- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:15:54 -0400
- To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
- Cc: public-swd-wg@w3.org
The minutes of today's RDF-in-XHTML Task Force meeting are now available as http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html A text snapshot follows. ---- [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ RDF in XHTML Task Force 04 Jun 2009 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jun/0010.html See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2009-05-28 [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-irc [4] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html Attendees Present Shane McCarron, Manu Sporny, Sam Ruby, Ralph Swick Regrets Ben Adida, Michael Hausenblas, Mark Birbeck Chair Manu Scribe Ralph, Manu Contents * Topics 1. Action Review 2. issue-214 3. Copyright for W3C Test Suites 4. Discussion order for HTML+RDFa issues 5. Start "Target of RDFa Processing Rules" discussion * Summary of Action Items _____________________________________________________ Action Review ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ben to author wiki page with charter template for RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in [12]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10] [12] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10 <msporny> [13]http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-ig-charter [13] http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-ig-charter ACTION: [DONE] Manu to go through and categorize issues and requirements that we should address going forward. [recorded in [14]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [14] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12 <msporny> [15]http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discus sion_Order [15] http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discussion_Order ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker instance [recorded in [16]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [16] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11 ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa" with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12 ACTION: [CONTINUES] Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases for Ivan. [recorded in [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09 ACTION: [CONTINUES] 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: [CONTINUES] Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [20] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11 ACTION: [CONTINUES] Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in [21]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13] [21] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13 ACTION: [CONTINUES] Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki [recorded in [22]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] [22] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14 ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML namespace [recorded in [23]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01] [23] http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01 ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in [24]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] [24] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15 issue-214 <Ralph> [25]issue-214 [25] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/214 Ralph: This issue was a comment that came during the SKOS Candidate Rec period. ... The WG decided that it was more of an editorial question for RDFa TF to consider. ... There has been a long thread over several years, Ben's aware of the thread... Ralph: We should consider providing community advice in the case where the same URI might be a piece of an RDF vocabulary or a target in an HTML document. ... In the case where the mimetype of the document is HTML, or application/rdf+xml ... in the case of RDFa, it's not so clear that an application can disambiguate between the two types of documents. ... You should not use the same URI for the name in an HTML document as well as a term in an RDF vocabulary. ... People shouldn't do <p id="foo" about="#foo"> ShaneM: I disagree ... The whole point of RDFa is to embed things in this way. ... I have a URI, which is interpreted in the context of the HTTP request header. ... A semantic web application will follow-your-nose that should take you to the definition of a vocabulary item. ... I'm going to prefer xml+rdf ... from a content negotiation perspective, the server should send back what the requester wants. ... If the request is rdf+xml, then it should extract the triples from the XHTML document and send those back as rdf+xml. Ralph: Interesting point. ... The old advice might not matter as much anymore? ... Eric Prudhommeaux might have something to say about this. Ralph: there might be use cases where the subject of a triple might well want to be a particular bit of HTML markup Manu: might be something to handle in a validator Manu: people might do id='foo' and about='foo' when they're doing vocabulary authoring ... it's nice to be able to drop a vocabulary term into a Web browser and see a document Ralph: How can we say something about the ID "foo" <p id="foo" about="#foo"> and not the about="#foo" Shane: and XML requires something of type ID in order for the fragment to be valie ... in general, id='foo' about='foo' always occurs when you want to bind triples to a block in a document ... particularly in definitions of terms ... when referring to a local definition of a term you'd have an ID and you'd bind to it using @about ... you might also refer to it in @resource Manu: maybe we should create a Wiki page and develop a best practice in this area ACTION: Manu create a wiki page for discussion of issue-214 [recorded in [26]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] Copyright for W3C Test Suites Shane: looking for advice on what are acceptable test suite copyrights Manu: specifically, is the MIT license sufficient? ACTION: Ralph find the statement on test suite copyright [recorded in [27]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13] <rubys> in general, MIT licensed code can be pulled into almost any codebase; the reverse is not necessarily true Discussion order for HTML+RDFa issues <msporny> [28]http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discus sion_Order [28] http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discussion_Order Manu: I'd taken action to propose a discussion order Sam: suggest moving " Requirement: RDFa signalling mechanism for XHTML+RDFa, HTML+RDFa, and how does mime-type affect that mechanism?" higher ... figure out what the signalling mechanism is ... html served as text/xml is interpreted differently by different browsers Manu: propose to move the signalling discussion after "target of RDFa processing rules" and before "Do we need to cut features from RDFa to support HTML+RDFa?" Shane: fine with me ... some of these items have been raised in email but I'm not persuaded they're really issues Manu: so move "RDFa signalling mechanism" to 2nd position Ralph: ok with me <rubys> if they aren't really issues, they should be able to be disposed of quickly. Start "Target of RDFa Processing Rules" discussion <msporny> [29]http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#The_target_of_RDFa_pro cessing_rules [29] http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#The_target_of_RDFa_processing_rules Manu: question is "on what do the RDFa processing rules