W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2010

Re: Amended draft minutes of TAG teleconference, 4th February 2010

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 17:53:47 -0500
To: John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>
Cc: "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFFB8B9E8A.ADD2D10A-ON852576C4.007D5A84-852576C4.007D75B1@lotus.com>
Thank you, John.  As one who was not present at the meeting, the minutes 
now seem to be very good, but of course I don't know what I'm missing.  I 
would prefer that someone who was there would take a look before we 
approve on Thurs.  Thank you in any case for the formatting corrections, 
which are a significant improvment.

Noah

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>
Sent by: www-tag-request@w3.org
02/05/2010 08:39 PM
 
        To:     noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
        cc:     "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
        Subject:        Amended draft minutes of TAG teleconference, 4th 
February 2010


I have edited the minutes to reflect the correct scribing pattern, and the 
updated document is at 
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html and below. 

Regards,

- johnk

- DRAFT -

Technical Architecture Group Teleconference

04 Feb 2010

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
  Dan Connolly, Jonathan Rees, Daniel Appelquist, John Kemp, Henry S 
Thompson, T.V. Raman, Ashok Malhotra, Larry Masinter, Tim Berners-Lee
Regrets
  Noah Mendelsohn
Chair
  Dan Connolly
Scribe
  John Kemp

Contents

                 • Topics
                                 • Convene
                                 • ISSUE-53: ACTION-231 & ACTION-232 
conneg, generic resources
                                 • ISSUE-53: ACTION-231 & ACTION-232
                                 • ACTION-326: Polyglot documents
                                 • ISSUE-51 & ACTION-308: Propose updates 
to Authoritative Metadata and Self-Describing Web to acknowledge the 
reality of sniffing
                                 • ACTION-278: Draft changes to 2.7 of 
Metadata in URIs to cover the "Google Calendar" case
                                 • ACTION-354: Client side storage APIs
                                 • ISSUE-41 & ACTION-369: Shorter document 
on version indicators
                                 • misc action review
                                 • resource/representation
                                 • HTML Microdata publication news
                 • Summary of Action Items

<trackbot> Date: 04 February 2010
<DanC> scribe: johnk_
Convene

DC: Can you scribe next week, Henry?
HT: OK
<DanC> minutes ok? http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/01/28-minutes

<DanC> "DKA: As a member of that WG, not sure I can concur "
I can't understand DKA very much at all...
<DanC> PROPOSED: to approve http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/01/28-minutes 
ammended to note that "DKA: As a member of that WG, not sure I can concur" 
should read "DKA: As a former member..."
<DanC> DKA, is it enough to note the correction in today's minutes?
<DKA> fine
<DanC> PROPOSED: to approve http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/01/28-minutes 
ammended to note that "DKA: As a member of that WG, not sure I can concur" 
should read "DKA: As a former member..." and to note that the security 
stuff is unclear
JK: I found the 'security' section unclear
<masinter> if there are errors in the minutes, send the errors to me and 
i'll update
<DKA> It should be "when I sat in on the first working group meeting as an 
observer"
JK: Happy to just note that and move on
<DanC> ACTION: DanC to take approval of minutes 28 Jan offline [recorded 
in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-385 - Take approval of minutes 28 Jan offline 
[on Dan Connolly - due 2010-02-11].
TVR: Take discussion offline
ISSUE-53: ACTION-231 & ACTION-232 conneg, generic resources

<DanC> close ACTION-232
<trackbot> ACTION-232 Follow-up to Hausenblas once there's a draft of 
HTTPbis which has advice on conneg closed
LM: Sent a note to requestor - should close the item
ISSUE-53: ACTION-231 & ACTION-232

LM: Propose to close the actions
HT: Why did we (re-) open this?
... Conneg text hasn't changed, has it?
LM: In editors draft
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2010JanMar/0033.html

<DanC> I propose that HTTPbis changeset 745 section.4.p.5, along
<DanC> with the Nov 2006 finding, addresses our ISSUE-53, Generic 
Resources.
<DanC> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/745

<jar> ht, description of http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/53 
seems pretty clear to me
<DanC> so RESOLVED.
HT: I'm happy with this
CLOSE ACTION-231
<trackbot> ACTION-231 Draft replacement for \"how to use conneg\" stuff in 
HTTP spec closed
ACTION-326: Polyglot documents

<DanC> action-326?
<trackbot> ACTION-326 -- Henry S. Thompson to track HTML WG progress on 
their bug 8154 on polyglot documents -- due 2010-01-21 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/326

