15:56:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfa
15:56:30 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc
15:56:36 <Ralph> Meeting: RDF-in-XHTML Task Force
15:56:40 <Ralph> zakim, this will be rdfa
15:56:40 <Zakim> ok, Ralph; I see SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
16:00:09 <Ralph> -> http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html previous 2008-02-28
16:00:27 <Ralph> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0071.html
16:00:38 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has joined #rdfa
16:00:39 <msporny> Ralph, I can scribe today if you'd like...
16:00:49 <Zakim> SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has now started
16:00:52 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
16:00:52 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
16:00:56 <Zakim> +Ralph
16:01:09 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has left #rdfa
16:01:17 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has joined #rdfa
16:01:30 <markbirbeck> zakim, random gibberish to see if I'm connected.
16:01:30 <Zakim> I don't understand you, markbirbeck
16:01:35 <Zakim> +??P21
16:01:41 <msporny> ha...
16:01:48 <msporny> zakim, I am ??P21
16:01:48 <Zakim> +msporny; got it
16:01:57 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
16:01:57 <Zakim> the conference code is 7332 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
16:02:27 <Zakim> + +0208761aaaa
16:02:27 <benadida> benadida has joined #rdfa
16:02:33 <markbirbeck> zakim, i am aaaa
16:02:33 <Zakim> +markbirbeck; got it
16:03:04 <Zakim> +Ben_Adida
16:03:33 <Ralph> Regrets: Michael, Simone
16:03:45 <Ralph> Regrets+ Shane
16:04:04 <benadida> Steven, are you on the call?
16:05:30 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
16:05:30 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
16:05:32 <Zakim> +Steven
16:06:27 <Ralph> agenda+ Actions
16:06:34 <Ralph> agenda+ Issue-89
16:06:39 <Ralph> agenda+ Issue-97
16:07:09 <Ralph> agenda+ Easy Issues
16:07:17 <Ralph> agenda+ Test Case status
16:07:20 <Ralph> agenda+ Primer
16:08:24 <Ralph> PROPOSED: to meet at 1500 UTC on March 13, 20, 27
16:08:47 <Ralph> RESOLVED: to meet at 1500 UTC from March 13 onward
16:09:15 <Steeeven> Steeeven has joined #rdfa
16:09:46 <Ralph> Manu: do I need to implement something in Crazy Ivan for the EARL stuff?
16:10:03 <Steven> Steven has changed the topic to:  Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0071
16:10:15 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
16:10:16 <Ralph> Ben: let's look for mail from Benjamin Nowack
16:10:24 <Ralph> Manu: I'll speak with Michael
16:10:52 <Ralph> Ben: the Web Service approach to parsing is only going to work for a subset of the parsers
16:11:01 <Ralph> ... e.g. the javascript parsers actually have to run inside the browser
16:11:12 <Zakim> +markbirbeck
16:11:46 <Ralph> ... inherently we'll need multiple ways to run the test suite
16:12:22 <Ralph> Manu: Shane might have been looking into this
16:12:29 <Ralph> ... spidermonkey may help?
16:12:37 <Ralph> Ben: but spidermonkey doesn't do DOM
16:12:52 <Ralph> ... so it won't work for Safari, IE, and Opera
16:13:29 <Ralph> move to next agendum
16:13:29 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Actions" taken up [from Ralph]
16:13:37 <Ralph> [DONE] ACTION: Ben to respond to issue 87 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
16:14:25 <Ralph> s/[DONE]//
16:14:39 <Ralph> Ben: oops, I really closed issue 92
16:14:56 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben to respond to issue 87 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
16:14:58 <Ralph> -- continues
16:15:05 <Ralph> [DONE] ACTION: Ben to update the primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
16:15:36 <Ralph> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0031.html "latest Primer edits" [Ben 2008-03-03]
16:15:52 <Ralph> -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/ live editor's draft of Primer
16:16:35 <Ralph> ACTION: Mark to reply and process issue 88 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
16:16:51 <Ralph> -- continues
16:17:04 <Ralph> Mark: I did reply to Johannes but didn't get the formal "OK, I'm happy" response
16:17:16 <Ralph> Ben: I'll take the followup to this action
