Re: Telecon Agenda - 4th March 2010, 1500 UTC

On 2010-3-4 04:07 , Manu Sporny wrote:
> On 03/03/2010 12:09 PM, Mark Birbeck wrote:
>> I have to send my apologies for tomorrow -- I don't know if that
>> affects your agenda.
>>
>> (Sorry about that, but it can't be avoided.)
> 
> I'll review your proposal again and make sure I understand the
> differences between it and my proposal along with the effects that it
> will have on ISSUE-11 and try to drive the discussion on ISSUE-1
> tomorrow. I think I have a good handle on your blog post, but we'll see
> if that is actually the case during the telecon tomorrow. :)
> 
> Regarding ISSUE-11 and ISSUE-1, I believe that I tend to agree with you
> more than disagree - we don't want a purely follow-your-nose solution to
> be the primary mechanism. For example, if a @profile document
> disappears, we want to give RDFa processors the option of getting the
> prefix declarations from a different source.
> 
> We do want to give RDFa processors the option of short-circuiting the
> profile mechanism for well-known profile documents. So, the primary mode
> of operation for Google's vocabulary for the Google RDFa processors may
> be to follow-your-nose once, parse the vocabulary document once, but
> then pull the prefix mappings from a data store of some kind every 2nd,
> 3rd, 4th, etc. time the @profile or @vocab elements are mentioned.
> 

I am sorry Manu, I do not understand what you mean


> The default may even be to never follow-your-nose. For example, Google
> may hard code their vocabulary prefixes in their RDFa processors -
> giving processor writers this flexibility may be okay as long as we're
> clear that the triples that an RDFa processor generates must always be
> generated as if the @profile/@vocab document were de-referenced and the
> prefixes loaded out of the @profile/@vocab document.
> 

That I think I would not like (or I misunderstand you). This would mean
that an RDFa document, when interpreted via Google, would yield a
different set of triples than when run through, say, the distiller. In
effect, that would mean that google would control what other
implementations would have to use to make it interoperable and I do not
think that is o.k.

Ivan


> Mark, if you could read the minutes tomorrow and respond with your
> thoughts fairly soon after the telecon, that would be helpful. I have to
> start editing the @profile everywhere proposal in the next week for HTML
> WG, so it would be good to know if the group has objections to the
> discussion we have on the telecon tomorrow.
> 
> -- manu
> 

-- 

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
vCard  : http://www.ivan-herman.net/HermanIvan.vcf