and @prefix='u1' may have value and should be further
   investigated

   [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

   [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to add public-rdfa examples to wiki and think
   of slightly improved top-level organization [recorded in
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa"
   with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded
   in [26]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Jeremy to demonstrate GRDDL with XHTML/RDFa once
   the NS URI is set up. [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action03]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Manu talk with Jamie McCarthy about an AskSlashdot
   piece [recorded in
   [28]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
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Manu write the perl code for Slashdot. [recorded
   in [30]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning
   [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff
   [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in
   [33]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
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in
   [35]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
     [26] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
     [27] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action03
     [28] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action04
     [29] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09
     [30] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
     [31] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
     [32] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
     [33] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13
     [34] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14
     [35] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15

   [DONE] ACTION: Shane to update the errata document to reflect that
   step 6 has extra text about a new subject - also respond to Johan
   who sent private mail, copying the task force. [recorded in
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]

     [36] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action15

   [End of minutes]
     _____________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [37]scribe.perl version 1.133
    ([38]CVS log)
    $Date: 2008/12/04 17:27:05 $

     [37] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [38] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2008 17:28:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:55 UTC