DC: Done to my satisfaction
<DanC> "2010-01-12 15:11:08: The offending para has been removed: 
http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=4458&to=4459 [Henry S. 
Thompson] "
DC: offending para has been removed, you (HT) wrote on Jan.12
<DanC> close action-326
<trackbot> ACTION-326 track HTML WG progress on their bug 8154 on polyglot 
documents closed
LM: Haven't understood about the doctype - whether there were actually 
valid polyglot docs
HT: this was a very narrow issue
LM: We still have an issue around polyglot documents
<masinter> agree to close action
DC: Interested in XML well-formed
HT: There might be other issues, but not under this action
ISSUE-51 & ACTION-308: Propose updates to Authoritative Metadata and 
Self-Describing Web to acknowledge the reality of sniffing

JK: Ball is with the group
LM: Additional status - I sent review comments regarding the sniffing 
draft
... draft is inadequate
<masinter> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-04

<DanC> tx
<masinter> dated January 26, 2010
<DanC> ("the issue"? which?)
HT: there is another action on sniffing not linked from the sniffing issue
... I sent changes to HTTPBis regarding sniffing
<DanC> action-370?
<trackbot> ACTION-370 -- Henry S. Thompson to hST to send a 
revised-as-amended version of 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.htmlto the HTTP 
bis list on behalf of the TAG -- due 2009-12-24 -- CLOSED
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/370

<ht> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2009OctDec/0346.html

HT: At TAG request I sent 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2009OctDec/0346.html

<DanC> "Such 'sniffing' SHOULD NOT be done unless there is evidence that 
the
<DanC> specified media type is in error"
HT: Barth said OK
HT: However, change was rejected by editor
HT: We were asked whether we co-ordinated with HTML WG
<masinter> I am considering offering to rewrite barth-mime-sniff
<DanC> action-370?
<trackbot> ACTION-370 -- Henry S. Thompson to hST to send a 
revised-as-amended version of 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.htmlto the HTTP 
bis list on behalf of the TAG -- due 2009-12-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/370

DC: Can you pursue ACTION-370 HT?
<DanC> action-370 due +2 weeks
<trackbot> ACTION-370 HST to send a revised-as-amended version of 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.html to the HTTP 
bis list on behalf of the TAG due date now +2 weeks
<DanC> (arbitrarily; feel free to choose another date)
LM: I don't like the sniffing document
<DanC> (henry, "the rest of us liked it" doesn't speak for me)
<ht> HST would need to look at the f2f minutes
<masinter> On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 15:17 -0800, Larry Masinter wrote:
<masinter> I reviewed draft-abarth-mime-sniff-03 and sent it to the 
authors and
<masinter> the IETF “apps-discuss”:
<masinter>
<masinter>
<masinter>
<masinter> 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01250.html

<masinter>
<masinter>
<masinter>
<masinter> (ReferenceISSUE-24 and ACTION-308)
<masinter>
<masinter>http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/24

<masinter>
<masinter> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/308

<masinter>
<DanC> ("improvement" can still lead to something I don't like. 1/2 ;-)
<Zakim> masinter, you wanted to comment on use of 'correct type'
<johnk__> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/09/24-minutes#item03

<johnk__> minutes from f2f where we created ACTION-308
<DanC> tx
LM: Notion that the file has a "correct type" is wrong
LM: You're making guesses about what the author intended
LM: language of "correctness" is wrong
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask lmm about the status quo which relies on 
something other than what's in the content-type header
LM: if someone tells you it's text/plain and you guess something else, 
this is your peril
DC: community standard is that web content providers rely somewhat that 
the consumer will consult more than content-type
LM: Not sure that's true
DC: I know they didn't consider it, but if you took it away they'll be 
shocked
<jar> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/155 was closed 6 
months ago... adam's 1st draft was july 13 ... not clear whether the 
httpwg talked about it (trying to understand whether there's new 
information for httpwg)
DC: Is it more cost-effective to specify what's going on, or to move the 
community away fromthis reliance?
DC: The latter seems expensive, perhaps not possible
LM: value of reverse engineering decays over time
DC: Would be happy to see an alternative draft
LM: Happy to propose alternatives
LM: Recommend that the TAG does not update our findings to reference the 
current sniffing draft
LM: needs to be opt-in mech as well as uniform and secure
LM: set of criteria need to be met
<DanC> (can anybody write down the criteria lmm said?)
LM: reluctant to recommend sniffing until we have a good algorithm
LM: "fine-grained opt-in"
LM: happy to review barth sniffing draft 4 and suggest any necessary 
follow-up to TAG
<DanC> ACTION: larry to review draft-barth-sniff-4 and send comments, cc 
TAG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action02

]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-386 - Review draft-barth-sniff-4 and send 
comments, cc TAG [on Larry Masinter - due 2010-02-11].
<DanC> ACTION-308?
<trackbot> ACTION-308 -- John Kemp to propose updates to Authoritative 
Metadata and Self-Describing Web to acknowledge the reality of sniffing -- 
due 2010-01-14 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/308

