- From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <oedipus@hicom.net>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:11:14 +0000
- To: public-xhtml2@w3.org
aloha!
minutes from today's XHTML2 telecon are available online at:
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html
and as plain text following my signature
the IRC log from the call is also available:
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-irc
please log any errors, omissions, mis-attributions (i'll get your voices
straight one of these days, mark and roland!) should be logged by
replying to this post on-list
reminder: there is a February 2008 Face2Face page-in-progress:
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/xhtml2/wiki/2007-02-Venice-FtF
and, yes, for those of you not on the call, we do have a wiki
gregory.
----------------------------------------------------------------
- DRAFT -
XHTML2 WG Weekly Teleconference
16 Jan 2008
Agenda
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Jan/0015
See also: IRC log [http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-irc]
Attendees
Present
+20876aabb, +386.8.aaaa, Alessio, Gregory_Rosmaita,
Mark_Birbeck, Roland, Shane_McCarron, Steven, markbirbeck, yamx
Regrets
Christine
Chair
Roland
Scribe
Gregory
Contents
* Topics
1. Modularization Transition
2. CURIES to Last Call
3. RDFa Module
* Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________________
<Steven> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/xhtml2/wiki/2007-02-Venice-FtF
<scribe> scribe: Gregory
<scribe> scribeNick: oedipus
<Roland> Gerrie Shults from HP joining
SP: 3 announcements: HP joining group again, 2) have at long last a
wiki (only one full page) (MarkUp/xhtml2/wiki); 3) made f2f page
... third announcement -- yahoo announced last week that new mobile
widget platform is based on XForms -- backs up a lot of what we've
been saying -- chose so as to enable platform to be directed to as
many devices possible, in the most appropriate manner -- in phase one
(transitional) but second will use straight XForms
<Steven> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/xhtml2/wiki/
<Steven> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/xhtml2/wiki/2007-02-Venice-FtF
RM: Selectors API - anything to report?
<Steven> http://mobile.yahoo.com/developers/roadmap
<markbirbeck> Shame that XML will never be used on the web, though. ;)
SP: webAPs have almost as many deliverables as we do -- at least 13
RM: 2 Web Apps groups going to merge
SP: part of review -- who will take up what
RM: Rich not here, so perhaps postpone ARIA issue discussion
... alessio will update wiki with details for f2f -- everyone planning
to attend
[note: everyone on call planning to attend]
AC: IWA Italy (host)
Yam: need to know for visa app
SP: populate wiki and let yam know
ACTION Alessio - add details to f2f wiki page
Modularization Transition
SP: sent an implementation request to RM and Shane -- in status of
doc, discovered that still talks about HTML WG rather than XHTML2 WG
-- needs change
... will send info to all necessary channels
CURIES to Last Call
RM: datatype, etc. discussion at last week's call -- any answers?
<Roland>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2007Mar/0038.html
SP: difference btw lexical value of CURIE and its value space
... my claim is lexical value is as described in spec, value space is
just URI -- think mark agreed, but shane dissented, but willing to let
it pass
RM: one more step -- pointing out that in Qnames talk about 2
components (2 seperate parts joined together for purpose) - value
space, but alos prior stage when have 2 different parts -- left with
mapping to URI plus suffix
SP: why would we need to do that
RM: point raised in email, if attempting to be backwards compatible
applies to us, too
Shane: posted to list on topic -
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Jan/0011.html
SP: my question to mark is - is there any sense in our being backwards
compatible with QNames -- problem: 2 CURIES that expand to same URI,
but prefix and suffix different -- not case in QName -- if same prefix
and suffix there is a one-to-one mapping; don't see value of triples
RM: wants us to be clearer on whatever we decide -- we're dealing with
specific case of QNames, not a general use of QNames -- if make
clearer and say value space final URI cannonized by whatever
cannonicalization thing supposed to use to compare 2 CURIES
MB: happy with that if Shane is
Shane: think i'm happy with that -- please refer to final paragraph
quote: Note that, as things stand right now, a CURIE used in a
document like
XHTML+RDFa will NOT be expanded in the DOM. If you are writing
portable
scripts today, you will need to do that expansion yourself. I think
that, given Steven and Mark's arguments, you MUST do this expansion if
you are going to attempt to do anything with CURIEs in a portable
script. If, on the other hand, you are just writing a script for your
own content, you could easily operate on the literal values, since you
know what the prefixes and references mean.
