W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sml@w3.org > December 2008

[w3c sml][agenda] 2008-12-11 SML

From: John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 10:49:55 -0500
To: public-sml@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF151EB4A2.C25A44F0-ON8525751A.0051F9B0-8525751A.0056F72B@us.ibm.com>
Kirk/Ginny, it appears you may be scribing this week.

Chair:  when sending out an agenda, use following format 
  [w3c sml][agenda] yyyy-mm-dd SML          in subject of email 
                                            ([agenda] agreed to, 
                                            rest chair's convention) 
Chair:  when sending out an updated agenda, use following format, 
        "n" = update number, 1st update == 2, etc. 
  [w3c sml][agenda][ver n] yyyy-mm-dd SML   in subject of email 
                                            ([agenda] agreed to, 
                                            rest chair's convention) 
Scribe: read entire agenda, your "to do"s around the scribe list are 
        time-sequenced so there is less to remember.

The WG's administrative home page documents:
The phone number to use for the SML WG teleconference: 
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/SML#phone 
Participants are invited to join IRC channel: 
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/SML#irc

Teleconference Time and Length (two hours) 
Pacific   11 AM -  1 PM 
Mountain  12 PM -  2 PM 
Central    1 PM -  3 PM 
Eastern    2 PM -  4 PM 
UK         7 PM -  9 PM 
Paris      8 PM - 10 PM 
Beijing    2 AM -  4 AM (sorry)

Publication moratorium for the rest of this year:
18 December, 12pm ET: Deadline for publication requests
                      before moratorium
22 December: Last publications before moratorium
23 December - 1 January: No publications
 2 January 2009: Publications resume

Proposed Agenda: 

1. Prolog 

1.1. Roll call (present/regrets/absent) 

1.2. Selection of Scribe based on list below
   New scribes see: 
   - Scribe Quick Start Guide 
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm 
   - Scribe FAQ 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-policy/2006Oct/0001.html 
   - Instructions (steps "n-...") at the end of this agenda for reviewing
     and sending out minutes

   - PLEASE make any new Actions fully self-describing so they do not 
     require the minutes as context.  We found it awkward in the past to
     require going back to the minutes for context. 

Last Scribe Date        Member Name         Regrets pending 
2008-05-22              Lynn, James         Until further notice 
2008-10-29              Pandit, Kumar       12/11, 12/18, 1/8 
2008-11-06              Wilson, Kirk 
2008-11-13              Smith, Virginia            12/18
2008-11-20              Gao, Sandy                 12/18
2008-12-04              Charest, Len 
Exempt                  Arwe, John 
Exempt                  MSM 

1.3. Approval of minutes from previous meeting(s): 
   - http://www.w3.org/XML/SML/#records
   - 12/04 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Dec/att-0026/20081204-sml-minutes.html

1.4. "from the CG" http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/SML#schedule
   - (no change) Next F2F week of Feb 23 2009, hosted by Intel, Austin TX 
 
1.5. Action items: goes faster if you update yours before the meeting...
     http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/sml/

1.6. Next Steps on Documents
   - Who is loading EPR Ref Scheme + XLink Ref Scheme drafts into CVS?
   - Ginny: new version of 11/26 spreadsheet available with 11/20 
     decisions incorporated?
 
2. New Work

2.1. Triage bugs with no keywords or target 

3. Existing Work

3.1. Review and attempt to reach consensus on other non-editorial bugs 
     targeted for the next draft.

     Within each cluster, typically we look at them in this order
           "decided" (after the 2-week grace period for responses ends)
           "needsReview" (either we have consensus, 
                      it's no longer needsReview, 
                      or the editors need to re-spin the proposed text)
           "hasProposal" 
           "externalComments + reviewerNotSatisfied" - even if closed, 
                                                       e.g. 5543, 5562
           "externalComments + neither( reviewerNotSatisfied 
                                      , reviewerSatisfied )" 
                          aka "reach out again?"
           others

3.2. Test case discussion 
   - For new test cases defined by this group, we need authors and 
     presumably some CVS setup.
   - Email concrete lists (3) of test cases that need to be added, 
     deleted, changed, respectively in advance of the meeting, so 
     everyone has it when the call starts.
   - Other concrete proposals, e.g. test metadata, happily accepted.

3.3. Test case discussion - COSMOS responses to SML comments
   - Using line numbers from latest available XLSX 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Nov/0053.html
   - 16, 17: disagree with Remarks, based on SML bug 5797 comment 7 
             believe test case is correct
   - 19-23: revised testcases available at 
            https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=119850
         (part of https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=258005 )
   - 61, 71: Remarks incorrect; COSMOS definition of "invalid" includes 
             warning messages.  The expected output of the test case 
             contains warnings, but no errors, which in SML's terms
             is the same as "valid".
   - 31, 62, 66, 67, 83, 90: Since the SML spec only defines a single 
         SML reference scheme, these tests are not relevant to 
         interoperability - they are all tests about the consistency
         of multiple reference schemes in a single SML reference.
   - 32, 44: still being examined
   - 49: Test has been updated to fix the problem noted.
         See https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257617
   - 54: Confused - Remarks say sml:refType is being used, do not see 
         that, believe test is ok.
   - 55, 56: Disagree with Remarks, however these were using sml:refType
             and that has been fixed by
             https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257781
   - 92: Fixed by https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257417
   - 114: Confused - no problem noted

3.4. Test case discussion - are we ready to assert success criteria?
   - We said we would do so once we had a "good view" of the test cases.
 
4. Epilog

4.1. Scribe: update scribe list below in this meeting's minutes, for use
     in the next meeting's agenda.  Update the list below and sort it 
         (LRU), leaving people who will be out for an extended period near 

         the bottom to keep the names of draftees for the current meeting 
         near the top, so when the next agenda goes out people will know 
if 
         their name is at or near the top of the list to scribe next. 

Last Scribe Date        Member Name         Regrets pending 
2008-05-22              Lynn, James         Until further notice 
2008-10-29              Pandit, Kumar       12/11, 12/18, 1/8 
2008-11-06              Wilson, Kirk 
2008-11-13              Smith, Virginia            12/18
2008-11-20              Gao, Sandy                 12/18
2008-12-04              Charest, Len 
Exempt                  Arwe, John 
Exempt                  MSM 

4.2. Scribe: follow the steps in the Scribe Quick Start Guide through 
     "Generate minutes" 
     http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm 
     Also issue the command "rrsagent, make log public" since we are a 
         public working group.

     DO NOT use tools that significantly change the source html, like 
         Word, to do your editing.  Those tools make compare tools to 
sanity
     check the scribe's edits unusable even though it renders fine 
     visually (even here, some like Word remove W3C style sheets so it 
     renders with subtle differences).

4.3. Scribe: (optional, but most often followed)
     Send the original and updated minutes to the meeting chair as an 
     editorial check before sending to the full list.  Assume the chair 
     will use a compare tool.
 
4.4. Scribe: send the minutes to the public mailing list 
     After the meeting, follow the conventions we have agreed on within
         the wg to help people search the email archives more effectively, 

         namely: 
     [w3c sml][minutes] yyyy-mm-dd SML    in subject of email 
                                          ([minutes] agreed to, 
                                          rest chair's convention) 
     As with agendas, if minutes are updated include a [ver n] "tag" as 
         well.

----
4.5. Chair
     After meeting, update good standing list
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2008 15:50:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 9 December 2008 15:50:54 GMT