W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2008

RE: TAG minutes from 11th September 2008

From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:40:53 +0000
To: John Bradley <john.bradley@wingaa.com>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <233101CD2D78D64E8C6691E90030E5C81B6C345850@GVW1120EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net>
John,

Thanks,  yes that could have been clearer, things got played out of order.

My "That's not the proposal" was recorded by the scribe with the incantation from <jar>  "/me'd" into the log which means it does
not propagate into the meeting record. To help the scribe <jar> reincanted his utterance out of order (as noted) to which the
'That's *not* the proposal" was my response.

> >   SKW: That's not the proposal
> >
> >   <jar> (Out of order) saying "[14]http://xri.*/*" are XRIS 
> is same as
> >   saying "[15]http://*/ark:*" are ARKs ...
> >
> >     [14] http://xri.*/*
> >     [15] http://*/ark:*
> >
> >   <ht> And I think there is _some_ room to argue that both of these
> >   are OK, if not ideal

Apologies for any confusion caused - we should have reordered that in the published (draft) record.

BR

Stuart
--
Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Bradley [mailto:john.bradley@wingaa.com] 
> Sent: 16 September 2008 17:29
> To: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
> Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: TAG minutes from 11th September 2008
> 
> 
> I just want to clarify that when David boot and I refer to 
> URI prefix  
> we are defiantly not talking about the DNS sub-domain as 
> indicated in  
> the minutes.
> 
> A URI prefix must follow the chain of authority.
> http://xri.*/*   is not following the DNS chain of authority and  
> though used as an example in the current XRI spec,  it is not 
> part of  
> the proposal.
> 
> The booth+bradley proposal requires URI prefixes in the form:
> http://*.xri/*    (if registering a new TLD)
> http://*.xri.net/*  (if using the existing proxy domain)
> http://thing-described-by.org  (if using David's thing described by  
> sub-scheme)
> 
> I agree that the examples
> >     [14] http://xri.*/*
> >     [15] http://*/ark:*
> 
> 
> Are not ideal and at least on the the XRI side we have moved beyond  
> that.
> 
> Some discussion we have had regarding a way of doing "Dynamic booth 
> +bradley" may work well with the existing ARK syntax.
> That however is a separate topic.
> 
> Regards
> John Bradley
> 
> On 16-Sep-08, at 8:34 AM, Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote:
> 
> >
> > Draft minutes from our meeting of 11th September 2008 are 
> available  
> > in plain text below and at:
> >
> >        http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/11-minutes
> >
> > My thanks to our scribe.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Stuart Williams
> > --
> > Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell,  
> > Berks RG12 1HN
> > Registered No: 690597 England
> > = 
> > = 
> > = 
> > = 
> > = 
> > = 
> > = 
> > = 
> > = 
> > 
> ======================================================================
> >
> >
> >   [1]W3C
> >
> >      [1] http://www.w3.org/
> >
> >                               - DRAFT -
> >
> >                           TAG Weekly Telcon
> >
> > 11 Sep 2008
> >
> >   [2]Agenda
> >
> >      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/11-agenda
> >
> >   See also: [3]IRC log
> >
> >      [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-tagmem-irc
> >
> > Attendees
> >
> >   Present
> >          Stuart_Williams, Jonathan_Rees, T.V._Raman, Henry_Thompson,
> >          Ashok_Malhotra, Dan_Connolly, Dave_Orchard, Noah_Mendelsohn
> >
> >   Regrets
> >          Noah, Norm, DaveO(partial)
> >
> >   Chair
> >          Stuart Williams
> >
> >   Scribe
> >          Ashok Malhotra
> >
> > Contents
> >
> >     * [4]Topics
> >         1. [5]Convene
> >         2. [6]binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30)
> >         3. [7]UrnsAndRegistries-50 (ISSUE-50)
> >         4. [8]Self-Describing Web
> >         5. [9]F2F Agenda
> >         6. [10]abbreviatedURI-56 (ISSUE-56)
> >     * [11]Summary of Action Items
> >     _________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> >   <skw> Scribe: Ashok Malhotra
> >
> > Convene
> >
> >   <scribe> scribenick: Ashok
> >
> >   No comments on agenda
