W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2005

minutes TAG 22 Feb for review

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:22:23 -0600
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1109107343.4991.1028.camel@localhost>
Please review:
 Technical Architecture Group (TAG) Weekly Teleconference -- 22 Feb 2005
 http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html
 $Revision: 1.14 $ of $Date: 2005/02/22 21:15:26 $

Plain text copy attached.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

   [1]W3C

            Technical Architecture Group (TAG) Weekly Teleconference

22 Feb 2005

   [2]Agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

Attendees

   Present
           Vincent Quint (VQ), Henry Thompson (HT), Norm Walsh (NDW), Roy
           Fielding (RF), Dan Connolly (DC), Chris Lilley (CL), Ed Rice (ER)
           , Dave Orchard (DO), PaulC (PC)

   Regrets
           TimBL, Noah

   Chair
           Vincent

   Scribe
           DanC

Contents

     * [4]Topics

         1. [5]Roll call, review records and agenda
         2. [6]Change location of June f2f? (Edinburgh?)
         3. [7]W3C Technical Plenary TAG F2F Monday am 28th February 2005
         4. [8]W3C Technical Plenary TAG Liaisons
         5. [9]New Issue?: Adding terms to a namespace, xml:id/C14N
            discussions
         6. [10]New Issue?: Relationship of URI schemes to protocols
         7. [11]issue review: RDFinXHTML-35
         8. [12]issue review. siteData-36
         9. [13]issue review. abstractComponentRefs-37
        10. [14]issue review: putMediaType-38
        11. [15]issue review rdfURIMeaning-39
        12. [16]issue review URIGoodPractice-40

     * [17]Summary of Action Items

   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Roll call, review records and agenda

   propose Tuesday 8 March 2005 for next meeting

   regrets DaveO for 8 Mar

   VQ has a conflict with 8 Mar

   VQ is available to prepare an agenda, but not to run the meeting

   <ht> regrets HST for 8 March

   NDW offers to run the 8 Mar telcon

   (are we resolved? doesn't seem critical... can decide 28Feb, I suppose)

     * [18]minutes 7 Feb

     * [19]14 Feb minutes

   DC: 2nd proposal to OK 7 Feb minutes

   VQ: I've reviewed actions from the telcons... many seem to be done; I'll
   get back to the others 28Feb
   ... unless there are comments now

   noah notes being done with his action on extensibility

  Change location of June f2f? (Edinburgh?)

   VQ: recall we agreed to meet near Nice just after the W3C AC meeting, but
   it's no longer convenient for Chris...
   ... and HT has offered to host...
   ... some preferences each way...

   <Roy> Edinburgh +1

   <noah> France +1

   <noah> (if someone will host, of course)

   Chris: I have not told Coralie (prospective INRIA local organizer) to
   cancel our meeting in June

   <noah> Edinburgh OK if not, just trying to save travel wear n tear

   VQ: to expects to attend the AC meeting?

   DC: I do

   DO: I do

   <noah> NM: I do

   HT: I do

   NDW: I prefer Edingburgh, though that reduces the chance I'll attend the
   AC meeting

   <Ed> I will not be at the AC meeting

   VQ: I expect TimBL to attend the AC meeting

   Roy: I think timbl had a conflict with the June 8 Date

   "TimBL was also unable to comfirm in-person attendance." re 8-10 June.
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html#meeting-plans

   HT: I think I can hold my hosting reservations for a month without much
   cost in case I cancel

   VQ: so let's take another week to consider it

   <scribe> ACTION: VQ to contact Coralie re 8-10 June meeting arrangements
   at INRIA. [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action01]

   CL: you might ask her about Cannes vs Sophia while you're at it

  W3C Technical Plenary TAG F2F Monday am 28th February 2005

     * [22]proposed agenda

   DC: hmm... .5hr of admin seems like a lot for a 2hr meeting...

   VQ: some is more than admin... issues list maintenance

   <Chris> start discussing issue list stuff in email to get up to speed?

   VQ: I expect to update the agenda tomorrow with comments received; I'm
   willing to take comments up to the meeting day

  W3C Technical Plenary TAG Liaisons

   VQ: re XML Core joint meeting...

     * [23]Tentative TAG Liaison Meeting Schedule

   VQ: PaulG proposes 10:30 to noon Thu for XML Core/TAG join telcon

   <scribe> ACTION: NDW: let XML Core WG know yes, we agree to meet Thu 3 Mar
   10:30am in Boston [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action02]

   VQ: note "14:45-15:45 Joint with CDF-WG"
   ... on Monday

   HT: no liaison meetings Tuesday?

   VQ: right

   VQ reviews liaison schedule Revision 1.21 2005/02/22 17:26:09 vquint

  New Issue?: Adding terms to a namespace, xml:id/C14N discussions

     * [25]Norm's request

   (hmm... seems to fall under versioning41, but so does all of life, the
   universe, and everything, so maybe a specific issue is good)

   DC: issue name ideas?

