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

TAG telcon minutes for 25 Feb 2010

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 16:59:13 -0500
Message-ID: <760bcb2a1003021359n2ca3a080re34079cdbe4076fe@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-tag@w3.org
Draft minutes available online as


and below in text form.  -Jonathan



      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

              Technical Architecture Group Teleconference

25 Feb 2010


      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/02/25-agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/25-tagmem-irc


          Timbl, noah, DanC, Raman, John_Kemp, Ashok_Malhotra,
          Jonathan_Rees, Ht, jar, DKA, Larry


          Noah Mendelsohn



     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Convene
         2. [6]Administrative items
         3. [7]ISSUE-33 & ACTION-332: Mixing SVG & MathML in HTML 5
         4. [8]ISSUE-41 & ACTION-395: TAG Response on HTML
            Decentralized extensibility
         5. [9]Face to Face Meeting Agenda Preparation
     * [10]Summary of Action Items

   <inserted> Scribenick: jar

   <inserted> Scribe: Jonathan_Rees

   <trackbot> Date: 25 February 2010


   <DanC> +1 approve [11]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/02/18-minutes

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/02/18-minutes

   <johnk> +1 to approve the minutes

   RESOLUTION: approve minutes of Feb 18

Administrative items

   (F2F agenda discussion)

   noah: Writing quarterly TAG status, input welcome

   (Noah discussing today's agenda)

ISSUE-33 & ACTION-332: Mixing SVG & MathML in HTML 5


     [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Nov/0012.html

   <timbl> The HTML 5 design puts MathML elements in the MathML

   <timbl> (and likewise SVG) with no syntactic cost to authors:

   danc: Opinions on the HTML WG design for MathML and SVG?

   <timbl> Given that the algorithm as far as I can see can be
   separated into a quite generic one, and a bit of metadata which
   defines which element names trigger which namespcaes, and given that
   it generates an XML DOM basically, this seems a nice design.

   timbl: Good feature: it's not specific to HTML. So there is
   potential for follow-your-nose.

   <DanC> "There isn't a general-purpose mechanism

   <DanC> for mixing other UI-related namespaces in the spec, but any

   <DanC> of that sort that should come along should be consistent with

   <DanC> the HTML 5 design, IMO."

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask how this issue is different from
   dist. extensibility discussion?

   Noah: what I still trip over is who decides what these elements are,
   how they get updated
   ... there's no distributed extensibility story [but maybe there
   could be]

   <noah> Dan, we'll have you scribe another time.

   danc: DKA, Do you know about XBL or XBL2?

   DKA: negative

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to make two points: text/html vs.
   application/xml+html; extensibility aspects of this design

   <noah> NM: I pointed out that the lack of a syntactic hook for
   distributed extensibility bothers me. Otherwise, it seems OK.

   ht: my 2nd point is what Noah says, there's centralised
   extensibility, not distributed extensibility
   ... But also it's another wedge between html and xhtml
   serialization. [...] doesn't work

   <noah> Raman is saying people depend on common prefixes. Maybe. Not
   sure I completely believe that.

   raman: with this design pattern, a particular way of doing things is
   being pushed

   <timbl> <svg:html><html:math><html<mi>x<//html:ma>

   <DanC> (no; don't go into namespace binding stuff... at least: don't
   go into stuff that doesn't address the *User Interface* aspects;
   screen real-estate, event bubbling, etc.)

   ht: a casual reader would think that there are these two magic
   elements <math> and <svg>. once you get to one of these you're using
   mathml or svg. this reasoning would be faulty

   <timbl> Other cross-over points? Please elaborate

   ht: the price is quadratic

   danc: you have to think about html inside svg, etc. - all

   <ht> ht: OK, DanC, so, yes, cubic already, and likely to grow

   timbl: might be possible that extension points are common, hub
   architecture ...

   larry: the plugin interface is an example of an extensibility
   mechanism that ... dom ... [scribe slow]

   <timbl> The plugin interface needs to specify a set of elements
   which it adopts.

   <timbl> If you use this for plugins then you get search path madness
   within a few steps.

   <DanC> (binding elements to plug-ins... that's how XBL works, yes?
   does anybody here know?)

   larry: extensibility has many aspects. graphic contexts, user
   requests re caching or security, dom
   ... looking at requirements for plugin interface is a good way to
   think about extensibility
   ... mathml and svg are about rendering, but if that's all you're
   looking at you may be missing things

   <masinter> different kinds of extensibility: rendering
   extensibility, DOM integration extensibility, security integration,
   state integration

   timbl: So (you're saying) looking at the plugin API [requirements]
   is a good test.