> >
> >   Resolution: Minutes from Sep 4 approved
> >   [12]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-tagmem-minutes
> >
> >     [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-tagmem-minutes
> >
> >   Next week call a risk. Regets from Tim. Stuart may not be able to
> >   make it
> >
> >   HT: Use the time to read our documents
> >
> >   Cancel next week's meeting
> >
> >   <jar> +1 use the time to read
> >
> >   Next meeting f2f
> >
> >   Raman: If we are serious abt this, all TAG members should read the
> >   HTML spec
> >
> >   DanC: Please let's finish reading list and Agenda for f2f
> >
> > binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30)
> >
> >   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to acknowledge my EXI actions
> >
> >   HT: I will read these on the 'plane and make a recommendation on
> >   what we should do
> >
> >   DanC: Last, we said tell us how you are better than gzip
> >
> >   HT: That's where we are, the ball is bak in our court.
> >
> >   SKW: We will discuss this again at our FTF.
> >
> > UrnsAndRegistries-50 (ISSUE-50)
> >
> >   <DanC> (though Dec sounds wierd... I thought our request was since
> >   Dec)
> >
> >   HT: I'm working on a new document. Shd have it ready 
> middle on next
> >   week
> >
> >   <DanC> close action-167
> >
> >   <trackbot> ACTION-167 S to start a thread on non-DNS authority
> >   resolution on www-tag closed
> >
> >   DanC: What's happening with XRIs?
> >
> >   SKW: Summarizes situation
> >
> >   We have not had a formal proposal saying would you be 
> happy with ...
> >
> >   SKW: We had a discussion on how the discussion was going
> >
> >   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to check whether skw meant it 
> when he said
> >   "prefix", since DNS names go least-significant-first
> >
> >   <DanC> does either booth or bradly advocate an actual prefix?
> >
> >   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to say there's one thing we will need to
> >   chase no matter what
> >
> >   <ht> Abstract Identifier document:
> >   [13]http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
> >
> >     [13] 
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
> >
> >   SKW: That's not the proposal
> >
> >   <jar> (Out of order) saying "[14]http://xri.*/*" are XRIS 
> is same as
> >   saying "[15]http://*/ark:*" are ARKs ...
> >
> >     [14] http://xri.*/*
> >     [15] http://*/ark:*
> >
> >   <ht> And I think there is _some_ room to argue that both of these
> >   are OK, if not ideal
> >
> > Self-Describing Web
> >
> >   Noah has incorporated feedback from Norm and SKW:
> >
> >   SKW: Norm and I would be supportive of publication
> >
> >   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to ask a question
> >
> >   ht: In a discussion with a student I realized ...
> >
> >   <ht> I believe the following: "FYN works iff every party to the
> >   story is a) publically accountable
> >
> >   <ht> and b) aware of the dependency of the FYN story on their part
> >   of it.
> >
> >   <ht> "
> >
> >   <DanC> I think you can follow-your-nose into policies and 
> such that
> >   aren't world-readable
> >
> >   DanC: I would not say 'publically accounatable"
> >
> >   HT: The parties have to be publically accountable
> >
> >   SKW: The draft does not say this
> >
> >   HT: I would like to discuss this
> >
> >   SKW: Pl. send comment
> >
> >   DanC: I disagree for 3 reasons
> >
> >   <DanC> (I ran out after 2)
> >
> >   <DanC> (1) need not be world-readable
> >
> >   <DanC> (2) the URI for text/plain isn't actually critical path
> >
> >   <DanC> ... currently
> >
> >   <DanC> (though it's nice that the text/plain full URI is 
> in an RFC)
> >
> >   HT: I will send mail on this
> >
> >   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to think about whether RDFa is critical
> >   path: if we leave it aside, what's the audience/purpose? and to
> >
> >   DanC: How can we finish without RDFa story?
> >   ... I'm not sure story holds up
> >
> >   SKW: can we document missing link and encourage them to put it in
> >   place.
> >
> >   <skw> [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda
> >
> >     [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda
> >
> > F2F Agenda
> >
> >   SKW: Talks about the f2f agenda. Thanks Raman for his help
> >
> >   DanC: I would like to negotiate the reading list now
> >