   NDW: nameSpaceTerms-NN, maybe?

   <Roy> nameAdditions-NN ?

   <Chris-again> reservedNoReally?

   NDW: some urgency motivates a separate issue from versioning41: having a
   TAG decision before end of xml:id CR period would be nice

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask about timing expectations

   <Roy> digestable +1

   DO: so the results of this new issue could be folded into work on
   versioning41?

   NDW: sure, but this seems independent of schema languages etc. [?]

   HT: people often read more into the namespace REC than is there; I'd like
   to take this opportunity to clarify

   DO: one thing that's in the [draft] finding now is a discussion of
   relationship between terms, [missed?], which seems relevant

   RF: [good point about issues : findings. can't summarize real-time]. I
   suggest "nameAddition" because the identity questions don't seem to be the
   main thing

   NDW: ...[missed?]... crux of it is xml: namespace [?]

   <Chris-again> ... and is it bounded or not

   CL: yes, that is the main thing... one spec made an assuption about the
   xml: namespace, and unless "will not change" is explicitly stated, that's
   not safe

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to disagree with Norm

   [scribe gives up trying to keep up]

   <Roy> We can have one finding answer multiple issues, but tracking
   multiple issues under a single issue name simply because we expect them to
   be answered in one finding would be a mistake, IMO.

   HT: to speak of "adding names to a namespace" doesn't make sense. the
   names are all there.

   NDW: while I might agree, that's not universally agreed

   <noah> +1, I agree with Henry. At the very least, we shouldn't preclude in
   advance that possible formulation

   <Chris-again> HT: namespace is a set, unbounded, all names already exist
   in it

   <dorchard> The first part of the finding has an attempt at formal
   description of the architecture of languages
   [26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Nov/att-0071/versioning-part1.html

   <noah> If you're looking for a name for an issue (I can't quite tell), how
   about "immutableNamespaces"?

   <ht> namespaceState?

   +1 namespaceState

   <Ed> +1 namespaceState

   VQ: seems we're agreed (agreeing?) to add an issue, in addition to, while
   perhaps related to, issue 41

   <Chris-again> +1 namespaceState

   <Roy> +1 namespaceState

   <dorchard> +1 namespaceState

   <Norm> +1 namespaceState

   RESOLUTION: to accept issue namespaceState.

   PC: we need to announce the issue to tag-announce

   VQ: ndw's request serves as an issue summary?

   ER: OK

   <Roy> +1

   <scribe> ACTION: NDW to announce TAG's acknolwedgement of issue
   nameSpaceState-NN [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action03]

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note traditions and to

   NDW, HT, DO volunteer to "work on it"

   <scribe> ACTION: NDW to work with HT, DO on namespaceState [recorded in
   [28]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action04]

   <Zakim> Chris-again, you wanted to add that a cc should be sent to
   affected WGs

   <ht> HST has in mind to try to summarise, in a way the owners would
   acknowledge as fair, the various positions so far articulated at the base
   of the ongoing discussion

   tx for the sketch, ht. pls do

   (not in this meeting, I assume)

   <ht> Correct DanC

   PC: add this to the 3 Mar TAG/XML Core agenda?

   NDW: yes, quite

   PC: pending XML Core work depends on this?

   NDW: xml:id CR exit

   PC: is there room for this on the TAG/XML Core agenda?

   NDW/VQ: think so, yes

   <Roy> my input is already in www-tag

  New Issue?: Relationship of URI schemes to protocols

     * [29]Noah's request

   DC suggests straw poll; if we can say "yes" today, very well. if not,
   let's wait 'till noah can make his case

   RF: having trouble differentiating this from work going on in uri mailing
   list

   DC: why do you want/need to differentiate?

   RF: good question...
   ... not sold by Noah's request as is.

   DC: let's wait 'till Noah can make his case.

   VQ: very well.

   <noah> Roy, either in these minutes or by email, maybe you could send URIs
   to pertinent thread in URI list? Thanks.

   <Roy> Noah, there is ongoing discussion on uri@w3.org regarding
   rfc2717-2718 replacement that contains instructions on what to include in
   scheme spec.

   <Roy> Noah, [30]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2005Feb/0042.html

  issue review: RDFinXHTML-35

     * [31]issues list

   VQ: continuing from 7 Feb
   ... continuing from 7 Feb, when we got to xmlFunctions-34 ...
   ... I'm interested in names relevant to each issue.

   DC: There are variuos questions about how to embed RDF in HTML/XHTML.
   Practice includes putting RDF in comments inside HTML.

   <Norm> Appalling but true

     * [32]Storing Data in Documents: The Design History and Rationale for
       GRDDL

   DC: I'd like reviewer for "Storing Data..."; I think there's perhaps more
   work to cover, but that's my work to date toward a finding on this issue.