   <masinter> math and svg integration also share events, not just

   raman: how do you write a processor that is extensible over time...
   doesn't solve the problem of how svg calls back to the host
   container... that's an unsolved problem

   <ht> Tim, for multiple magic, see

     [13] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/syntax.html#parsing-main-inforeign

   timbl: you mean it just hasn't been written yet

   <DKA> We tried to address this problem in the CDF working group,
   FYI: [14]http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/

   noah: There are people invested in this kind of generality, e.g.
   microsoft rendering html on surfaces

   <DanC> (yes, CDF was chartered to solve the general problem...)

   noah: To do this you need an integrated rendering model that all the
   pieces buy into

   raman: authoring, rendering, eventing all need to be coordinated

   timbl: This was done in Amaya, years ago, but i'm not sure whether
   you could apply a shear to something with html in it and have that
   shear affect the embedded HTML

   <DanC> hmm... interesting example tim just gave... a graph shear
   (sp?) ... whether it applies to HTML... and whether hit detection on
   HTML buttons in there work

   <ht> See also the example in

     [15] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/syntax.html#foreign-elements

   <DanC> is that different from the example in my msg? looking...

   masinter: part of the css/html to embedded object interface is
   [scribe lost]

   noah: They closed this, but left distributed extensibility open

   <DanC> "html-svg-mathml State: CLOSED" --

     [16] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/37

   ht: The situation is appalling. Don't think we should push back on
   this. SVG and MathML WGs have accepted it
   ... There will be DOM incompatibilities because attribute names are

   danc: DKA, what about the CDF experience?

   DKA: (compound document format WG)

   <DanC> [17]WICD Core 1.0 W3C Candidate Recommendation 18 July 2007

     [17] http://www.w3.org/TR/WICD/

   dka: WICD didn't have implementations

   [scribe sorry for missing Dan's summary. in a noisy room]

   DKA: the approach was that there would be separate DOMs ...

   raman: but they have consistent eventing, so you could graft

   dka: but there was a security issue, so we decided not to do that

   noah: let's wrap up

ISSUE-41 & ACTION-395: TAG Response on HTML Decentralized extensibility

   <DanC> action-357?

   <trackbot> ACTION-357 -- Henry S. Thompson to elaborate the DPD
   proposal to address comments from #xmlnames and tag f2f discussion
   of 2009-12-10, particularly wrt integration with XML specs and wrt
   motivation -- due 2010-03-16 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357

   noah: Deadline is March 23

   ht: we've seen no evidence of any constituency inside the htmlwg
   interested in this. pushing from outside would probably be fruitless

   noah: Being on record is of some value even so, sometimes

   ht: Any of these proposals would be an improvement on the current

   noah: (Discussion of TAG relation to change proposal preparation)

   <noah> I thought I'd heard particular flaws raised with at least
   some of the proposals. Is it not appropriate for the TAG to get to
   the bottom of whether that's true?

   raman: Why should TAG take a position on one option vs. another? Put
   all 3 on the table

   <DKA> +1 to Raman's suggestion.

   <johnk> yes, also +1 to Raman's suggestion

   ht: I don't have time to do what Noah asked, that is, to compare the
   strengths and weaknesses of the status quo and the three proposals,
   but I do have time to put in a change proposal. Encourage other
   proposal authors to do the same

   <Zakim> johnk, you wanted to ask whether we can simply send an email
   to WG pointing out the set of proposals we know about

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask about flaws in the designs

   johnk: We've done work here, we could say we looked at the three,
   couldn't someone in WG take a look at them

   noah: don't think we should appear to endorse one if we think it had
   a serious flaw.
   ... did our discussion peter our because of our criticisms?

   raman: The proposals got shouted down, so authors went away

   noah: didn't we say "but it doesn't do this or that"?

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask what suggests the HTML WG hasn't
   looked at these? The trick is to get a critical mass of support,
   which involves somebody who's interested to at least

   danc: I don't think the WG hasn't looked at them. The trick is to
   get a critical mass of support, someone to code them up

   <ht> Boy, setting the bar for _proposals_ at having an
   implementation is pretty high

   danc: When you said no support in the WG - don't know what happened
   to Microsoft - and there was someone else

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to disagree with NM

   danc: the wg never adopts something unless someone's convinced to
   code it up

   <DanC> (WG participants who own code and see a proposal that they're
   not willing to code up regularly reject the proposal.)

   ht: In the discussion about all 3 proposals, as in the discussion of
   the status uo, there was consideration of strengths and weaknesses.
   ... but I don't think any flaws are fatal. pros and cons are

   <DanC> ("rough consensus and running code", no?)