Shane: now, scripts are effecting DOM
RM: crack open and convert to URIs
Shane: does nothing to help write script looking for roles
SP: script uses these parsers -- include script and API gives you the
different bits; libraries for CURIES that do expansion for you --
don't query DOM to "give me this" but ask the API
... agree with last paragraph -- not automatically in DOM -- have to
construct yourself or use something that constructs it for you
[scribe's note -- GJR mistook MB for RM repeatedly)
RM: who will reply to tell what we will do
SP: candidates?
RM: the 3 people involved in the dialog
Shane: i can do it
<ShaneM> ACTION: Shane to add text about expanding CURIEs into URIs in
scripting. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action01]
SP: definitive reference for transition from IRI to what goes over
wire
<ShaneM> ACTION: Shane to respond to submitter of question about value
space of CURIEs and their relation to the value space of qnames.
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action02]
<Steven> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt
RM: CURIES issue 8010
<Roland>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2007JanMar/0051
Shane: we've already done this eight months ago
RM: final one on list also done?
<Roland>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2007AprJun/0000
"When a CURIE is used in an XML grammar, and the prefix on the CURIE
is omitted, then the prefix MUST be interpreted as the current default
XML namespace."
Shane: was it our intent to remove ambiguity (he says "flexibility")
and answer is a resounding YES -- i replied to norm on this
SP: we do mean current namespace (in reference to NormW's last
comment) -- must be interpreted as if had prefix of current default
XML namespace
Shane; draft change so can't have non-prefixed CURIES -- have to
define prefix
<Steven> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-curie-20071126/
"When CURIES are used in a non-XML host language, the host language
MUST provide a mechanism for defining the mapping from the prefix to
an IRI. A host language MAY provide a mechanism for defining a default
prefix value. In such a host language, if the prefix is omitted from a
CURIE, the default prefix value is used. The concatenation of the
prefix associated with a CURIE and its reference MUST be an IRI [IRI].
The CURIE prefix '_' is reserved. For this r
SP: mark, you said we made more flexible
MB: both scenarios XML Schema uses default NS, XSLT uses none --
asking if removed that, we didn't -- if allow host language to define
prefix, have SPARQL if not have RDF
... second question - addressed as well
"The default prefix? Do you not mean the default namespace?
MB: host language MAY is wording
SP: default prefix is issue
Shane: if a language mapping permits defaults, it will define
mechanism, if not, the language will not permit it
SP: if language doesn't support default prefixes, production for CURIE
wrong - prefix not optional
Shane: not really -- syntax still right
MB: some kind of API? here are a whole lot of mappings, here is a
CURIE, please tell me what the IRI is -- host language needs means of
hosting and defining the CURIE through API -- language should inhibit
the format that it doesn't like and not even call the API
Shane: arbitrary rules for prefix mapping -- can't have generic prefix
mapping anyway -- there is no default prefix that is the rule
MB: latest editors' draft -- slightly out-of-date compared with RDFa
-- perhaps we need to reword
<markbirbeck> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies
Shane: shouldn't be anything generic in RDFa that would cause problem
unless something changed in last round of edits, which hasn't been
made public
s/RM: latest/MB: latest/
MB: whether define mapping to use for default prefix and when define
way for authors to override that are 2 seperate things
... need another draft
RM: objective is to issue LC draft
... can we get these cleared this week so can make decision to go to
LC next week?
MB: cleared -- think specific comments resolved/answered
<ShaneM> ACTION: Shane to reconcile CURIE draft with CURIE RDFa text
so the processing model is consistent and the rules about default
prefix processing are complete. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action03]
RM: draft ready for LC in time to review before next meeting
<ShaneM> ACTION: Shane to produce a CURIE last call candidate for next
week's call. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action04]
RM: done all can do today on CURIES -- any other issues?
