W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2007

minutes TAG 9 July for review: XMLVersioning-41, httpRange-14, WAF-WG review request

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:52:08 -0500
To: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1184086328.20170.34.camel@pav>

http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes
2007/07/10 16:45:28


                              TAG Weekly

9 Jul 2007

   See also: [2]Agenda, [3]IRC log

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jun/0146.html
      [3] http://www.w3.org/2007/07/09-tagmem-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Stuart, DanC, Rhys, Raman, Ht, DOrchard, Norm

   Regrets
          Noah, TimBL

   Chair
          Stuart

   Scribe
          DanC

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Convene, review records and agenda, plan next meeting
         2. [6]Issue XMLVersioning-41
         3. [7]Issue httpRange-14
         4. [8]On "Enabling Read Access for Web Resources"
         5. [9](Post) Summer 'Recess'
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

Convene, review records and agenda, plan next meeting

   Minutes: [11]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes

   PROPOSED: to meet again 16 July, Raman to scribe

   raman: OK

   RESOLUTION: to meet again 16 July, Raman to scribe

   for next week: regrets: David, Rhys, Henry

   SKW: I may cancel if we're thin on agenda

   PROPOSED: to accept
   [12]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/02-minutes as a true record

     [12] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/02-minutes

   RESOLUTION: to accept
   [13]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/02-minutes as a true record

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/02-minutes

Issue XMLVersioning-41

   SKW: withdraw 2 and continue 3 actions?

   <DanC_> [14]DaveO RE: versioning definitions...

     [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0003.html

   discussing ACTION: DC accepted on 8 Aug 2006 Review definitions of
   partial understanding, backward compatible, and forward compatible.

   DanC made progress 21 May
   [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007May/0040.html

     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007May/0040.html

   DO: I answered that...

   <Stuart> " Indeed. All 3 reviewers have asked this key question. How
   about "I1 is

   <Stuart> compatible with I2 if all of the information in I1 does not
   replace or

   <Stuart> contradict any information in I2."

   DanC: sounds like "consistent"
   ... I'll have to think about it.

   <scribe> ACTION: DC Review definitions of partial understanding,
   backward compatible, and forward compatible. [CONTINUES] [recorded
   in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action01]

   DaveO: ... now text-set has a [different relationship] to syntax...
   ... I changed the diagram.

   DaveO reviews changes... faster than the scribe can summarize

   DaveO: the reviewers seemed to catch many of the same things

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask about diagram source

   DaveO: yes, I checked in .violet v6
   ... note violet has been updated; it's an eclipse plug-in. quite
   convenient since I use eclipse for W3C spec editing

   <dorchard> I just checked in the .violet v6..

   SKW: [something from a recent review message...]

   ball seems to be with NDW on XML strategies

   <scribe> ACTION: SKW complete review of terminology section of of 4
   July versioning draft [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action02]

   <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - SKW

   DaveO: I addressed a bunch of "add a link here" editorial comments
   on the strategies stuff...

   <DanC_> [18]section 2.2.2 Forwards Compatible

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-strategies-20070704.html#forwardsCompatible

   DaveO: section 6, case studies, is now one table.
   ([19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-strategies-20070704.h
   tml#iddiv194353056 )
   ... there's a new strategy 2.5 "some go in a new namespace, some go
   in an existing namespace"
   ... to capture the pattern where [something about ##any and ##other]
   ... I also mentioned XSLT [i.e. its versioning policy?]

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-strategies-20070704.html#iddiv194353056

   <dorchard> XSLT documents versioning, not versioning XSLT itself
   from XSLT 2.0 to >2.0.

   SKW: a process question... should we aim for last call on this
   material?

   DanC: umm... sounds good... last call after review of peer groups
   such as HTML

   DaveO: yeah, HTML, XML Schema, XML Core

   raman: and CSS, and XHTML 2

   DanC: yes, I'd like to think more about the CSS versioning strategy

   NDW: yes, I'm working on reviewing "strategies" and the XML part

   <scribe> ACTION: NW Produce some information about NVDL for the
   finding. [CONTINUES] [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action03]

   NDW: by 23 July
   ... maybe some for the 16 July meeting

   (trackbot groks due dates, but the scribe doesn't know how to get it
   to do it)

Issue httpRange-14

   <scribe> ACTION: Stuart to review "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"
   [DONE] [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action04]

   <DanC_> [22]SKW on "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"

     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jun/0075

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to review "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"
   [WITHDRAWN] [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action05]

   DanC: SKW, any impact from your review on our httpRange-14 finding?

