- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:51:22 -0400
- To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
SemWeb BPD HTML Task Force 29 Oct 2004 [2]Agenda See also: [3]IRC log Attendees Present Ralph Swick, Jeremy Carroll, Dan Connolly, Ben Adida Regrets Mark Birbeck Chair Ben Scribe Ralph Previous: 2004-10-22 [9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0024.html Contents * Topics 1. Action review 2. Jeremy's XSLT2 implementation of RDF/A 3. Jeremy's Comments on RDF/A * Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________________ ACTION: Ben report back to HTML WG on our evaluation of RDF/A Action review ACTION BenA assesses impact of namespace and media type change on CC BenA: talked with Mike, CTO of CC ... happy to have an XHTML 2 solution but we expect adoption to not be immediate ... CC has to decide how to move to a notation that will be XHTML2-compliant and that is going to at least render correctly in current deployed browsers and ideally that would validate ... may adopt the current RDF/A syntax inside our recommended HTML BenA: ... regarding literals, considering Jeremy's comments it appears we are in fine shape ... we don't see a need for XML literals ... we do need plain literals <DanC> (hmm... is there an XHTML2 validation service yet?) JJC: do you care about having to duplicate content? BenA: I am a big supporter of not having to duplicate content, yes action complete ACTION BenA determine CC requirement with respect to literals -- complete (see above) ACTION BenA to find someone to determine requirement with respect to FOAF and literals BenA: will be contacting Dan Brickley action withdrawn, replaced with ACTION JJC below ACTION JJC to check nodeID and bnode issues -- completed ACTION: JJC contact Dan Brickley to determine requirement with respect to FOAF and literals ACTION Steven and Mark to add about="" to example 6.1 (CC) [10]http://www.formsplayer.com/notes/rdf-a.html appears to have last been modified on 2004-09-22 -- continues ACTION DanC: ask for contact from SHOE/DAML/OWL "how do I put this in my web page?" community -- continues DanC: what is the time window for getting a SHOE/DAML/OWL person into the discussion and up to speed? BenA: HTML WG meets f2f week after next and hopes to go to Last Call shortly thereafter JJC: want to talk about complexity. This may hurt the HTML WG schedule DanC: GRDDL does not depend on the HTML WG taking further action Ralph: I fully expect this TF to come back to GRDDL discussions once we've gotten our feedback to the HTML WG Jeremy's XSLT2 implementation of RDF/A [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Oct/att-0052 JJC: I just updated the XSLT2 implementation and now believe it to be a complete implementation of RDF/A except for the bnode() Xpointer scheme DanC: I suggest recruiting a reviewer, or at least an alpha tester ACTION: Ben test JJC's implementation on CC cases <jjc> (oh there's a bug to do with whitespace within XMLLiterals) JJC: the key goal of the implementation was to have a clear mapping from the document to the code ... the critical sections (4 and 5) correspond paragraph-by-paragraph <DanC> (hmm... is it worth putting the "simple rules using XPath expressions" in the RDF/A spec?) JJC: there are two transformations from the doc to the final XSLT2 code ... it's meant to be obvious where to change the code if the spec is changed Jeremy's Comments on RDF/A [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0047.html RDF/A review summary [Jeremy 2004-10-28] JJC: the I18N WG raised a formal objection to the RDF Core's decision on xml:lang in XML Literals <DanC> (my instinct would be to get the RDF/A spec to the point where the rules could be scraped from it, ala "ical RDF schema: derived from the RFC" [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-calendar/2004Mar/0007.html) JJC: RDF Core decided to simplify XML Literals so they were just like other datatypes w/o an xml:lang ... using <span> to add xml:lang back when necessary ... if RDF/A goes to Last Call as currently written the I18N folk are likely to again raise a strong objection DanC: I don't care much about the details until I hear someone actually using a feature ... RDF Core spent a year on the details of language tagging and I'm not aware of anyone using it ... people are creating new properties JJC: we have Jena users using xml:lang BenA: tempted to say this is not in our scope ... as the same problem occurs in RDF/XML JJC: within RDF/XML the authors are explicitly told that xml:lang is not in scope and if they want it they must include it explicitly ... whereas with XHTML the expectation is that xml:lang is in scope ... e.g. language-dependent stylesheets would be expected to work inside this XML markup DanC: consider the W3C translation system as a use case [14]http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/ ... I think Ivan Herman is the person responsible for the W3C translations database ... think he maintains that by hand, not by automated scraping ... I18N WG might be able to point to use cases ... we could point out to the HTML WG the risks of this current solution JJC: I have a solution, which doesn't require the HTML author to do anything more; the mapping (XSLT) adds the <span> RESOLVED to point out to HTML WG the risk of I18N objections to the RDF/A handling of xml:lang but that we feel a solution exists that requires no additional work for HTML authors JJC: regarding literals ... ... last week people were interested in having plain literals in element content [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0037 <DanC> datatypes + in-line plain literals JJC: my suggestion is to take the xpath text if there is other markup present; i.e. ignore the markup DanC: example would be more compelling if it used something other than <meta>, as <meta> is already special JJC: this would be easy to implement; didn't do it in order to stay strictly to the written spec ... two ways to denote a plain literal in element content ... 1. special datatype 2. separate attribute DanC: I prefer a separate attribute, as the type of the datatype attribute is QName Ralph: we could make a plain literal QName JJC: in RDF plain literals have a lang tag so they're not typed ... prefer separate attribute approach <DanC> (yes, "ugh" applies to almost all aspecs of datatypes in RDF.) <jjc> .//text() <jjc> takes the text() nodes of descendenents <DanC> yes, let's ask them to replace the metainfo module with RDF/A RESOLVED to propose to HTML WG a 'plain="true"' attribute for expressing plain literals in element content PROPOSE We find RDF/A a big step forward and encourage the HTML WG to use it in place of the 22 July metainformation module. Our detailed criticism of RDF/A is intended to helpfurther improve this work toward the long-standing needs of the RDF deployment community to mix semantic web data with HTML documents. (consensus among the 4 of us) <benadida> ACTION: BenA to write up a version of the above and send to list <DanC> Connolly 2nds that and trusts ben to stay in that neightborhood. JJC: there are quite a number of ways to determine subjects and objects and the objects are particularly complicated ... it's very hard to keep track of this all ... my implementation does keep track in an elegant way that is hugely inefficient ... the resulting complexity is too much for humans to understand and sufficiently hard that programs will frequently be wrong as well ... getting rid of the the predicate inheritance rules would help some ... the subject rules amount to 8 different ways to determine a subject ... this is a lot but not too bad ... in paragraph 4.4.3 there is a rule ... different treatment for link & meta elements than all other elements ... most of the examples in RDF/A actually produce more triples than the authors intend ... the current draft is good but not yet REC-quality ... it's not yet clear which rules need to be removed; this is a complex language design issue JJC: the essential idea of 4.4.3 introduces a huge complexity JJC: but I also like 4.4.3 as well RESOLVED: the current rules provide more options than needed and produce more triples than intended. We offer to work with the HTML WG to simplify the rules for determining resource-valued objects Discussion during f2f?: Ben: I could be available 8:30am-1:00pm EST on Monday Summary of Action Items ACTION: DanC to ask for contact from SHOE/DAML/OWL "how do I put ... this in my web page?" community [NEW] ACTION: Ben report back to HTML WG on our evaluation of RDF/A [NEW] ACTION: Ben test JJC's implementation on CC cases [NEW] ACTION: BenA to write up a version of the resolution on RDF/A ... and send to list [NEW] ACTION: JJC contact Dan Brickley to determine requirement ... with respect to FOAF and literals _________________________________________________________________ Minutes formatted by David Booth's [17]scribe.perl 1.90 ([18]CVS log) $Date: 2004/08/10 15:51:28 $ References 2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0048.html 3. http://www.w3.org/2004/10/29-swbp-irc 9. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0024.html 10. http://www.formsplayer.com/notes/rdf-a.html 11. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Oct/att-0052 12. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0047.html 13. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-calendar/2004Mar/0007.html 14. http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/ 15. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2004Oct/0037 16. http://www.timeanddate.com/ 17. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribe.perl 18. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/scribe.perl
Received on Friday, 29 October 2004 19:54:27 UTC