16:17:52 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben to followup with Johannes on his satisfaction with issue 88 resolution
16:17:59 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL transform transferred to W3C [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
16:18:00 <Ralph> -- continues
16:18:09 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben to add status of various implementations on rdfa.info [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action06]
16:18:10 <Ralph> -- continues
16:18:23 <Ralph> Ben: I'll do this after the implementation report is done
16:18:28 <Ralph> ACTION: Ben to email mailing list to think about last substantive issue on tracker: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/6 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/07-rdfa-minutes.html#action07]
16:18:30 <Ralph> -- continues
16:18:41 <Ralph> ACTION: Manu write a response to Christian Hoertnagl for issue 7 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
16:18:42 <Ralph> -- continues
16:18:51 <Ralph> ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action06]
16:18:52 <Ralph> -- continues
16:19:20 <Ralph> move to next agendum
16:19:20 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Issue-89" taken up [from Ralph]
16:19:31 <Ralph> -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/89 issue 89
16:20:29 <Ralph> Mark: the problem in the first example (called "second example") is that when we drop all the way through we fetch the bnode from the parent
16:21:00 <Ralph> ... in the first case this is fine for foaf:name to complete the hanging triple but it's not fine for the DIV
16:21:30 <Ralph> ... it was being handled as if there were no subject, but there's no _anything_
16:21:37 <Ralph> ... Ivan had proposed a solution to this a while ago
16:21:52 <Ralph> ... he suggested skipping everything unless one of the significant attributes were present
16:22:10 <Ralph> ... this isn't sufficient, as @lang processing still needs to be done
16:22:41 <Ralph> ... Johannes spotted a condition that didn't quite work correctly with the added skip flag
16:23:38 <Ralph> ... the skip flag is _not_ meant to handle superfluous triples
16:23:49 <Ralph> Ben: what changes need to be made?
16:24:17 <benadida> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Mar/0043.html
16:25:29 <Ralph> Mark: there is a minor error in the skip flag and an additional error in @property
16:25:39 <Ralph> s/@//
16:25:51 <Ralph> ... the property error may not be worth fixing
16:26:08 <Ralph> ... when setting the skip flag we should also test that there is no property value
16:26:33 <Ralph> ... 'skip' skips completing the hanging triples (in this case)
16:27:01 <Ralph> ... so while it's correct that empty DIV should not complete a hanging triple, the next foaf:name _should_ complete a hanging triple
16:27:21 <Ralph> ... so this correction feels like a minor editorial one to me
16:27:40 <Ralph> Ben: why didn't we discover this earlier?
16:27:55 <Ralph> Mark: it has to do with @property appearing below a hanging triple.  Would still be there without the DIV
16:28:13 <Ralph> Ben: we have test cases with @rel and @property below it.  Those should complete hanging triples.
16:28:44 <Ralph> Mark: I didn't spot this because in my test case I have nearly the same markup as in Johannes' example but I added a 3rd line with an @rel
16:29:02 <Ralph> ... unfortunately, my @rel does complete a hanging triple so I didn't spot this
16:29:16 <Ralph> ... this skip flag error only arises if you have only @property
16:30:12 <Ralph> ... skip flag is only used at the end of a branch of @rel and @rev
16:31:34 <Ralph> Ben: there's no disagreement in the task force; it seems a small but in the rules
16:33:52 <Ralph> Ralph: let's just document this change clearly in the Changes section
16:34:16 <msporny> Test #33
16:34:17 <Ralph> ACTION: Mark/Shane include issue 89 correction in Changes section
16:34:22 <msporny> http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/rdfa-test-harness/
16:34:26 <Ralph> Manu: why didn't we notice this with test 33?
16:34:42 <Ralph> Mark: we now do not complete hanging triples unless the recursion has given us a reason to complete them
16:35:08 <Ralph> ... the box in step "11" (really 10) was not in the previous rules
16:35:33 <Ralph> Ben: is the change a small number of sentences?
