W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2006

TAG 25 Apr: xmlFunctions-34, namespaceState-48 minutes for review

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:17:52 -0500
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1145999872.27608.980.camel@dirk.w3.org>

Hypertext: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes

Plain text:

                              TAG Weekly

25 Apr 2006

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/04/25-agenda.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Norm, DanC, Ht, Vincent, Noah_Mendelsohn, noah, DOrchard,
          TimBL, Ian

   Regrets
          Ed

   Chair
          Vincent

   Scribe
          DanC

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Administrative
         2. [6]Issue xmlFunctions-34
         3. [7]issue namespaceState-48
         4. [8]State Finding
         5. [9]Security Workshop follow-up
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

Administrative

   <scribe> Scribe: DanC

   PROPOSED: to meet 2 May, NDW to scribe. at risk: DO

   RESOLUTION: to meet 2 May, NDW to scribe. regrets DO

   <DanC_> [11]minutes 18 Apr

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-tagmem-minutes.html

   VQ observes "DRAFT" at top and diagnostics at the bottom

   RESOLUTION: to approve minutes 18 Apr

   <timbl> brb

   VQ: agenda adjustments?

   DC: June ftf... at the end?

   VQ: after Vancouver ftf discussion

   <noah> Oct 4 and 5 is OK for me in Vancouver

   PROPOSED: to meet in Vancouver 4-5 Oct 2006

   <timbl> hi

   DO: price update: opus hotel looks like 229 CAD, around USD 200.
   looks like I can get a meeting room in that hotel

   VQ: can you send me details? DO: yes, I've got all the hosting
   details on a page that I'll send presently

   RESOLUTION: to meet in Vancouver Wed/Thu 4-5 Oct 2006

   TBL: so that's 2 days...? VQ: yes, 2 days.

   DanC: hmm... security workshop follow-up... perhaps invite some
   security experts from the BOS/MIT area?

   NDW: I can accomodate a few

   NM: an expert from MIT with practical experience sounds interesting

   VQ: more on this later in the call, perhaps...
   ... the preparation for the AC meeting seems to have converged,
   after some punctuated discussion
   ... moderator and panelists seem to be pretty much all set
   ... one more admin item... quarterly update... I'll draft something,
   tomorrow, I hope...
   ... then I'll send it out after a couple days of collecting comments
   from tag

Issue xmlFunctions-34

   VQ: hmm... this agendum was requested by TV...

   <scribe> ACTION: TVR, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: summarize history of
   DTD/namespace/mimetype version practice, including XHTML, SOAP, and
   XSLT [CONTINUES] [recorded in
   [12]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]

     [12] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01

   <timbl> [13]my action 27 Feb

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2006/02/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action02

   <scribe> ACTION: TBL, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: write a short email
   to make his point, i.e. XML extensbility: Possible only with a
   framework providing some form of semantics [CONTINUES] [recorded in
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02]

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02

   point being: that extensibility with a framework such as CDF makes
   sense, but extensibilXML extensbility: Possible only with a
   framework providing some form of semanticsy in general does not. [?]

issue namespaceState-48

   <ht> [15]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri is in an odd state

     [15] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri

   <ht> it says "A new version of this document is available. "

   <DanC_> [16]URIs for W3C Namespaces 1.36 2006/01/20

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri

   TBL: one comment was that "Namespace Changes over Time" doesn't make
   sense

   <ht> [17]namespaceState finding

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

   <noah> From the finding: "Colloquially, we often speak of ´adding a
   nameĦ to a namespace. Here we prefer to speak of ´defining a nameĦ
   or otherwise licensing the interpretation of a name."

   <Norm> Precisely.

   NM: section 4 could cite the finding more locally
   ... section 4 i.e. [18]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy

   <noah> Suggestion (rough not exact): a) leave title of section 4 b)
   In that section, say something like "The TAG finding 'The
   Disposition of Names in an XML Namespace' explains how the use of a
   particular namespace may evolve over time. At the W3C, it is
   important for a group to state clearly its expectations for how
   namespaces it controls will..."

   <noah> ...and the continue with the text already in the doc, edited
   if necessary.

   <noah> In that section, say something like "The TAG finding 'The
   Disposition of Names in an XML Namespace' explains how the use of a
   particular namespace may evolve over time. At the W3C, it is
   important for a group to state clearly its expectations for how use
   of the namespaces it controls will..."

   <noah> Dan if you commit this, you'll need to create a hyperlink for
   the TAG finding.

   <Vincent> Hi Ian

   <Ian> I was pinged on the topic of nsuri...

   <Ian> I heard:

   <Vincent> Dan is updating the nsuri document to add a reference to
   the TAG finding in section 4.

   <Ian> 1) TAG ok with [19]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri

   <Ian> 2) Add a ref

   <Ian> +1 to adding ref.

   <Ian> The document has already been announced as "en vigeur" to the
   chairs.

   <DanC_> [20]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy 1.52

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy

   <Ian>
   [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2006JanMar/0026.html

     [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2006JanMar/0026.html

   <Ian> Bjoern had expressed some concerns.

   <Ian> Would you like to see them?

   <timbl> Ian, would you like to join the call for a bit?

   Ian, wanna dial in? or not bother?

   <Ian> Sure.