   <ht> Describes the IETF. . .

   ht: the community that ought to be looking at this, is the HTML WG

   <DanC> and the W3C, largely.

   <masinter> "running code" is given a priority, yes, but not
   "shipping code"

   <DanC> the code doesn't have to get written before a proposal is
   adopted, but implementors have to be *willing* to code it up

   ht: I would like noah, for the TAG, to write to Liam Quin and the MS
   proposal authors, to ask them to get a change proposal in

   <Ashok> +1

   <ht> +1


   <DanC> well, what i meant by "prototype in the context of a shipping
   browser" is "running code that's integrated with code that handles
   the complexity of the modern web"

   <johnk> +1

   <bubbles> 1+

   <DKA> to what?

   DKA, see above 'ht: I would like"

   <DKA> +1

   <masinter> +1 but note requirement may not to get CP in by deadline

   <ht> trackbot, status?

   <ht> ACTION to Henry S to draft emails for NM to send to HTML WG
   chairs and to Liam+MS authors encouraging a change proposal wrt
   distr. extensibility by 23 March

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to

   <DanC> ACTION-356?

   <trackbot> ACTION-356 -- Noah Mendelsohn to work with Carine Bournez
   to schedule followup meeting on xmlnames followup discussion -- due
   2010-02-20 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/356

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/356

   <ht> ACTION Henry S to draft emails for NM to send to HTML WG chairs
   and to Liam+MS authors encouraging a change proposal wrt distr.
   extensibility by 23 March

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-396 - S to draft emails for NM to send to
   HTML WG chairs and to Liam+MS authors encouraging a change proposal
   wrt distr. extensibility by 23 March [on Henry S. Thompson - due

Face to Face Meeting Agenda Preparation

   ht: Request time at F2F to talk about domain name permanence

   <DanC> ACTION-351?

   <trackbot> ACTION-351 -- Henry S. Thompson to look into a workshop
   on persistence... perhaps the June 2010 timeframe -- due 2010-03-16
   -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/351

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/351

   <DanC> web apps architecture product

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/products/7

   raman: Web app arch. As background, look at webapps [?] and geo

   <noah> [22]http://www.w3.org/TR/hash-in-uri/

     [22] http://www.w3.org/TR/hash-in-uri/

   raman: Next steps on hash-in-uri

   ashok: What is status of our issue on geoloc/geopriv? Open or not?

   <DanC> (we don't have an issue on geoloc/geopriv)

   ashok: ... we've been contacted by IETF

   DKA: I think it would be useful to talk about geo in context of the
   wg rechartering

   <DanC> ACTION-380?

   <trackbot> ACTION-380 -- Daniel Appelquist to draft response to
   Fredrick, short and to the point. Larry to review. -- due 2010-02-17
   -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/380

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/380

   DKA: also consider going back to the WGs to ask for changes

   action ashok Frame F2F discussion on geolocation and geopriv, with
   help from DKA

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-397 - Frame F2F discussion on geolocation
   and geopriv, with help from DKA [on Ashok Malhotra - due

   <DanC> action-380: done 3 Feb

     [24] http://www.w3.org/mid/C78FAD46.92F4%25daniel.appelquist@vodafone.com

   <trackbot> ACTION-380 Draft response to Fredrick, short and to the
   point. Larry to review. notes added

   <scribe> scribenick: noah

   JAR: I'm working on issue-57 and maybe issue-62
   ... I think there will be another draft of the HTTP semantics note.

   <DanC> ACTION-201?

   <trackbot> ACTION-201 -- Jonathan Rees to report on status of AWWSW
   discussions -- due 2010-03-02 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/201

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/201

   JAR: 2) possible other work on ISSUE-57 (address bar on
   redirections, etc.)

   <DanC> ACTION-282?

   <trackbot> ACTION-282 -- Jonathan Rees to draft a finding on
   metadata architecture. -- due 2010-03-10 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/282

     [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/282

   JAR: 3) metadata architecture (ISSUE-62) action to draft finding.
   Won't know until the 8th.

   <DanC> ACTION-282 due 8 March

   <trackbot> ACTION-282 Draft a finding on metadata architecture. due
   date now 8 March

   <DanC> action-390?