[silence]
RDFa Module
<Roland>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-wg/2007AprJun/0001.html
RM: first item from last spring
<Roland> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml-rdfa-20070402/
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-wg/2007AprJun/0003.html
<Roland>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-wg/2007AprJun/0008.html
"Two quick points noted by the CC folks: 1) xmlns still not
supported.... darn DTDs, right? What's the path to fixing the W3C
validator in this regard? Does it have to be schema-based? 2) it seems
the document must be served as application/xhtml+xml... but XHTML 1.1
should be servable as text/html, right? Is there a deeper issue here
that I don't understand?"
Shane: done something really clever -- group member took collection of
test cases and integrated them into a web page with ajax backend stuff
that allows for easy browsing and use of tests -- try to find link for
that
... decent approach to testing -- i think; don't know how to run tests
against RDF
MB: could use extended version of Manu's test suite locally
<Steven> http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/rdfa-test-harness/
Shane: issues resolving references for URIs due to SPARQL queries
Shene: rules for dealing with test cases? not normative part of spec
SP: no, not normative, but part of transition to PR
... issue CR spec with test suite -- here's CR spec, here's test
suite, and then use to prove have 2 implementations
Shane: isn't a test suite document -- just bag of tests tell people to
use
... should draft reference drafts or part of transition announcement
SP: part of transition announcement
RM: near LC of RDFa
Shane: WG needs to approve LC draft once there is a document --some
strange outstanding issues that need to be resolved
RM: none of items on list for modularization are still pertinent, but
will look through
Shane: they are ALL closed off; implementation report, as part of most
recent draft produced last week (thought would use for CR request)
SP: i did
Shane: updated M12n candidate for CR transition -- you refer to last
editors' draft, but that's not what we are pushing for CR
... only thing changed recently is "prose versus implementation" --
should add text to clarify there is a prose spec and implementations,
if inconsistencies, prose wins
... didn't agree to change MUST to SHOULD in M12n, just Role
RM: not my recollection
Shane: changed in role and considered changing in access; argued that
can't change in M12n -- no one thought of implications of importing
all attributes in a namespace
RM: think discussed in november
... relaxed constraint for Role for ARIA
SP: yes
Shane: agree we would do in role, but not in M12n
RM: have to change in M12n -- could be interpreted as change that
could push back to LC -- will try and find pointer
GJR: think on second day of f2f
http://www.w3.org/2007/11/09-xhtml-minutes
Shane: not even sure where to change
quote: <markbirbeck> When @role appears without a namespace in another
language, it is because that language has added it to its own
language. Just like @class in SVG is *not* @class in HTML, but they
have given it the same semantics to make it easier for people to use
... Steven: I would prefer just one, with an ENglish sentence "Rule
3.1.5 of modularization does not apply to this attribute" or somesuch
Roland: Good
[scribe's note - Roland's comment "good" from minutes
rssagent, draft minutes
rssagent, draft minutes
<ShaneM> steven.... M12N says this: <p>Each of the attributes defined
in an XHTML attribute collection
<ShaneM> is available for use when
<ShaneM> their corresponding module is included in an XHTML Host
Language or an
<ShaneM> XHTML Integration Set. In such a
<ShaneM> situation, the attributes are available for use in the
definition
<ShaneM> of elements that are NOT
<ShaneM> in the XHTML namespace when they are referenced using their
<ShaneM> namespace-qualified identifier (e.g.,
<code>xhtml:class</code>).
<ShaneM> The semantics of the attributes remain the same regardless of
whether
<ShaneM> they are referenced using their qualified identifier or not.
<ShaneM> <strong>It is an error to use an XHTML namespace-qualified
attribute on elements from the XHTML Namespace.</strong>
<ShaneM> </p>
<ShaneM> or roland. Is that where you think there should be a change?
<Steven> Thanks Gegory!
<Steven> Gregory
no problem, steven!
steven, are you going to push the minutes -- it's no bother to me if i
do
<Steven> As you like
<Steven> If you volunteer :-)
aye, aye, cap'n!
steven, do you know to whom the mystery numbers belong?
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Shane to add text about expanding CURIEs into URIs in
scripting. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Shane to produce a CURIE last call candidate for next
week's call. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Shane to reconcile CURIE draft with CURIE RDFa text so
the processing model is consistent and the rules about default prefix
processing are complete. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Shane to respond to submitter of question about value
space of CURIEs and their relation to the value space of qnames.
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-xhtml-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________________
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 15:11:26 UTC