Re: RDFa Meeting minutes...

On Sep 30, 2010, at 18:46 , Shane McCarron wrote:

> Honestly, it almost never changes.  But it's not like there is an RSS feed that would tell you.  Regardless, I think it is outside of our scope AND A BAD IDEA to try to define interesting sets of schemes so you can identify that something is a URI or not within the context of a plain literal.  Its just a bad idea.

Well, to be fair, _we_ do not define what an interesting set is, IETF does. We just consume it. But I take your point, of course.

> 
> The real issue here is that some organizations in the wild are treating plan literals as a rdf:resource when, in fact, they are really just a string.  

Right.

> This is angels on the head of a pin stuff, and no one outside of the semantic web activity is going to care.  Nobody.  Someone with an RDF hat needs to tell these organizations that a string is not a resource, and explain it in very small words peppered with sexy terms like 'knowledge engine'.  What you can't do is say 'a string is not a URI in the same way that a number is not a Numeral'.  No one outside of a 4th grade math class or a PhD program is going to grok it.

Well... that is the problem. This is something we may have to hide this behind the syntax for most users.

> 
> The right thing to do is to get them to use <link rel='whatever' href='URI'> instead of <meta>.  @href, @src, and @resource take URIs and that's what they should be doing.   It isn't any more work for their consumer base to do this instead of using meta.  Every uses link for stylesheets and other stuff already.  Its fine.  Its safe.

Failed and tried. At various places. 

The point is, as you say, Google or Facebook does not _really_ care. They do not really care about correct RDF. Facebook only cares about the few terms they can use in their application, and they do not really care whether those terms could be, say, integrated with other RDF terms somewhere else, because that is not part of their business model. Ie, they go with the flow of their own user base to whom they cannot (or do not want to?) explain why, in some cases, they are asked to use @href and <link> rather than @content and <meta>...

Sigh. As I said on the call I do not LIKE this feature. But, against my instincts, I still have the feeling it would be useful to have this; and I am willing to compromise if it helps adoption of RDFa. At the end of the day what really counts (for me) is that RDFa content generated by all these places smoothly integrate with a more general Web of data...

Ivan



> 
> On 9/30/2010 11:41 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> On Sep 30, 2010, at 17:33 , Shane McCarron wrote:
>> 
>>> Right - but I thought the root RFC would be interesting in light of the discussion.  That list can change AT ANY TIME.  If we decided to try to make rules that were dependent on knowing that list, a conforming processor would need to read that list from time to time.
>> 
>> True. And, an installation would have to read the content of the file (via crontab or something similar) say, once a day. Which is an extra pain on an implementation:-(
>> 
>> Having said that: do we have an idea how often these things change? Or is there some sort of a notification service by IETF for something like that?
>> 
>> Sigh...
>> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>>> On 9/30/2010 10:28 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>>>> Actually, the list of registered URI schemes is at
>>>> 
>>>>  http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html
>>>> 
>>>> Ivan
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 30, 2010, at 17:19 , Ivan Herman wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> ... are at:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2010-09-30
>>>>> 
>>>>> Note that we had two issue resolutions, but several people were missing. I think that we should consider those resolutions accepted and the issues closed unless there is an objection within 48 hours.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There was also a discussion on the literal->uri issue. We agreed we would _not_ close the issue, but the discussion is ongoing...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ----
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> ----
>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
>>> Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
>>> ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ----
>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
> Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
> ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
> 
> 


----
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