- From: Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:18:57 +0200
- To: "public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf.w3.org" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html Steven Now also in monochrome text below this line! ____________________________________________ - DRAFT - RDF in XHTML TF weekly teleconference 21 Jun 2005 See also: [2]IRC log [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-irc Attendees Present Steven, Ben, Mark Regrets Chair Ben Adida Scribe Steven Contents * [3]Topics 1. [4]GRDDL Stuff 2. [5]Proofreading Ben's reply 3. [6]Bnodes 4. [7]IPTC 5. [8]Interpreting author meaning * [9]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________________ <scribe> Scribe: Steven Absent: Ralph, DanBri GRDDL Stuff Ben: I talked with DanC this week about GRDDL ... we would like to add a GRDDLY transform somewhere <MarkB_> Ben asked if the XHTML schema would live at the namespace URL address. <MarkB_> Steven said no decision had been taken yet. Steven: Maybe ... depends on content negotiation Ben: we could specify a GRDDL transform in the head of the HTML doc that lives at the end of the NS URI Steven: Sounds fine Proofreading Ben's reply Ben: Is my usage of RDF:bag OK? Mark: We changed the inheritance rules, and haven't yet redrafted the RDF/A document ... the example you gave had nested elements in an about, and I'm not sure if that was the final version Steven: I am sure we agreed to inherit the about Mark: I need to check ... especially check the use cases in the rdf/a document ... IPTC are thinking of adopting rdf/a ... one of the examples that someone from IPTC showed asked how we were going to do lists ... this was one of the reasons I wanted to put the rdf:bag stuff on hold ... A new requirement from IPTC is the ability to use qnames in the object as well as the properties ... and I think we do need to think about the bag/list stuff ... to avoid repetition ... One possibility is to rephrase the example that uses bags Ben: can we give you an action? Mark: Yes <benadida> ACTION: Mark to check edge cases of inheritance in RDF/A [recorded in [10]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action01] Mark: If those are OK, we can tweak the example Ben: I would like to resolve it before we reply, if possible Mark: Part of the requirement from IPTC is to keep the markup short ... and consistency between how you refer to object and subject ... We could use a special character in hrefs, such as "[" to mark qnames in href, or different attributes for the two cases, such as href and qref Ben: This is for brevity? Mark: Yes, because their use cases adds MASSES of metadata ... and apparently in the WAI area this is also an issue ... One way would be to do something special with meta and link, such as adding extra attributes, but not generalise those attributes, allowing them only on those elements. Ben: I think it would be good if IPTC adopted this, so we should consider their requirements <scribe> ACTION: Mark to create an rdf/a wiki [recorded in [11]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action02] Bnodes Ben: I am convinced, I appreciate your summary [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jun /0010.html [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jun/0010.html Ben: But would like more feedback from other members of the TF <benadida> ACTION: Ben to put together the "ACID" test for XHTML2 RDF/A [recorded in [13]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action03] IPTC Mark: Another IPTC requirement ... was that they would have many attributes from different namespaces on one element [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jun /0024.html [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jun/0024.html Mark: we could make any 'foreign' attribute a predicate ... this would then work with other attributes within XHTML2 ... such as media type Ben: This sounds a little worrying Steven: It might break backwards and forwards compatibility ... since attributes might mean different things between different versions of XHTML2 Mark: Well, it's only metadata; it shouldn't matter if it gets added to the triple store, even if it means something else as well ... the problem is working out what the content of the foreign attribute is Ben: I won't be able to come to the IPTC coordination meeting in July ... Eric Miller will be there Mark: I have already talked with Eric about it Steven: So have I; don't know if I can/will be there Mark: Not clear for me either Ben: We should coordinate with Eric <scribe> ACTION: Ben chat to Eric about IPTC [recorded in [15]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action04] Mark: Their issues are soluble; their higher level issue is whether to use XHTML2 ... instead of their in-house language Interpreting author meaning [16]http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-metaAttributes.html#sec_23.2. [16] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-metaAttributes.html#sec_23.2. Ben: The question is does the wording imply that a rel= implies an rdf statement ? Mark: Well, the idea is that you are making RDF statements whether you like it or not Steven: Would you like to replace "The metadata attributes can be used to generate RDF statements." with ... The metadata attributes represent RDF statements. Ben: Yes, that would be fine. I thought it might just be a wording issue ... It is basically to do with author intent ... whether they really meant to say what we will extract in rdf triples ... Are there examples where the author wouldn't be generating rdf? Steven: Well rel="next" can be used by the user agent to automatically go to the next document ... and the author may not have been thinking rdf ... but I see no harm in this also representing rdf Ben: I want to avoid the situation where there could be any ambiguity in whether the author really meant what is in the markup <danbri> (vmtf overrunning...) <benadida> please join us! Mark: XHTML2 reserves all unprefixed values Ben: So any prefixed values mean nothing in XHTML2, and can only be interpreted as RDF Steven: I think we need to say that there is an equivalence regardless of prefix ... I don't see why it matters Mark: I'm trying to think of how to word it without being too proscriptive (for instance to allow flexibility in the use of rel="next") Ben: That brings us to the question of DanBri's schema, and our action item Steven: Well, most of the questions just bring up questions in my mind, so I would rather discuss it Ben: We will discuss it next week then ... Steven/Mark, would you please send suggested wording for 23.2 to the mailing list? Steven: OK <scribe> ACTION: Steven send wording for 23.2 to mailing list [recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action05] <benadida> Steven, can you generate the minutes? Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: Ben chat to Eric about IPTC [recorded in [18]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action04] [NEW] ACTION: Ben to put together the "ACID" test for XHTML2 RDF/A [recorded in [19]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action03] [NEW] ACTION: Mark to check edge cases of inheritance in RDF/A [recorded in [20]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action01] [NEW] ACTION: Mark to create an rdf/a wiki [recorded in [21]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action02] [NEW] ACTION: Steven send wording for 23.2 to mailing list [recorded in [22]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/21-swbp-minutes.html#action05] [End of minutes] output] [27] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 15:19:10 UTC