W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2003

[Agenda] 8 Sep 2003 TAG teleconf (mtg. sched, deliv. sched., namespaceDocument-8, Versioning/Extensibility)

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: 05 Sep 2003 12:10:02 -0400
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1062778201.3340.305.camel@seabright>

Hello,

The agenda for the 8 Sep TAG teleconf is available 
as HTML [1] and as text below.

 _ Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/2003/09/08-tag.html

========================================================
   [1]W3C | [2]TAG | Previous: [3]18 Aug teleconf | Next: 15 Sep 2003
   teleconf

      [1] http://www.w3.org/
      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/
      [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html

                 Agenda of 8 September 2003 TAG teleconference

   Nearby: [4]Teleconference details  [5]issues list ([6]handling new
   issues) [7]www-tag archive

      [4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/#remote
      [5] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist
      [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jul/0054.html
      [7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/

   Note: The Chair does not expect the agenda to change after close of
   business (Boston time) Thursday of this week.

1. Administrative (15min)

    1. Roll call. Regrets: RF, DC, IJ, TBL. Scribe?
    2. Accept the minutes of the [8]18 Aug teleconf?
    3. Accept this [9]agenda?
    4. Next meeting 15 Sep teleconf?

      [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html
      [9] http://www.w3.org/2003/09/08-tag.html

  1.1 Scheduling

   Completed action SW 2003/08/18: Review work plan from Vancouver F2F to
   help with schedule ([10]done)

     [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Aug/0037.html

   See below for information about [11]Arch Doc scheduling.

  1.2 Bristol meeting planning (6 - 8 Oct)

   See [12]meeting page for information about suggested hotels.

     [12] http://www.w3.org/2003/10/06-tag-mtg

   Completed action SW 2003/08/18: Suggest hotel ([13]done)

     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Sep/0004.html

2. Technical (75min)

  2.1 NamespaceDocument-8

   Status of work on [14]namespaceDocument-8.
     * Action TB 2003/04/07: Prepare RDDL Note. Include in status section
       that there is TAG consensus that RDDL is a suitable format for
       representations of an XML namespace. Clean up messy section 4 of
       RDDL draft and investigate and publish a canonical mapping to RDF.
       From 21 July ftf meeting, due 31 August.
     * Action PC 2003/04/07: Prepare finding to answer this issue,
       pointing to the RDDL Note. See [15]comments from Paul regarding TB
       theses. From 21 July ftf meeting, due 31 August.
     * Refer to draft TAG [16]opinion from Tim Bray on the use of URNs
       for namespace names.

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/07/21-tag#namespaceDocument-8
     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0046.html
     [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jun/0003.html

  2.2 Versioning and extensibility

     * Completed Action NW, DO 2003/08/21: Finding on extensibility, due
       15 August 2003 ([17]done)

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning.html

  2.3 Status of overdue action items

     * Action RF 2003/06/02: Rewrite section 3. From 21 July ftf meeting,
       due 18 August
     * [18]contentPresentation-26: Action CL (and IJ from ftf meeting)
       2003/06/02: Make available a draft finding on
       content/presentation. From 21 July ftf meeting, revision due 8
       August.

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26

   Findings:
     * [19]whenToUseGet-7: 9 July 2003 draft of [20]URIs, Addressability,
       and the use of HTTP GET and POST
          + DO said he had additional comments at 21 July 2003 ftf
            meeting.
          + See [21]comments from Noah

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#whenToUseGet-7
     [20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet-20030709.html
     [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0297.html

  2.4 Architecture Document

   Reference draft: [22]1 August 2003 Editor's Draft of the Arch Doc

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/webarch-20030801

   What is TAG's expectation of editor at this point? For example:
    1. IJ closes loop on introduction with TB, RF (DC?). There was
       discussion at the [23]18 Aug teleconf about a [24]rewrite of the
       abstract and introduction
    2. Editor's draft 17 Sep
    3. Reviewed at 22 Sep TAG teleconf
    4. IJ incorporates comments, gets review from two TAG participants,
       and requests 1 Oct TR publication
    5. New TR draft published 1 Oct
    6. TAG reviews 1 Oct draft for and at face-to-face meeting 6 Oct.