   SKW: not really; there's stuff they suggest [in "Cool URIs for the
   Semantic Web"] as best practice that goes beyond what the TAG
   decided.
   ... OK, Dan, on to your formal description of webarch slides...

   <Stuart> [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/fdesc54/slides 2003/11/24

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/fdesc54/slides

   (scribe is hardly even trying to capture the discussion as he leads
   it)

   DanC: HT's msg on terminology covers some of the same ground; it's
   just a few minutes/hours old...

   <DanC_> [25]HT on terminology

     [25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0021.html

   HT: in the case of the Oxaca weather report and [some common fairy
   tale scribe already forgot], the french and english have roughly the
   same relationship to the resource; not so for french and english
   versions of Moby Dick

   DanC: is the question of whether the translation is authorized
   relevant?

   HT: not really

   SKW: ... generic resources finding relevant... ?

   HT: only trivially. [?]
   ... english version of The Wasteland, by T. S. Eliot has special
   status. e.g. conneg...

   <Zakim> dorchard, you wanted to mention that translations sometimes
   don't hold is in GEB as well, the example being russian book (can't
   remember which author) translation should perhaps be

   DanC: this is _exactly_ the authorized translation question. In
   conneg, the publisher is making claims. if the publisher says, using
   conneg, "these are equivalent for my purposes", then they're
   equivalent for his/her purposes

   DaveO: [scribe was totally behind and let himself get distracted]

   <dorchard> translations sometimes don't hold is in GEB as well, the
   example being russian book (can't remember which author) translation
   should perhaps be Dickens

   HST: The somewhat surprising tentative conclusion is that you can't
   be a responsible Webmaster until you've taken a position on the
   issue of "The nature of The Work of Art"

   DanC walks through Frag Identifier Diagram

   HST explains indexicals: "I'm right and you're wrong!"... a phase we
   can both locally agree because it means different things to both of
   us.

   SKW: Dan, in your investigation, where does 303 come in?

   DanC: it's sort of a noop, as far as knowledge exchange, in my
   thinking. Tim's idea that it constrains things is new to me; I'm
   still thinking about it

   SKW: and Rhys, does this help with httpRange-14?

   Rhys: I'm learning a lot about backgrounds that readers bring

   SKW: is httpRange-14 a comfortable place for this discussion?

   Raman: no, it's opaque

   DanC: oops; you're right

   Raman: webarch2?

   SKW: terminology for webarch2?

   DanC: that doesn't narrow it down; does that help? hmm... yes, let's
   noodle on this a bit

   <scribe> ACTION: RL to revise Dereferencing HTTP URIs finding in
   response to F2F discussion. [CONTINUES] [recorded in
   [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action06]

On "Enabling Read Access for Web Resources"

   SKW: I did one half of my action, contacting the chairs
   ... that's going well...

   <DanC_> [27]SKW to POWDER/WAF chairs

     [27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0008.html

   SKW: on technical comments, I wrote up the 2 we discussed and added
   several more based on reading and discussion; are those others
   better as TAG comments or as my own?

   <Stuart>
   [28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2007Jul/0015.html

     [28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2007Jul/0015.html

   DanC: tactically, separate messages for separate subjects
   ... I don't know enough to endorse #6

   DO: likewise; can't say yes nor no

   SKW: OK, I'll send the ones we discussed (1 and 2) as from the TAG
   and the others personally

(Post) Summer 'Recess'

   SKW: perhaps we did this last week, but just to be sure:

   RESOLUTION: to cancel 23rd, 30th July and 6th Aug

   SKW: if we're to meet 13 Aug, I need help with agenda prep; I'll
   just be returning from holiday.

   a few others will be in a similar position

   NDW: OK, I'll prepare an agenda (or cancellation notice) for 13 Aug

   ADJOURN.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: SKW complete review of terminology section of of 4
   July versioning draft [recorded in
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action02]

   [PENDING] ACTION: DC Review definitions of partial understanding,
   backward compatible, and forward compatible. [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action01]
   [PENDING] ACTION: NW Produce some information about NVDL for the
   finding. [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action03]
   [PENDING] ACTION: RL to revise Dereferencing HTTP URIs finding in
   response to F2F discussion. [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action06]

   [DONE] ACTION: Stuart to review "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"
   [recorded in
   [33]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action04]

   [DROPPED] ACTION: Norm to review "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"
   [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/07/09-tagmem-minutes#action05]

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [35]scribe.perl version 1.128
    ([36]CVS log)
    $Date: 2007/07/10 16:45:28 $

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


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2007 16:52:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:46 GMT