<DanC> close ACTION-308
<trackbot> ACTION-308 Propose updates to Authoritative Metadata and 
Self-Describing Web to acknowledge the reality of sniffing closed
JK: Would like the group to review 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html

<johnk__> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0028.html

HT: Will take a look
<DanC> ACTION: Henry to review JK/NM's stuff on sniffing, authoritative 
metadata, self-describing web, incl. 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-387 - Review JK/NM's stuff on sniffing, 
authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl. 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html [on Henry S. 
Thompson - due 2010-02-11].
<DanC> issue-24?
<trackbot> ISSUE-24 -- Can a specification include rules for overriding 
HTTPcontent type parameters? -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/24

<DanC> ACTION-376?
<trackbot> ACTION-376 -- Daniel Appelquist to send to www-tag a pointer to 
and brief summary of Mobile Web Best Practices working group's "Guidelines 
for Web Content Transformation Proxies" and its implications for content 
sniffing : http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/ -- due 2010-02-10 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/376

DC: Related to content-type override issue
DC: DKA - content transformation proxies?
ACTION-278: Draft changes to 2.7 of Metadata in URIs to cover the "Google 
Calendar" case

DKA: Later...
<DanC> action-278?
<trackbot> ACTION-278 -- Jonathan Rees to draft changes to 2.7 of Metadata 
in URIs to cover the "Google Calendar" case -- due 2010-02-04 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/278

JAR: Can continue my action 278
JAR: Change the due date
<jar> action-278 due 2010-02-09
<trackbot> ACTION-278 Draft changes to 2.7 of Metadata in URIs to cover 
the "Google Calendar" case due date now 2010-02-09
LM: Thinking about this a lot
LM: What distinguishes capability-based system and what is proposed here 
is...
LM: If you have a resource, you should have just one URI
<DanC> (indeed, there's a tension with aliasing)
LM: Capability URI is not usable for an "access control system"
LM: If you combine the key with the URI, you can't do lots of things 
(expire the key without expiring the URI for example)
LM: Confidential in the finding means something really quite strong
LM: Another use pattern where the information is not confidential, but not 
widely known
LM: I don't really care if people can read my calendar
LM: Not really confidential
DC: No sharp distinction between that and passwords
DC: Counting on you not to pass it (password) around
LM: I can change the password without changing the calendar URI
LM It's the address as well as the capability
DC: Large random numbers can be revoked
DC: Rethink "don't make aliases"
LM: That _is_ one of the conflicts
LM: The other is that infrastructure of the web assumes it's ok to make 
easily available URIs (in logs etc.)
TVR Not a useful question to answer
<Zakim> ht, you wanted to gloss larry's point as revocation is willfully 
breaking a URI
HT: if you put a large random number in a uri, it says that URI identifies 
a resource
HT: you shouldn't ever revoke that capability
HT:& so you can't easily say that a URI can be revoked
DC: 403/410 them, not 404
HT: It seems you're "cheating" - if you name a resource, and then remove 
access to the resource at that URI
DC: I'm persuaded that capability URIs are OK...
<DanC> ("actual access control method" is needlessly pejorative... 
closed-minded, even.)
<jar> lm: Three cases (a) public, (b) obscure, (c) confidential
LM: I see that use of capability URIs are for non-confidential cases
JAR: Not sure what Tyler thinks of Larry's distinction
JAR: Would like to write up the "unsubscribe" case
<raman> have a hard stop, need to bale.
DC: we did write that up
DC: GET/POST finding
ACTION-354: Client side storage APIs

<DanC> action-354?
<trackbot> ACTION-354 -- Ashok Malhotra to review client side storage apis 
(web simple storage etc.), looking for architectural issues or other 
critical problems... or interesting design features the TAG should know 
about -- due 2010-01-21 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/354

AM:AM: Two client-side storage API specs.
<DanC> TAG Action-354 Review client-side storage API’s
AM: should have a better story than "cookies"
AM: name/value pairs should be made more useful
AM: I only looked at two possible cookie storage replacements
DC: Just talking about different use-cases?
AM: there's also a caching API spec and a web storage spec.
AM: I've not yet looked at these
DC: Would like to know about all these APIs and how they compare
AM: Many documents seem to explore this client-side storage case
AM: reviewed 'index' API, 'web SQL' API
<jar> indexed api and web sql api
<johnk__> WebSQLDatabase and Indexed Database API
AM: WebSQL API is not really a spec...
AM: Based on SQLLite database
<johnk__> http://dev.w3.org/html5/webdatabase/