     [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html
     [24] http://www.w3.org/2003/08/webarch-intro-20030813.html

    2.4.1 Review of actions related to Architecture Document

   Open action items:
     * Action RF 2003/06/02: Rewrite section 3. From 21 July ftf meeting,
       due 18 August.
     * Action IJ 2003/06/16: Attempt to incorporate relevant bits of
       "[25]Conversations and State" into section to be produced by RF.
     * Action TBL 2003/07/14: Suggest changes to section about
       extensibility related to "when to tunnel".
     * Action CL 2003/07/21: Create an illustration of two resources, one
       designated by URI without fragment, and one designated by same URI
       with fragment...
     * Action TB 2003/08/18: Bring some Vancouver ftf meeting photos to
       IJ attention (of whiteboard, re: CL action about illustration of
       two resources)
     * Action IJ, CL 2003/07/21: Discuss and propose improved wording of
       language regarding SVG spec in bulleted list in 2.5.1.
     * Action TBL 2003/07/21: Propose a replacement to "URI persistence
       ...person's mailbox" in 2.6 and continue to revise [26]TBL draft
       of section 2.6 based on TAG's 23 July discussion.
     * Action DC 2003/07/21: Propose language for section 2.8.5 showing
       examples of freenet and other systems.
     * Action TB 2003/08/04: Write a definition of "XML-based"
     * Action IJ 2003/08/04: s/machine-readable/something like: optimized
       for processors, w/ defn that includes notion that it can be
       processed unattended (by a person).
     * Completed action NW 2003/08/04: Redraft 4.10.2 to include some
       good practice notes (e.g., use namespaces!) ([27]done)
     * Completed action NW 2003/08/04: Rewrite para 4 of 4.10.4
       ([28]done)
     * Action TB and CL 2003/07/21: Propose a replacement sentence in
       section 3.2.2.1 regarding advantages of text formats. IRC log of
       [29]18 Aug teleconf suggested done, but can't find evidence.

     [25] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Conversations
     [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/tim
     [27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0002.html
     [28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0008.html
     [29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html

   The following action items were follow-up from the 22 July
   face-to-face meeting in Vancouver:
     * Identification and resources
         1. TBL 2003/08/21: Write replacement text for Moby Dick example
            in section 2.6 (on URI ambiguity). Is this done in [30]TBL's
            draft?
     * Representations
         1. TB, IJ 2003/08/21: Integrate findings. What does this mean?

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/tim#URI-persistence

     _________________________________________________________________

  2.2 Findings

   See also [31]TAG findings home page.

     [31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings/

    2.2.1 Draft findings nearing closure

     * [32]contentTypeOverride-24: 9 July 2003 draft of [33]Client
       handling of MIME headers
         1. [34]Comments from Roy on charset param
         2. [35]Comments from Philipp Hoschka about usability issues when
            user involved in error correction. Is there a new Voice spec
            out we can point to for example behavior?
         3. [36]Comments from Chris Lilley
         4. Change "MIME headers" to "server metadata" in title?
     * Action IJ 2003/07/21: Update Deep linking finding (i.e., create a
       new revision) with references to [37]German court decision
       regarding deep linking. No additional review required since just
       an external reference.

     [32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentTypeOverride-24
     [33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html
     [34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0051.html
     [35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jul/0076.html
     [36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0113.html
     [37] http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Sort=3&Datum=2003&Art=pm&client=3&Blank=1&nr=26553&id=1058517255.04

    2.2.2 Draft findings that require more discussion

     * [38]xmlIDSemantics-32:
         1. [39]Chris Lilley draft finding.
         2. Action CL 2003/06/30: Revise this draft finding with new
            input from reviewers.
     * [40]contentPresentation-26: Action CL 2003/06/02: Make available a
       draft finding on content/presentation. From 21 July ftf meeting,
       revision due 8 August.
     * [41]metadataInURI-31: 8 July 2003 draft of "[42]The use of
       Metadata in URIs"
          + Action SW 2003/07/21: Produce a revision of this finding
            based on Vancouver ftf meeting discussion.
          + Action DO 2003/07/07: Send rationale about why WSDL WG wants
            to peek inside the URI.
          + See also [43]TB email on Apple Music Store and use of URI
            schemes instead of headers
          + See comments from [44]Mark Nottingham and [45]followup from
            Noah M.
     * [46]abstractComponentRefs-37
          + Action DO 2003/06/23: Point Jonathan Marsh at options. Ask
            them for their analysis.

     [38] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlIDSemantics-32
     [39] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDSemantics-32.html
     [40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26
     [41] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#metadataInURI-31
     [42] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/metaDataInURI-31
     [43] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0151.html
     [44] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0048.html
     [45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0055.html
     [46] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#abstractComponentRefs-37

    2.2.3 Expected new findings

    1. Action IJ 2003/06/09: Turn [47]TB apple story into a finding.
    2. Action PC: Finding on namespace documents, due 31 August 2003

     [47] http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/04/30/AppleWA

  2.3 Issues

   The TAG does not expect to discuss these issues at this meeting.

    2.3.1 Identifiers ([48]URIEquivalence-15 , [49]IRIEverywhere-27)

     [48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#URIEquivalence-15
     [49] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#IRIEverywhere-27

     * [50]URIEquivalence-15
          + SW proposal: Track RFC2396bis where [51]Tim Bray text has
            been integrated. Comment within the IETF process. Move this
            issue to pending state.
     * [52]IRIEverywhere-27
          + Action CL 2003/04/07: Revised position statement on use of
            IRIs.
          + Action TBL 2003/04/28: Explain how existing specifications
            that handle IRIs are inconsistent. [53]TBL draft not yet
            available on www-tag.
          + See TB's [54]proposed step forward on IRI 27.