   HT: I'm happy to review

   NDW: [cut off?]

   <scribe> ACTION: HT to review [33]Storing Data in Documents: The Design
   History and Rationale for GRDDL [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action05]

   <scribe> ACTION: NDW to review [35]Storing Data in Documents: The Design
   History and Rationale for GRDDL [recorded in
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action06]

  issue review. siteData-36

   DC: [can't type and summarize]
   ... something like: next time a /robots.txt situation comes around, I'd
   like to have something in place that's better than a hard-coded name

   CL: meanwhile, /robots.txt is quite useful.

   VQ: any takers?

   NDW: some interest, but not much bandwidth

   DC: haven't have a "lightbulb" idea. prefer to leave it in the "someday"
   pile

  issue review. abstractComponentRefs-37

   DO: this came from a request from the web services description WG...
   ... (1) when we come up with a component designator, is it designating an
   abstract component, or a piece of syntax in the WSDL doc?
   ... (2) [missed?]
   ... and the TAG said: (1) designates abstract component (2) we discussed
   lots of options and said "yeah, the one in your WD is OK"

   ( trying to confirm that we've approved this finding...
   [37]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/abstractComponentRefs-20031030 )

   HST: XML Schema work on component designators is relevant...

     * [38]Abstract Component References Draft TAG Finding 30 Oct 2003

   HT notes...

     * [39]Comments from MSM on behalf of Schema WG

   <ht> MSM reports Schema WG was not happy

   <ht> HST hears DO saying that it doesn't actually answer the question, yet

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to volunteer to take this finding on, in a month or
   two

   VQ: ok, so we are where we are.

  issue review: putMediaType-38

   DC: offshoot of issue 7

   CL: there was some WEBDAV criticism in the discussion?

   DC: yes, I think so

   RF: perhaps it should be reassigned to me

     * [40]putMediaType-38

   <Roy> ACTION: Roy to prepare putMediaType-38 for further discussion
   [recorded in [41]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action07]

  issue review rdfURIMeaning-39

     * [42]Re: New issue - Meaning of URIs in RDF documents

   DanC: gee... can't remember the gist of this. let's wait 'till TimBL is
   around

  issue review URIGoodPractice-40

   <Roy> I am planning to work on URIGoodPractice-40 next week during TP when
   I can talk to DaveO

   RF: related to abstractComponentRefs-37 ...

   DO: in discussion of XPointer () stuff, I recall some criticism from RF,
   which spawned this issue

   VQ: ok, that's it for today

   ADJOURN.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: HT to review " Storing Data in Documents ..." [recorded in
   [43]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action05]
   [NEW] ACTION: NDW to announce TAG's acknolwedgement of issue
   nameSpaceState-NN [recorded in
   [44]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: NDW let XML Core WG know yes, we agree to meet Thu 3 Mar
   10:30am in Boston [recorded in
   [45]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: NDW to review " Storing Data in Documents ..." [recorded in
   [46]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action06]
   [NEW] ACTION: NDW to work with HT, DO on namespaceState [recorded in
   [47]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: Roy to prepare putMediaType-38 for further discussion
   [recorded in [48]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action07]
   [NEW] ACTION: VQ to contact Coralie re 8-10 June meeting arrangements at
   INRIA. [recorded in
   [49]http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action01]
    
   [End of minutes]

   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DanC for VQ and the TAG
    $Revision: 1.14 $ of $Date: 2005/02/22 21:15:26 $
    formatted by David Booth's [50]scribe.perl version 1.111 ([51]CVS log)

References

   Visible links
   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/02/22-agenda.html
   3. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-irc
   4. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#agenda
   5. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item01
   6. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item05
   7. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item06
   8. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item07
   9. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item08
  10. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item09
  11. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item10
  12. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item11
  13. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item12
  14. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item13
  15. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item14
  16. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#item15
  17. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes.html#ActionSummary
  18. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-minutes.html
  19. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Feb/att-0112/Feb142005FormattedMinutes.html
  20. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html#meeting-plans
  21. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action01
  22. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/02/28-agenda.html
  23. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/01/TechnicalPlenaryLiaisons.html
  24. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action02
  25. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Feb/0015.html
  26. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Nov/att-0071/versioning-part1.html
  27. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action03
  28. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action04
  29. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Feb/0013.html
  30. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2005Feb/0042.html
  31. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1
  32. http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/specbg.html
  33. http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/specbg.html
  34. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action05
  35. http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/specbg.html
  36. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action06
  37. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/abstractComponentRefs-20031030
  38. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/abstractComponentRefs-20031030
  39. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0007.html
  40. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1#putMediaType-38
  41. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action07
  42. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0127.html
  43. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action05
  44. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action03
  45. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action02
  46. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action06
  47. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action04
  48. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action07
  49. http://www.w3.org/2005/02/22-tagmem-minutes#action01
  50. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  51. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2005 21:22:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:32 GMT