16:36:13 <Ralph> Mark: at the very end of step 4, we add "/+and if @property is not present+/ the skip property is set to True"
16:36:36 <benadida> PROPOSE to resolve issue 89 as "update step 4 to take into account @property before setting the skip flag"
16:37:08 <msporny> +1
16:37:12 <Steeeven> +1
16:37:42 <Ralph> RESOLVED: issue 89 resoved as "update step 4 to take into account @property before setting the skip flag"
16:38:12 <Ralph> ACTION: Mark update editor's draft with issue 89 resolution
16:38:49 <Ralph> move to item 4
16:38:56 <Ralph> Topic: Easy Issues
16:39:33 <Ralph> zakim, close item 4
16:39:33 <Zakim> agendum 4, Easy Issues, closed
16:39:34 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:39:35 <Zakim> 2. Issue-89 [from Ralph]
16:39:49 <Ralph> Ben: the easy issues are mostly resolved in mail
16:39:54 <Ralph> move to next agendum
16:39:54 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Issue-89" taken up [from Ralph]
16:40:02 <Ralph> zakim, close agendum 2
16:40:02 <Zakim> agendum 2, Issue-89, closed
16:40:03 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:40:03 <Ralph> move to next agendum
16:40:04 <Zakim> 3. Issue-97 [from Ralph]
16:40:05 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Issue-97" taken up [from Ralph]
16:40:17 <benadida> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/97
16:40:30 <Ralph> "handing of namespaces and canonicalization of XML literals"
16:40:53 <Ralph> Ben: namespaces in XML Literals should be in the XML namespace
16:41:18 <Ralph> ... Mark proposed that the right way to serialize these is to use XML Exclusive Canonicalization
16:41:45 <Ralph> Mark: Exclusive Canonicalization requires a root element, called an "apex node"
16:42:09 <Ralph> ... we'd be required to do two things:
16:42:19 <Ralph> ... 1. dump all of the in-context namespaces onto the apex node
16:43:08 <Ralph> ... we have all the in-context prefix mappings in our [evaluation context]
16:43:45 <Ralph> ... 2. any embedded namespace declarations are supposed to be removed if they duplicate declarations on the apex node
16:43:54 <Ralph> ... I think we can drop this step
16:44:06 <Ralph> ... I've talked with Ivan about this and he thinks he might be able to implement it
16:44:25 <Ralph> ... but if there's no apex node I don't think we can do anything
16:45:11 <Ralph> ... Exclusive Canonicalization does not _require_ the implementation to create an apex node; it mostly does not deal with things that don't have apex nodes
16:46:38 <Ralph> ... RDF Concepts document only requires that an XMLLiteral be a well-formed thing; e.g. it can be inserted as a child of some other element and the result is well-formed
16:47:20 <Ralph> Ben: how much of a problem would it be for us to say that namespaces must be specified [within the literal] if the author wants them
16:47:48 <Ralph> Mark: RDF Concepts says XMLliterals must conform to Exclusive Canonicalization
16:48:14 <Ralph> ... so I think our loophole here is in the Exclusive Canonicalization specification
16:48:45 <Ralph> Ben: I don't want to have to do XML [namespace] processing in the parser
16:49:11 <Ralph> Mark: we could drop XMLLiterals alltogether and reserve the datatype, saying it's for a future version
16:49:38 <Ralph> ... we could wait and see how implementations experiment with the idea
16:50:09 <Ralph> ... alternatively, continue processing as now but once the parser encounters an XMLLiteral treat it as a string rather than do XML processing
16:51:09 <Ralph> ... create a string representation of the XML
16:51:43 <Ralph> Manu: I'm hesitant to require processing all the XML
16:51:50 <Ralph> ... adds a lot of complexity to the parser
16:52:26 <Ralph> ... I'd prefer to take the inner text as-is and not require processing of it
16:52:33 <Steeeven> +1
16:52:36 <Ralph> ... or leave the question to a future spec
16:53:21 <Ralph> Mark: I have lots of use cases for XMLLiterals but I'm also not inclined to require processing the inner text
16:53:52 <Ralph> Steven: keep the inner text as-is with the markup
16:54:13 <Ralph> Manu: I do think people will have requirements to preserve all the inner markup
16:55:34 <Ralph> Mark: taking the inner text is really useful for the 80% case, particularly for round-tripping uses
16:56:00 <Ralph> ... the problem is that calling the result an RDF XMLLiteral then it has to actually be one, and Exclusive Canonicalization is then required
16:56:10 <Ralph> ... could we call it an "RDFa XML literal"?
16:56:34 <Ralph> Manu: rdfa:literal?
16:56:42 <Zakim> -Ben_Adida
16:56:50 <benadida> uggh, what happened....
16:57:10 <Ralph> Ben: I'd prefer to look for a different solution and avoid rdfa:literal ; we're not supposed to be adding RDF features
16:57:13 <Ralph> Ralph: +1 to Ben
16:57:26 <Zakim> +Ben_Adida
16:58:02 <msporny> rdfs:Literal ?
