W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2009

TAG minutes 11 Jun for review: TagSoupIntegration-54 (ISSUE-54), ...

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:11:52 -0500
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1244758312.5418.16096.camel@pav.lan>
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/06/11-tagmem-minutes.html


              Technical Architecture Group Teleconference

11 Jun 2009

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/11-tagmem-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Raman, DanC, jar, Sam, noah, John_Kemp, Ht

   Regrets
          Ashok, Larry, Tim

   Chair
          noah

   Scribe
          DanC

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Convene, review agenda and records
         2. [5]TagSoupIntegration-54 (ISSUE-54) and liaison with HTML
            working group
         3. [6]F2F Agenda Planning
         4. [7]Should the TAG look into architectural issues relating
            to APIs?
         5. [8]ACTION item review
         6. [9]next meeting
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 11 June 2009

Convene, review agenda and records

   <noah> Hi Sam, thank you for joining us.

   <rubys1> glad to be here

   NM welcomes Sam Ruby, reviews agenda

   NM: next week's telcon is at risk; no regrets now, though

   RESOLUTION: to approve
   [11]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/05/28-minutes

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/05/28-minutes

TagSoupIntegration-54 (ISSUE-54) and liaison with HTML working group

   NM: clearly success of HTML specs in development is a high priority
   for W3C...
   ... evolution of HTML interacts with our issues on language
   versioning and error handling
   ... we've talked about RDFa some

   TVR: what news since the AC meeting; any news of your work with
   Steven P?

   SR: the work with Steven... we looked at RDFa as a test case...
   ... Ian Hickson took the RDFa requirements and produced something
   different
   ... I think the review of RDFa by the HTML WG has turned up
   technical issues...
   ... RDFa was designed in the context of XHTML, but it's deployed in
   text/html, and that raises issues...
   ... there are test cases and a spec being written

   (test cases? I try to keep an eye out for those. maybe I'll q+ to
   ask for pointers.)

   <ht_redmond> Browsers are not the only HTML-consuming application. .
   .

   NM: suppose this new spec depended on head/@profile but the editor
   of the main HTML 5 spec didn't specify @profile...

   SR: yes, that's somewhat likely... @profile works a certain way in
   browsers; that's not really an issue, operationally. The only
   operational issue is what validator should say

   <Zakim> ht_redmond, you wanted to ask about extensibility/namespaces

   <rubys1> I can hear Henry fine

   HT: ~1.5years ago, we discussed ARIA attributes in HTML 5...

   SR: yes, I recall...

   HT: it didn't work out as I would have liked, despite my spending a
   lot of energy... we seem to have aria_* attributes [or aria-* ]
   ... "extensibility is pretty much done" is one of the main
   arguments, especially from hsivonen. Where are we on that
   discussion?

   SR: I think hsivonen hasn't changed his position. I don't agree, but
   I don't see how to convince people such as hsivonen

   <Zakim> jrees, you wanted to say I want to understand html5 attitude
   to extension... agree with assessment "it's going to happen, how to
   channel it"

   [scribe missed what jar refers to re attributes]

   SR: [earlier] people use new attributes all the time...

   TVR: Chris Wilson seems to support extensibilty; he's moved away
   from the IE browser team... is he [doing something]?
   ... it seems to be that anyone who has a different opinion walks
   away.

   [scribe struggles to record the gist of TVR's comment and SR's
   response]

   NM: what sorts of extensibility mechanisms do you think are in play?

   SR: I think various extensions for things that people care about
   will happen, even without an overall mechanism. ARIA, fb: etc.

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask more about particular extensibility
   mechanisms

   SR: I hope to see, if not help build, validators that have some
   helpful approach to extensibility

   NM: there's a self-describing sense to the web with a few registries
   (URI schemes, media types) and URI-based hooks... it looks like
   that's being lost with this free-for-all of fb: and aria-*

   SR: I think it's worth encouraging a few other vocabularies before
   building the extensibility bridge

   NM: but doesn't that risk 3 or 4 mechanisms that we have to support?