operate?" ... e.g. on a DOM structure [or not] ... now we're trying to explain how this works across all languages ... and generate the same triples across all document [types] ... gets tricky when accounting for serialization issues ... goal is to find a set of rules that works on a parse tree or an abstract syntax tree rather than on a DOM ... so define the rules in a way not based on serialization of a specific language Shane: Mark has a clever way of thinking about this ... and is very persuasive :) ... as I understand it, Mark's model is that RDFa is at the application layer so whatever the underlying layer provides to the application is what should be worked on ... this solves the RDFa specification problem but doesn't solve the "I want the same triples when I give the same document content to different things" ... I don't see how we can control the structure of the _input_ to RDFa in a meaningful way ... will happen differently in legacy browsers, HTML5, new browsers, etc. ... I'm not optimistic that we'll find a way to guarantee the same triples everywhere Sam: if we can find a subset that _does_ give the same triples and note the other cases with a recommendation not to to those ... can't assume that the consumer respects the well-formed input requirement ... this requirement is routinely ignored Shane: ignored by user agents but not by tool chain processors Sam: wise to accept that some people will be processing this in browsers and give advice on what won't work there Shane: I do think we can restrict the language so that it has more predictable behaviours under different processing models Sam: e.g. if a single document has two names that differ only in case, that's probably wierd and don't do it Shane: yep, we just never considered that case in our prior discussions Manu: the test cases put on the mailing list are really good starting points ... we should be clear about what model the RDFa rules are operating on but I do not see a reason to strip out any rules ... Mark's position is that we can't control the input to the RDFa processing rules ... we can't control how things get put into a DOM; that's in the domain of the HTML WG ... so the RDFa processing rules ought to be restated in terms of _some_ incoming model ... RDFa might be used in something that has nothing to do with a DOM ... not a good idea to restrict RDFa to just a DOM ... if you run an HTML document through two different processors, one producing a DOM and the other not then I don't see how we can guarantee in all cases to produce the same triples <rubys> I agree with DOM as the answer to question #1... the problem is that Drupal is producing content with RDFa, and depending on the user agent, it may be processed differently. If you look at Phillip's tests there will be cases where they answers will differ, and some of these can't be solved. In some cases, the answer may be "don't do that". Example: if you define an XML literal and serve the content as text/html, be sure that you don't define any content that HTML5 processing rules will reorder or change in a way that can't be addressed by the parser. Manu: they _might_ be the same in some cases but I don't think we should try to guarantee the same triples in all cases Shane: from personal experience, some of our tests produced foreign elements that were removed from the DOM tree I was handed Shane: I don't have control over this; I can only work on what I'm handed Manu: can we come up with an example that shows how a well-formed document would generate different triples? Shane: comes up when embedding foreign stuff, e.g. SVG -- the SVG simply doesn't show up in the DOM ... there could be RDFa annotations on the SVG but I've lost them <msporny> Thanks for joining us Sam :) <msporny> and for your input. Shane: the XML literal case may well be the most glaring example ... there are several ways to address this and I don't have a strong preference for which we pick ... I sort-of like Mark's suggestion to change the default to not be an XML literal ... so you'd only produce an XML literal in a triple when you explicitly ask for one Manu: the side-effect of making it not automatically an XML literal is that it will process the content ... e.g. <spam about='foo'> inside the content would cause triples to be generated Shane: that's probably a corner case ... easier to change behavior sooner than later Manu: the reason for a change is to make XML literals the same between HTML and XHTML ... but there's a parallel discussion suggesting that it may be OK for the triples to differ given different input Shane: the core issue here is whether it makes any sense to generate XML literals in a non-XML context Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: Manu create a wiki page for discussion of issue-214 [recorded in [30]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [NEW] ACTION: Ralph find the statement on test suite copyright [recorded in [31]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13] [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to author wiki page with charter template for RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in [32]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10] [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa" with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded in [33]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [PENDING] ACTION: Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases for Ivan. [recorded in [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [PENDING] ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning [recorded in [35]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [PENDING] ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff [recorded in [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [PENDING] ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in [37]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 [38]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14] [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker instance [recorded in [39]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11] [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML namespace [recorded in [40]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01] [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in [41]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15] [32] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10 [33] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12 [34] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09 [35] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12 [36] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11 [37] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13 [38] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14 [39] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11 [40] http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01 [41] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15 [DONE] ACTION: Manu to go through and categorize issues and requirements that we should address going forward. [recorded in [42]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12] [42] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12 [End of minutes] _____________________________________________________ Minutes formatted by David Booth's [43]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([44]CVS log) $Date: 2009/06/04 18:14:03 $ [43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm [44] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2009 18:16:14 UTC