GRDDL Going to Last Call: Relevant to DIWG

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

GRDDL Going to Last Call: Relevant to DIWG

Harry Halpin

I'm Harry Halpin, the Chair of the GRDDL WG [1] which links XML and
XHTML (including "microformats") to the Semantic Web in order to
facilitate the deployment of the Semantic Web.

 In order to prevent a "surprise" Last Call, I'd like for your WG to
know  that we are going to go, barring any final comments or problems,
to  request move to Last Call on or shortly after Feb 15th for the
following three documents:

 1) GRDDL Specification [2]
 2) GRDDL Primer [3]
 3) GRDDL Use Cases [4]
 
 We believe this technology is related to the DIWG WG as a GRDDL can be
considered a possible solution for a Semantic Enrichment for Device
Independence work item, which states that:

"Discussion with various groups, including WAI PF and MMI, has indicated
that there is a likely need for representations that allow authors to
express additional semantics associated with particular
components of a user experience" [5]

In a nutshell, GRDDL allows the use of "link" element in a XHTML header
to express a transformation of the HTML to RDF, which could then in turn
provide needed semantic enrichment. This requires only a minor addition
to the link element or namespace document of the XML vocabulary/XHTML
profile URI and the authoring of a transformation, which can often be
done generically for many XHTML pages.

We believe this is compatible with:

"
it is possible that one outcome might include a small number of markup
extensions that represent usage patterns so common that they should be
supported directly. Another and possibly alternative outcome might be
ways to annotate such usage patterns to indicate additional semantics.
As with other work items, DIWG will focus on using existing W3C
techniques wherever appropriate and will propose extensions only where
necessary. Any extensions proposed will use the modularity of the
underlying W3C technology." [5]


 We are interested in whether or not implementations of GRDDL on mobile
devices may contribute to these work item, and I hope it does.

thanks!

 
 [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/
 [2] http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec
 [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc29/primer.html
 [4] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc43/scenario-gallery
 [5]
http://www.w3.org/2004/05/di-charter-2004-06.html#author-semantic-enrichment

--
                -harry

Harry Halpin,  University of Edinburgh
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GRDDL Going to Last Call: Relevant to DIWG

Rhys Lewis
Hello Harry,
 
Thanks very much for your note about GRDDL going to last call soon.
 
First impressions do confirm your assertion that GRDDL makes a major contribution to the item we had labelled 'semantic enrichment' in our current charter. Actually, we had concluded that the 'role' attribute and some likely extensions in XHTML Version 2 would probably meet our needs in this area. GRDDL looks to go beyond those capabilities.
 
I've taken the liberty of copying your note to our internal working group list ([hidden email]). That's where we normally carry out group discussions.
 
Perhaps you could indicate, on that list, whether the GRDDL working group is likely to request DIWG as one of the formal reviewers for the GRDDL documents?
 
Best wishes
Rhys Lewis, chair DIWG
 
 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GRDDL Going to Last Call: Relevant to DIWG

Harry Halpin

(trying to cc [hidden email]).

I do not believe a formal review is needed as there is no dependency we
believe between DIWG and GRDDL. However, we do believe that GRDDL might
be of use to DIWG and we do believe that GRDDL as it stands fulfills our
charter, which mentions DIWG [1].


"The Device Independence Working Group
<http://www.w3.org/2001/di/Group/> has a Semantic Enrichment for Device
Independence work item
<http://www.w3.org/2004/05/di-charter-2004-06.html#author-semantic-enrichment>
etc; the two groups should investigate whether implementations of GRDDL
on mobile devices may contribute to these work item"

I think GRDDL is actually both more lightweight, requiring minimal or,
and if the namespace document contains the transfomraiton, no change
XHTML documents in order to retrieve semantics in the form of RDF from them.

However, HTML layout information is lost in translation to RDF ofcourse.
However, Ben Adida is working on a hGRDDL transform that transforms
microformats -> RDFa+XHTML that keeps the HTML in place [2]. Hopefully
there will be more progress on that front!

       thanks,
             harry

[1]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/grddl-charter.html
[2]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/hGRDDL_Example

Rhys Lewis wrote:

> Hello Harry,
>  
> Thanks very much for your note about GRDDL going to last call soon.
>  
> First impressions do confirm your assertion that GRDDL makes a major
> contribution to the item we had labelled 'semantic enrichment' in our
> current charter. Actually, we had concluded that the 'role' attribute
> and some likely extensions in XHTML Version 2 would probably meet our
> needs in this area. GRDDL looks to go beyond those capabilities.
>  
> I've taken the liberty of copying your note to our internal working
> group list ([hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>). That's where
> we normally carry out group discussions.
>  
> Perhaps you could indicate, on that list, whether the GRDDL working
> group is likely to request DIWG as one of the formal reviewers for the
> GRDDL documents?
>  
> Best wishes
> Rhys Lewis, chair DIWG
>  
>  


--
                -harry

Harry Halpin,  University of Edinburgh
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: GRDDL Going to Last Call: Relevant to DIWG

Rhys Lewis

Hello Harry,

Thanks for the clarification. It just helps me know whether I need to find a reviewer or not.

Thanks also for pointing out the potential advantages of GRDDL over other approaches to semantic enrichment. You have definitely helped us with our semantic enrichment work item.

Thanks again and good luck with the last call.

Very best wishes
Rhys


-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Harry Halpin
Sent: 09 February 2007 17:57
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: GRDDL Going to Last Call: Relevant to DIWG


(trying to cc [hidden email]).

I do not believe a formal review is needed as there is no dependency we believe between DIWG and GRDDL. However, we do believe that GRDDL might be of use to DIWG and we do believe that GRDDL as it stands fulfills our charter, which mentions DIWG [1].


"The Device Independence Working Group
<http://www.w3.org/2001/di/Group/> has a Semantic Enrichment for Device Independence work item <http://www.w3.org/2004/05/di-charter-2004-06.html#author-semantic-enrichment>
etc; the two groups should investigate whether implementations of GRDDL on mobile devices may contribute to these work item"

I think GRDDL is actually both more lightweight, requiring minimal or, and if the namespace document contains the transfomraiton, no change XHTML documents in order to retrieve semantics in the form of RDF from them.

However, HTML layout information is lost in translation to RDF ofcourse.
However, Ben Adida is working on a hGRDDL transform that transforms microformats -> RDFa+XHTML that keeps the HTML in place [2]. Hopefully there will be more progress on that front!

       thanks,
             harry

[1]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/grddl-charter.html
[2]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/hGRDDL_Example

Rhys Lewis wrote:

> Hello Harry,
>
> Thanks very much for your note about GRDDL going to last call soon.
>
> First impressions do confirm your assertion that GRDDL makes a major
> contribution to the item we had labelled 'semantic enrichment' in our
> current charter. Actually, we had concluded that the 'role' attribute
> and some likely extensions in XHTML Version 2 would probably meet our
> needs in this area. GRDDL looks to go beyond those capabilities.
>
> I've taken the liberty of copying your note to our internal working
> group list ([hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>). That's where
> we normally carry out group discussions.
>
> Perhaps you could indicate, on that list, whether the GRDDL working
> group is likely to request DIWG as one of the formal reviewers for the
> GRDDL documents?
>
> Best wishes
> Rhys Lewis, chair DIWG
>
>


--
                -harry

Harry Halpin,  University of Edinburgh
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426