AM: Can look at the other ones, but with what goal?
DC: Is there room in webarch for all of these?
<DanC> Action-354: ashok to look at caching api, etc. as well
<trackbot> ACTION-354 Review client side storage apis (web simple storage 
etc.), looking for architectural issues or other critical problems... or 
interesting design features the TAG should know about notes added
<DanC> action-354: and web storage
<trackbot> ACTION-354 Review client side storage apis (web simple storage 
etc.), looking for architectural issues or other critical problems... or 
interesting design features the TAG should know about notes added
<DanC> action-354 due +2 weeks
<trackbot> ACTION-354 Review client side storage apis (web simple storage 
etc.), looking for architectural issues or other critical problems... or 
interesting design features the TAG should know about due date now +2 
weeks
ISSUE-41 & ACTION-369: Shorter document on version indicators

<DanC> action-369?
<trackbot> ACTION-369 -- Larry Masinter to write a shorter document on 
version indicators -- due 2010-02-04 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/369

DC: Larry wrote a short document on version identifiers, and I reviewed it
LM: Have not incorporated your comments
LM: Suggest we postpone
LM: This is related to polyglot docs
<DanC> subject of my review msg was something like "can't get behind 
DOCTYPE-based proposal"
LM: would like conforming xhtml to be conforming html when a doctype is 
present
LM: (scribe: regarding quirks mode, I missed this mostly)
<masinter> trying to speak to the polyglot issue
HT: all kinds of things wrong with the section about doctypes
DC: W3C validator will take a document without a system identifier...
<masinter> I'm asking for help with 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/171

<DanC> ACTION-364?
<trackbot> ACTION-364 -- Dan Connolly to ask HTML WG team contacts to make 
a change proposal re issue-53 mediatypereg informed by HT's analysis and 
today's discussion -- due 2010-02-09 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/364

<DanC> ACTION-334?
<trackbot> ACTION-334 -- Henry S. Thompson to start an email thread 
regarding the treatment of pre-HTML5 versions in the media type 
registration text of HTML5 -- due 2009-12-02 -- CLOSED
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/334

HT: difference between browser behaviour and "meaning" of HTML documents
<DanC> action-364 due +1 week
<trackbot> ACTION-364 Ask HTML WG team contacts to make a change proposal 
re issue-53 mediatypereg informed by HT's analysis and today's discussion 
due date now +1 week
<DC: can you review 0015 JAR?
<DanC> ACTION: JAR to take a look at LMM's doctype/versioning proposal 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0015.html 
[recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-388 - Take a look at LMM's doctype/versioning 
proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0015.html 
[on Jonathan Rees - due 2010-02-11].
misc action review

<DanC> action-354?
<trackbot> ACTION-354 -- Ashok Malhotra to review client side storage apis 
(web simple storage etc.), looking for architectural issues or other 
critical problems... or interesting design features the TAG should know 
about -- due 2010-02-18 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/354

AM: There's a note from mnot asking "why are they doing this?"
DC: Do we want to talk about resource/representation?
<Ashok> ACTION-354: Discuss MNot note when we next discuss this action
<trackbot> ACTION-354 Review client side storage apis (web simple storage 
etc.), looking for architectural issues or other critical problems... or 
interesting design features the TAG should know about notes added
LM: Yes
JAR: can talk more in email...
DC: shall we adjourn?
<DanC> ACTION: Larry to take Dan's proposal on resource/representation and 
turn it into a change proposal [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-389 - Take Dan's proposal on 
resource/representation and turn it into a change proposal [on Larry 
Masinter - due 2010-02-11].
<DanC> close ACTION-378 (edit)
<DanC> close ACTION-378
<trackbot> ACTION-378 Draft suggested text re resource/representation in 
HTML 5 for discussion with LMM and JAR closed
resource/representation

LM: One more thing....
HTML Microdata publication news

LM: HTML WG is considering publishing microdata and RDFa FPWDs
LM: Vocabularies have "popped back in"
<johnk__> ADJOURN
<jar> Looking for an action on LMM to draft an html5 change request with 
DanC's work as input...
<jar> oh i see it now.
Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: DanC to take approval of minutes 28 Jan offline [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Henry to review JK/NM's stuff on sniffing, authoritative 
metadata, self-describing web, incl. 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html[recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: JAR to take a look at LMM's doctype/versioning proposal 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0015.html 
[recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: larry to review draft-barth-sniff-4 and send comments, cc 
TAG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action02

]
[NEW] ACTION: Larry to take Dan's proposal on resource/representation and 
turn it into a change proposal [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/04-tagmem-minutes.html#action05]


Received on Monday, 8 February 2010 22:51:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:19 GMT