   <trackbot> ACTION-390 -- Daniel Appelquist to review ISSUE-58 and
   suggest next steps, due 2010-03-03 -- due 2010-03-03 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390

   <DanC> (chinese menu expansion: scalabilityOfURIAccess-58)

   <jar> issue-58?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-58 -- Scalability of URI Access to Resources --

   <trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/58

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/58

   DKA: I could do an overview of mobile issues (widgets, etc.)
   ... Should device access APIs (e.g. camera) be Javascript and/or

   <jar> scribenick: jar

   dka: Competing architecture proposals in the DAP WG. one from
   Google. Javascript vs. REST

   noah: I'm interested in mobile, let's talk

   <scribe> scribenick: noah

   LM: I'll be at TAG F2F into Thurs morning.

   <jar> masinter: IRIEverywhere issue

   <DanC> issue-27?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-27 -- Should W3C specifications start promoting
   IRIs? -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27

     [29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27

   <DanC> action-343?

   <trackbot> ACTION-343 -- Larry Masinter to discuss petname
   application to IRI spoofing in public-iri and www-tag -- due
   2010-02-25 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/343

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/343

   LM: I want to talk at F2F about IRI everywhere.

   NM: And what would we actually talk about wrt IRIs

   LM: On reflection, probably not much. But we could talk about things
   like whether to close the issue.

   <jar> masinter: Hoping that by then there may be more clarity on the
   IRI issue. How do we go about closing it

   LM: I'd like to prepare an action plan for resolution.

   <scribe> ACTION: Larry to prepare plan for resolving issue-27
   IRIEverywhere for F2F discussion [recorded in

     [31] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/25-tagmem-irc

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-398 - Prepare plan for resolving issue-27
   IRIEverywhere for F2F discussion [on Larry Masinter - due


   <jar> johnk: We need further discussion on sniffing

   <DanC> (HT an LMM have the actions on sniffing

     [32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/24

   <DanC> )

   <DanC> ACTION-386?

   <trackbot> ACTION-386 -- Larry Masinter to review
   draft-barth-sniff-4 and send comments, cc TAG -- due 2010-02-25 --

   <trackbot> [33]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386

     [33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386

   <jar> . ACTION johnk to frame F2F discussion on sniffing

   <DanC> trackbot, status?

   <scribe> ACTION: John to prepare F2F discussion of sniffing, being
   sure to check status of other pertinent actions [recorded in

     [34] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/25-tagmem-irc

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-399 - Prepare F2F discussion of sniffing,
   being sure to check status of other pertinent actions [on John Kemp
   - due 2010-03-04].

   <DanC> action-355?

   <trackbot> ACTION-355 -- John Kemp to explore the degree to which
   AWWW and associated findings tell the interaction story for Web
   Applications -- due 2010-03-10 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [35]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/355

     [35] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/355

   <DanC> action-355 due 8 March

   <trackbot> ACTION-355 Explore the degree to which AWWW and
   associated findings tell the interaction story for Web Applications
   due date now 8 March

   <DanC> action-352 due 8 March

   <trackbot> ACTION-352 Integrate whiteboard drawings into a prose
   document about ways to distribute applications due date now 8 March

   JK: I may have progress on ACTION-355 and/or ACTION-352 for the F2F

   DC: I've been doing some stuff on redirection. Will coordinate with

   <DanC> ACTION-368?

   <trackbot> ACTION-368 -- Dan Connolly to write up version change
   ontology as blog item -- due 2010-02-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [36]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/368

     [36] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/368

   TBL: some interest in persistent domains, but probably can't do any

   DC: I might manage to do some tabulator stuff

   <DanC> HTML+RDFa, Microdata, and Canvas in HTML WG Tim Berners-Lee
   (Thursday, 25 February)

     [37] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0871.html

   DC: Tim, do you want to discuss some of your responses to the HTML

   NM: Tim, do you want to spend F2F time on this?

   TBL: Don't know yet. Depends in part on wishes of the TAG.

   Any objection to me adjourning now?

   <DanC> +1 adjourn now.

   TBL: I think we should push for distributed extensibility.

   <DKA> ciao

   We are adjourned.

   <masinter> distributed extensibility requires orthogonality of

   <masinter> without it you don't have modulairity

   <jar> gotta go, sorry

   <timbl> Fred Brooks, Mythical Man Month

   big committee -> big language


     [38] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/02/18-minutes#item02

   <raman> n

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: John to prepare F2F discussion of sniffing, being sure
   to check status of other pertinent actions [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Larry to prepare plan for resolving issue-27
   IRIEverywhere for F2F discussion [recorded in

     [39] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/25-tagmem-irc
     [40] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/25-tagmem-irc

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [41]scribe.perl version 1.133
    ([42]CVS log)
    $Date: 2010/03/02 21:51:58 $

     [41] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2010 21:59:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:05 UTC