   TVR: yes, that does look like a risk

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to add the palm pre stuff to the list

   [12]http://www.w3.org/QA/2009/02/palm_webos_approach_to_html_ex.html

     [12] http://www.w3.org/QA/2009/02/palm_webos_approach_to_html_ex.html

   <div x-mojo-element="ToggleButton"

   <jrees> original question was how can tag be helpful. no answer?

   <jrees> so does the html5 wg need to know anything?

   TVR: I hear that unification efforts winding down and polarization
   remaining; this seems that there's little opportunity for the TAG to
   make a difference in the coming months

   NM: we'd have to show people something they don't know. "we're the
   tag and we think X" doesn't help much

   <Zakim> ht_redmond, you wanted to ask about the AC meeting question:
   managing the namespace, who's on top?

   NM: thanks for coming, Sam; if there's anything we can do to
   catalyze things, please let us know

F2F Agenda Planning

   <noah> [13]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/06/23-agenda

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/06/23-agenda

   NM: one constraint I'm working with is that TVR is only available to
   dial in in our afternoons
   ... major goals of the meeting are * work on client-side URL
   patterns [?] and * versioning

   <johnk__> +1, agenda looks ok to me too

   ACTION-33 due next week

   <trackbot> ACTION-33 revise naming challenges story in response to
   Dec 2008 F2F discussion due date now next week

   NM: note people identified as shepherds for sessions

Should the TAG look into architectural issues relating to APIs?

   ACTION-273?

   <trackbot> ACTION-273 -- Ashok Malhotra to carry forward framing
   issues around Archicture of APIs, with help from JK and LM -- due
   2009-06-04 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [14]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/273

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/273

   JK: AM and LM and I talked about this and drafted something...
   ... trying to frame the issue...

ACTION item review

   action-255?

   <trackbot> ACTION-255 -- John Kemp to contact Sam to ask (a) how can
   the TAG be helpful (b) offer set up phone call involving Sam & 1 or
   2 others -- due 2009-05-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/255

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/255

   close ation-255

   close action-255

   <trackbot> ACTION-255 Contact Sam to ask (a) how can the TAG be
   helpful (b) offer set up phone call involving Sam & 1 or 2 others
   closed

   [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jun/0013.html

     [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jun/0013.html

   <noah>
   [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jun/0028.html

     [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jun/0028.html

   <noah>
   [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jun/0013.html

     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jun/0013.html

   <noah> [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet.html

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet.html

   NM: maybe the "when to use get" finding should be updated to deal
   with malicious actors?

   ACTION-255: the tag considered updating the "when to use get"
   finding but didn't find a critical mass of interest

   <trackbot> ACTION-255 Contact Sam to ask (a) how can the TAG be
   helpful (b) offer set up phone call involving Sam & 1 or 2 others
   notes added

   close action-255

   <trackbot> ACTION-255 Contact Sam to ask (a) how can the TAG be
   helpful (b) offer set up phone call involving Sam & 1 or 2 others
   closed

   ACTION-257?

   <trackbot> ACTION-257 -- Noah Mendelsohn to invite Mark Not or Lisa
   D to revisit progress in IETF/HTML liaison on content sniffing --
   due 2009-05-28 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/257

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/257

   ACTION-264 due july 11

   <trackbot> ACTION-264 Draft agenda item for upcoming telcon
   discussion of geolocation and privacy due date now july 11

   close ACTION-270

   <trackbot> ACTION-270 Provide additional material for review at F2F
   for Issue 41 closed

   action-270?

   <trackbot> ACTION-270 -- Larry Masinter to provide additional
   material for review at F2F for Issue 41 -- due 2009-06-22 --
   PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/270

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/270

   ACTION-272 due 15 June

   <trackbot> ACTION-272 Report back to the TAG on outcome of
   collaboration with LM on Versioning due date now 15 June

   ACTION-273 due 15 June

   <trackbot> ACTION-273 Carry forward framing issues around Archicture
   of APIs, with help from JK and LM due date now 15 June

next meeting

   RESOLUTION: to cancel the TAG telcon of 18 June

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version 1.134
    ([23]CVS log)
    $Date: 2009/06/11 22:09:08 $

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


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2009 22:11:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:14 GMT