     [50] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#URIEquivalence-15
     [51] http://www.textuality.com/tag/uri-comp-4
     [52] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#IRIEverywhere-27
     [53] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0074.html
     [54] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0090.html

    2.3.2 Qnames, fragments, and media types([55]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6,
    [56]fragmentInXML-28, [57]abstractComponentRefs-37, [58]putMediaType-38)

     [55] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
     [56] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#fragmentInXML-28
     [57] http://www.w3.org/2003/07/24-tag-summary.html#abstractComponentRefs-37
     [58] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#putMediaType-38

     * [59]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
          + Action DC 2003/02/06: Propose TAG response to XML Schema
            desideratum ([60]RQ-23).
     * [61]fragmentInXML-28 : Use of fragment identifiers in XML.
         1. Connection to content negotiation?
         2. Connection to opacity of URIs?
         3. No actions associated / no owner.
     * [62]abstractComponentRefs-37(discussed [63]above).
     * [64]putMediaType-38

     [59] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
     [60] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xmlschema-11-req-20030121/#N400183
     [61] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#fragmentInXML-28
     [62] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#abstractComponentRefs-37
     [63] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/07/21-tag.html#findingsInProgress
     [64] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#putMediaType-38

    2.3.3 New and other Issues requested for discussion.
    ([65]mixedUIXMLNamespace-33, [66]RDFinXHTML-35, [67]siteData-36 plus
    possible new issues)

     [65] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
     [66] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#RDFinXHTML-35
     [67] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#siteData-36

   Existing Issues:
     * [68]mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
     * [69]RDFinXHTML-35
     * [70]siteData-36
          + Action TBL 2003/02/24 : Summarize siteData-36

     [68] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
     [69] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#RDFinXHTML-35
     [70] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#siteData-36

    2.3.5 Miscellaneous issues

     * [71]uriMediaType-9
          + IANA appears to have responded to the spirit of this draft
            (see [72]email from Chris Lilley).What's required to close
            this issue?
          + Action CL 2003/05/05: Propose CL's three changes to
            registration process to Ned Freed. [What forum?]
     * [73]HTTPSubstrate-16
          + Action RF 2003/02/06: Write a response to IESG asking whether
            the Web services example in the SOAP 1.2 primer is intended
            to be excluded from RFC 3205
          + See [74]message from Larry Masinter w.r.t. Web services.
     * [75]xlinkScope-23
          + See [76]draft, and [77]SW message to CG chairs.
          + Action CL 2003/06/30: Ping the chairs of those groups asking
            for an update on xlinkScope-23.
     * [78]binaryXML-30
          + Action TB 2003/02/17: Write to www-tag with his thoughts on
            adding to survey.
          + Action IJ 2003/07/21: Add link from issues list binaryXML-30
            to upcoming workshop
          + Next steps to finding? See [79]summary from Chris.
     * [80]xmlFunctions-34
          + Action TBL 2003/02/06: State the issue with a reference to
            XML Core work. See [81]email from TimBL capturing some of the
            issues.
     * [82]charmodReview-17
         1. Completed action IJ 2003/07/14: Move issue 17 to pending
            rather than resolved.
         2. Completed action DC: Remind I18N WG of what we are expecting
            regarding issue 17; send this on behalf of the TAG ([83]Done
         3. [84]Mail from DC to I18N WG in light of new Charmod draft
     * [85]rdfURIMeaning-39
         1. Completed Action DC 2003/08/18: Alert SWCG of this issues
            ([86]done)

     [71] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#uriMediaType-9
     [72] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0302.html
     [73] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#HTTPSubstrate-16
     [74] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0208.html
     [75] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#xlinkScope-23
     [76] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0094.html
     [77] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0104
     [78] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#binaryXML-30
     [79] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0224.html
     [80] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlFunctions-34
     [81] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0309.html
     [82] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#charmodReview-17
     [83] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jul/0052.html
     [84] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Sep/0019.html
     [85] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#rdfURIMeaning-39
     [86] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0003.html

3. Other actions

     * Action IJ 2003/02/06: Modify issues list to show that
       actions/pending are orthogonal to decisions. PLH has put the
       issues list in production; see the [87]DOM issues list.

     [87] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/09-dom-core-issues/issues.html

     _________________________________________________________________


    Ian Jacobs for Stuart Williams and TimBL
    Last modified: $Date: 2003/09/05 16:07:32 $



-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
Received on Friday, 5 September 2003 12:10:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:20 GMT