> >   <DanC> I hear from skw: urnsregs, binaryxml, html*,
> >
> >   <DanC> digest of ?
> >
> >   SKW: Should read binary XML specs, HTML spec, collected digest of
> >   refernces from Raman's thread
> >
> >   <DanC> self-describing web draft
> >
> >   <DanC> passwords in the clear
> >
> >   Self-describing Web, Password in Clear, Versioning
> >
> >   <DanC> versioning revision from david
> >
> >   Need two readers for Binary XML, HT is one.
> >
> >   URNsAndRegistries-50 ... HT writing paper. Due Tuesday. 
> Shd be read
> >   by f2f
> >
> >   <DanC> * tim's bit
> >
> >   HT: We should all have read Tim's paper
> >
> >   <skw> also had an explicit request from David for Jar's formal
> >   treatment...
> >
> >   <ht> s/alll/all/
> >
> >   <DanC> "the document"... one document on versioning?
> >
> >   <DanC> DO nominates JAR's formalism
> >
> >   DaveO: What is new is Jonathan's formalism. Recommend people read
> >   this by f2f
> >
> >   <DanC> DO: key chapter is ch5
> >
> >   DaveO: Please review Chapter 5. That is new and is key
> >
> >   <DanC> HT nominates SVG and HTML thread from 
> public-html... a dozen
> >   messages
> >
> >   HT: Read SVG and HTML thread. Read 10 msgs and get a 
> feeling of the
> >   context
> >
> >   <DanC> TVR 2nds... long thread... read for motivations
> >
> >   <DanC> (looks like TVR's agenda input subsumes HT's suggestion to
> >   read a thread)
> >
> >   TVR: Read HTML spec with a view thru the structuring lens 
> I proposed
> >
> >   JR: Is there a document that tells why W3C got involved in html5
> >
> >   <noah> Are you discussing reading list?
> >
> >   <jar>
> >   [17]http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
> >
> >     [17] 
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture
> >
> >   <jar> ?
> >
> >   DanC: I can point to formal mataerial but that's not what you want
> >
> >   <DanC> on mime types... a section of the html spec
> >
> >   <DanC> pwinc fri
> >
> >   <noah> Friday's OK if short, I think.
> >
> >   <DanC> (thanks; I was just gonna ask for irc convirmation)
> >
> >   Noah: Are we all supposed to read whole HTML spec?
> >
> >   <DanC> nm nominates thread on meeting goals
> >
> >   Noah: Please read thread on Tag Soup
> >
> >   HT: Norm is not coming to Kansas City
> >
> >   <skw> I think that the thread Noah referred to is based at:
> >   [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2008Aug/0019.html
> >
> >     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2008Aug/0019.html
> >
> >   DanC: I will send mail before EOD after editing agenda page
> >
> >   Possible topic GenricResources-53
> >
> >   Content negotiation and Abstract Documents
> >
> >   Not on agenda currently. You can lobby me.
> >
> >   TVR: Steve said he was pulling in my TPAC proposal
> >
> > abbreviatedURI-56 (ISSUE-56)
> >
> >   SKW: Asks abt status of CURIE comments
> >
> >   <DanC> (anybody have a summary of the comment? the 
> subject line was
> >   a generic "comments on X")
> >
> >   Noah: That's for responder to say
> >
> >   SKW: Summarizez comments
> >
> >   Editorial: Qnames never inted as attribute values. Some discussion
> >   on this
> >
> >   <DanC> (pls promote that "main substantive comment" to the subject
> >   line)
> >
> >   SKW: Definition of XML Schema datatype
> >
> >   <ht> Please remember that we have already fed back on this point,
> >   see
> >   
> [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0
> >   014.html
> >
> >     [19] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar
> /0014.html
> >
> >   <skw> ?
> >
> >   AM: Noah you had a comment on lack of clarity between 
> CURIE and URI
> >   where there is ambiguity
> >
> >   Noah: I sent this as a personal comment. If no objection, 
> I can add
> >   to my note
> >
> >   <jar> the whole point of safecurie was so that they can be put in
> >   uri contexts
> >
> >   <DanC> yes, now that I understand the comment, it seems 
> to miss the
> >   point of safecuries
> >
> >   <noah> Well, it hijacks the use of [ in everyone's languages.
> >
> >   Raman: I'm uncomfotable with this. We need to allow new syntax in
> >   old contexts
> >
> >   jar: If there was no intention of extensing URI content 
> there would
> >   be no SafeCURIEs
> >
> >   <jar> RDFa already would violate a prohibition on safecuries. It's
> >   too late to prohibit safecuries
> >
> >   HT: We should be careful abt distinguishing between CURIE's and