   <DanC_> [22]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri v 1.63 2006/04/25
   17:54:40 is obsolete

     [22] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri

   <noah> Responding to Dan's request that I hatch yet a bit more text:

   <noah> The draft currently says:

   <noah> Groups SHOULD document those expectations in [or clearly
   linked from] the Namespace Document.

   <Ian>
   [23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Feb/0000.htm
   l

     [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Feb/0000.html

   <noah> How about putting after that: "Draft TAG Finding Associating
   Resources with Namespaces provides additional guidance on the
   creation of such namespace documents."

   <DanC_> [24]Comments on URIs for W3C Namespaces Bjoern Hoehrmann 01
   Feb 2006

     [24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Feb/0000.html

   <DanC_> bumper sticker from finding: "Specifications that define
   namespaces SHOULD explicitly state their policy with respect to
   changes in the names defined in that namespace."

   HT: not sure about "this specification" indexical in the examples..

   <ht> "The definitions of names in this namespace will not change
   from those given in the June 13 2007 version of the Foonly spec
   [ref. dated URI]"

   <DanC_> yes, that's an improvement to example 1, HT

   <ht> ... "Subsequent versions of thte Foonly spec which make any
   substantive changes will do so in a new namespace"

   <timbl> For example, the namespace document could contain text along
   the following lines.

   <DanC_> 1.53 $ of $Date: 2006/04/25 18:05:59
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri

   <DanC_> 1.54 $ of $Date: 2006/04/25 18:08:34

   <DanC_> Ian, 1.54 is it. pls let Bjoern know.

   <Ian> yay!

   <Ian> Merci

   <Ian> Would you think that your changes will satisfy him?

   <Ian> (He'll let us know, certainly)

   <DanC_> I do hope these changes address his comment

   <Ian> Ok, thank you.

   <scribe> ACTION: TBL to accepted on 8 Mar 2005, provide a draft of
   new namespace policy doc ([26]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri). in
   progress. tbl would like to confirm with Ian that there's nothing
   pending on Ian's side [DONE] [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]

     [26] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri).
     [27] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03

   RESOLUTION: that
   [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html and
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri 1.54 address
   namespaceState-48

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html
     [29] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri

   <scribe> ACTION: NDW to announce that the TAG has resolved
   namespaceState-48 [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04

   VQ: I'll update our report to the AC to show we've closed another
   one

   <Ian> ciao...

State Finding

   <DanC_> [31]draft state finding

     [31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/state-20060419.html

   DO: Ed did a thorough review; I think I addressed his comments...
   ... I reorganized some stuff, moving some stuff before examples so
   that I could refer to it in discussion of pros/cons

   (is this changelog in email somehwere? or do I need to record it?)

   <DanC_> [32]Updated State Finding 19 Apr 2006

     [32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2006Apr/0026.html

   DO: I compared/constrasted approaches to getStockQuote a bit...
   ... I have considerable comments from Baker and Nottingham; haven't
   started addressing those yet
   ... I'd like to talk about this 9 May; I'm not avaiable 16 nor 23
   May

   NM: I see an opportunity to reduce the text in the early sections
   quite a bit

   DO: yes, I can imagine a shorter "letter" given longer time

   <timbl>
   [33]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Apr/att-0014
   /State.html

     [33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Apr/att-0014/State.html

   TBL: I like abstracts that make the relevant points in one paragraph

   <DanC_> (I think that's a high bar; I raraly meet it myself.)

   <noah> +1 to Tim's comment.

   TBL: is this a summary? There are several types of app ... state...
   client... server... stateful... stateles...
   ... cookies is an example of the 1st; @@ is an example of the 2nd;
   $ZZZ is always bad

   <DanC_> (I'm not asking for less text, btw. I haven't read it
   closely enough to judge whether there's a lot of redundancy. I'm
   asking for the thesis statement(s) to be highlighted)

   <scribe> ACTION: NDW to review draft state finding for 9 May
   [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05]

     [34] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05

   <timbl> (Dave, a two-level essay:
   [35]http://www.w3.org/2002/04/Japan/Lecture.html )

     [35] http://www.w3.org/2002/04/Japan/Lecture.html

   VQ: and I suppose Ed is another reviewer

Security Workshop follow-up

   DanC: (a) community service work on passwords in the clear...
   ... (b) specific investigation of decentralized auth ala OpenID/SXIP
   ... anybody interested to spend time on this in the June ftf
   meeting? a few: yes.

   ADJOURN.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: NDW to announce that the TAG has resolved
   namespaceState-48 [recorded in
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: NDW to review draft state finding for 9 May [recorded
   in [37]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05]

     [36] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04
     [37] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05

   [PENDING] ACTION: TBL, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: write a short email
   to make his point, i.e. XML extensbility: Possible only with a
   framework providing some form of semantics [recorded in
   [38]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02]
   [PENDING] ACTION: TVR, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: summarize history of
   DTD/namespace/mimetype version practice, including XHTML, SOAP, and
   XSLT [recorded in
   [39]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]

     [38] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
     [39] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01

   [DONE] ACTION: TBL to accepted on 8 Mar 2005, provide a draft of new
   namespace policy doc ([40]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri). in
   progress. tbl would like to confirm with Ian that there's nothing
   pending on Ian's side [recorded in
   [41]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]

     [40] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri
     [41] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [42]scribe.perl version 1.127
    ([43]CVS log)
    $Date: 2006/04/25 21:14:35 $

     [42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2006 21:18:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:39 GMT