16:58:16 <Ralph> Ben: I see 3 solutions; 1. resolve exclusive canonicalization, which seems to require XML understanding in the parser
16:58:43 <Ralph> ... 2. find another datatype that allows us to preserve the markup but doesn't require exclusive canonicalization
16:58:50 <Ralph> ... 3. leave it undefined in this version
16:59:37 <msporny> I would prefer option #2: find another datatype that allows us to preserve the markup.
16:59:58 <Ralph> Mark: in (3), I'd still suggest a paragraph that makes suggestions; e.g. "just take the inner string with the markup which isn't precisely an rdf:XMLLiteral but it's close enough for many users"
17:00:35 <Ralph> Ben: let's post a summary to the mailing list and solicit feedback
17:00:44 <msporny> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_literal
17:01:19 <Ralph> Manu: perhaps rdfs:Literal gives us enough leeway
17:02:25 <Ralph> Ralph: I'm pretty sure rdfs:Literal will not do what we want
17:02:56 <Ralph> ... but let's put it to the list.  Some of the RDF Core WG participants may have useful advice
17:03:02 <benadida> ACTION: Mark to summarize the issue and 3 options for XMLLiteral to mailing list
17:03:43 <Ralph> s/the issue/issue 97/
17:03:45 <Steeeven> bye
17:03:49 <Zakim> -Steven
17:04:02 <Ralph> zakim, close this agendum
17:04:02 <Zakim> agendum 3 closed
17:04:03 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:04:05 <Zakim> 5. Test Case status [from Ralph]
17:04:10 <Ralph> Topic: Primer
17:04:17 <Ralph> Ben: please do look at the Primer
17:04:28 <Ralph> ... and send comments
17:05:48 <Ralph> ... should we push out an updated Primer quickly and then do another WD in a few weeks or wait?
17:05:49 <markbirbeck> zakim, mute me
17:05:49 <Zakim> markbirbeck should now be muted
17:05:53 <Ralph> Ralph: how confusing is the current WD?
17:06:16 <markbirbeck> zakim, unmute me
17:06:16 <Zakim> markbirbeck should no longer be muted
17:07:01 <Ralph> Ben: the changes are mostly in @src
17:07:58 <Ralph> ... perhaps the WGs can review these changes quickly
17:09:04 <benadida> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/
17:09:32 <Ralph> Ralph: I'm in favor of doing a quick update to resync followed in a few weeks by another update
17:10:12 <Ralph> ... but the risk in doing a rush update is in overlooking something else that's out of sync that might then create more confusion
17:11:02 <Ralph> Ben: I'll try to write a diff document later today
17:11:53 <Ralph> [adjourned]
17:11:56 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
17:11:57 <Zakim> -msporny
17:11:58 <Zakim> -Ben_Adida
17:11:59 <Zakim> -Ralph
17:11:59 <Zakim> SW_SWD(RDFa)11:00AM has ended
17:12:00 <Zakim> Attendees were Ralph, msporny, +0208761aaaa, markbirbeck, Ben_Adida, Steven
17:12:27 <Ralph> rrsagent, please make record public
17:12:34 <Ralph> rrsagent, please draft minutes
17:12:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
17:13:19 <Ralph> Chair: Ben
17:13:55 <Ralph> rrsagent, please draft minutes
17:13:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-minutes.html Ralph
17:14:00 <Ralph> zakim, bye
17:14:00 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdfa
17:14:09 <Ralph> rrsagent, bye
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> I see 11 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-actions.rdf :
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben to respond to issue 87 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [1]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-14-56
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Mark to reply and process issue 88 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10] [2]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-16-35
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben to followup with Johannes on his satisfaction with issue 88 resolution [3]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-17-52
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben followup with Fabien on getting his RDFa GRDDL transform transferred to W3C [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/15-rdfa-minutes.html#action01] [4]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-17-59
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben to add status of various implementations on rdfa.info [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action06] [5]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-18-09
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ben to email mailing list to think about last substantive issue on tracker: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/6 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/07-rdfa-minutes.html#action07] [6]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-18-28
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Manu write a response to Christian Hoertnagl for issue 7 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/21-rdfa-minutes.html#action09] [7]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-18-41
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Michael to create "Microformats done right -- unambiguous taxonomies via RDF" on the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/23-rdfa-minutes.html#action06] [8]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-18-51
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Mark/Shane include issue 89 correction in Changes section [9]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-34-17
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Mark update editor's draft with issue 89 resolution [10]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T16-38-12
17:14:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Mark to summarize the issue and 3 options for XMLLiteral to mailing list [11]
17:14:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-rdfa-irc#T17-03-02