> >   SafeCURIES
> >
> >   <DanC> <ht> Please remember that we have already fed back on this
> >   point, see
> >   
> [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0
> >   014.html
> >
> >     [20] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar
> /0014.html
> >
> >   HT: We should not go back on that advice
> >
> >   TVR: The way Noah phrased it it sets a very high bar for 
> new syntax
> >
> >   <jar> Two questions here! (1) CURIEs in URI contexts? (No.) (2)
> >   SafeCURIEs in URI contexts? (RDFa requires.)
> >
> >   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to say implying safecuries can be used in
> >   existing languages where URIs are expected hijacks the use of [ in
> >   those languages.
> >
> >   Noah: Explains his POV ... I should open my spec to other syntax
> >
> >   <jar> relative URIs can start with [, yes?
> >
> >   They should make clear that these things are not URis
> >
> >   DaveO: Supports Noah. CURIEs cannot be wedged into existing
> >   specifiactions
> >
> >   <jar> I repeat: There are two questions here! (1) CURIEs in URI
> >   contexts? (No.) (2) SafeCURIEs in URI contexts? (RDFa requires.)
> >
> >   <DanC> jar, does RDFa use <a href="[safecuri]">? I see deployment
> >   problems there.
> >
> >   <skw> [21]http://www.w3.org/mid/48B810F4.60807@aptest.com
> >
> >     [21] http://www.w3.org/mid/48B810F4.60807@aptest.com
> >
> >   DaveO: Must specify how CURIEs and URI are disambiguated
> >
> >   <jar> no, but it allows safecuries in other uri contexts, 
> I believe.
> >   will check.
> >
> >   <DanC> ok. deployment considerations for a/@href are somewhat
> >   special
> >
> >   TVR: XSLT uses { } is attribute value templates. Use of a special
> >   character
> >
> >   <jar> ok, URIorSafeCURIE only occurs in attributes that are newly
> >   added by RDFa
> >
> >   <noah> I did propose text to Shane on 8/29:
> >
> >   <noah> <proposed>
> >
> >   <noah> CURIEs and safe-CURIEs map to IRIs, but neither a 
> CURIE nor a
> >   safe-CURIE
> >
> >   <noah> <italic>is</italic> an IRI or URI. Accordingly, CURIEs and
> >   safe-CURIEs
> >
> >   <noah> MUST NOT be used as values for attributes that are 
> specified
> >   to contain
> >
> >   <noah> only URIs, IRIs, URI-references, IRI-references, etc.
> >   Specifications for
> >
> >   <noah> particular attribute values or other content MAY be written
> >   to allow
> >
> >   <noah> either CURIEs or IRIs (or URIs, etc.). The 
> specifications for
> >   such
> >
> >   <noah> languages MUST provide rules for disambiguition in 
> situations
> >   where the
> >
> >   <noah> same string could be interpreted as either a CURIE 
> or an IRI.
> >   One way to
> >
> >   <noah> do this is to require that all CURIEs be expressed as
> >   safe-CURIEs,
> >
> >   <noah> implying that all unbracketed strings are to be interpreted
> >   as IRIs.
> >
> >   <noah> </proposed>
> >
> >   TVR: I'm mostly OK with this.
> >
> >   <DanC> x:y
> >
> >   JAR: I'm bothered by saying "CURIES are not IRIs". There are
> >   bstrings that are both.
> >
> >   <DanC> noodling... "neither every CURIE nor every safe-CURIE
> >   <italic>is</italic> an IRI or URI"
> >
> >   Noah: I will put this in a note to the TAG list and people can
> >   comment
> >
> >   <noah> So, Stuart, what's the next step on the response.
> >
> >   SKW: Let's conclude on email.
> >
> >   <noah> SKW: Noah to redraft considering Stuart's proposal 
> on intent
> >   of qnames and add 8/29 draft text on using CURIEs where URIs
> >   expected
> >
> >   SKW: DanC, any progress on 171
> >
> >   Dan: No.
> >
> >   <DanC> p.s. any hosting issues?
> >
> >   <DanC> hmm... decisions decisions...
> >
> >   <DanC> collect all preparation materials in one place in the
> >   agenda...
> >
> >   <DanC> or tuck them under the relevant items?
> >
> >   <DanC> I lean toward tucking, so far
> >
> >   <DanC> hmm... how to do a crawl-and-zip...?
> >
> > Summary of Action Items
> >
> >   [End of minutes]
> >     _________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version 1.128
> >    ([23]CVS log)
> >    $Date: 2008/09/15 15:05:41 $
> >
> >     [22] 
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
> >     [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
> >
> >
> 
> 

Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2008 16:43:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:06 GMT