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

minutes TAG weekly 6 May for review

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 12:43:17 -0500
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <1273599797.3925.1499.camel@pav>
sorry for the delay...

http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/06-minutes.html


              Technical Architecture Group Teleconference

06 May 2010

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010May/0004.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Noah_Mendelsohn, DanC, John_Kemp, Jonathan_Rees,
          Ashok_Malhotra, Raman, TimBL

   Regrets
   Chair
          Noah Mendelsohn

   Scribe
          DanC

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Convene, review agenda and records
         2. [6]Local arrangements for London F2F
         3. [7]W3C Vision
         4. [8]Overdue Action Items (cont)
         5. [9]Writing resources re hyperlinking
         6. [10]HTML Language Reference
         7. [11]HTML5 Doctypes, Media-types, & support for older
            versions
         8. [12]CVS Hints for TAG Members
         9. [13]pending actions
        10. [14]stakeholders regarding distributed extensibility
     * [15]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 06 May 2010

   <scribe> scribe: DanC

Convene, review agenda and records

   JAR: yes, I can scribe next week

   TVR: regrets next week

   i.e. 13 May

   NM: proposed to approve
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/04/22-minutes.html

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/04/22-minutes.html

   +1

   so RESOLVED.

Local arrangements for London F2F

   NM: looks like we'll have group activities Mon, Tue

   DanC: my travel plans for June have fallen through. Regrets.

W3C Vision

   action-418?

   <trackbot> ACTION-418 -- Noah Mendelsohn to initiate discussion of
   what the TAG thinks of JJ's proposed scoping work, and whether and
   if so how the TAG will participate -- due 2010-05-06 --
   PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/418

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/418

   NM: Jeff Jaffe is organizing task forces around W3C
   priorities/vision

   AM: about how much time?

   NM: sort of email and a few calls model, I think

   AM: so sporadic?

   DC: well, no, fairly regular

   <noah> I dont think sporadic, but I doubt there's travel, and I
   assume a call or two a week plus email

   TBL: what I like to do when looking at things at a high level is
   reviewing goals and work items and how they relate ... how/why
   diagrams...
   ... I think Jeff is looking to the TAG to set out the
   [goals/missiong?] in terms of the architecture

   TVR: I'm less motivated to put together abstract models of W3C work;
   I'm more interested in driving actual tasks

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to say I >think< jeff means mission at a
   higher level

   TBL: yes, there may be some high-level platitudes a la "do good
   things" but the job here is to figure out which good things

   TVR: ok, yes
   ... that's pretty much what I was saying

   NM: I hear Jeff saying they're crafting higher level prinicples that
   would help us choose which things to do

   AM: I'm willing, but I sympathize with what TVR was saying re
   concrete/specific work

   NM: ok, of course you'll bring your own biases; just be clear about
   them

   <scribe> ACTION: Ashok contact Jeff/PLH regarding particiapation in
   W3C core mission TF [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc]

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-431 - Contact Jeff/PLH regarding
   particiapation in W3C core mission TF [on Ashok Malhotra - due
   2010-05-13].

Overdue Action Items (cont)

   NM: Ordinarily I'd leave this to the end, but the number of overdue
   items is getting unwieldy. We started this last week, but several
   people weren't there.

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

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

   action-381?

   <trackbot> ACTION-381 -- Jonathan Rees to spend 2 hours helping Ian
   with [20]http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/ -- due 2010-04-16 --
   OPEN

     [20] http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/

   <trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/381

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/381

   action-381 due +3 weeks

   <trackbot> ACTION-381 Spend 2 hours helping Ian with
   [22]http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/ due date now +3 weeks

     [22] http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/

   action-403?

   <trackbot> ACTION-403 -- Noah Mendelsohn to ensure that TAG responds
   to Murata Makoto's request for RelaxNG Schemas for XHTML
   (self-assigned) -- due 2010-05-04 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/403

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/403

   action-403 due 11 May

   <trackbot> ACTION-403 Ensure that TAG responds to Murata Makoto's
   request for RelaxNG Schemas for XHTML (self-assigned) due date now
   11 May

   action-422?

   <trackbot> ACTION-422 -- T.V. Raman to examine the current text of
   his client state finding and update appropriately with Noah's email
   from ACTION-353 -- due 2010-04-02 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/422

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/422

   TVR: I did that but just didn't send mail

   NM: you covered the maps case?

   TVR: I think that's covered by nearby material

   <scribe> ACTION: NM to review client state finding update w.r.t.
   maps case recorded in [25]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc]

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-432 - Review client state finding update
   w.r.t. maps case [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2010-05-13].

   action-422: see action-432

   <trackbot> ACTION-422 Examine the current text of his client state
   finding and update appropriately with Noah's email from ACTION-353
   notes added

   <noah> action-432 due 2010-05-28

   <trackbot> ACTION-432 Review client state finding update w.r.t. maps
   case due date now 2010-05-28

   <noah> action-432 due 2010-05-18

   <trackbot> ACTION-432 Review client state finding update w.r.t. maps
   case due date now 2010-05-18

   action-422?

   <trackbot> ACTION-422 -- T.V. Raman to examine the current text of
   his client state finding and update appropriately with Noah's email
   from ACTION-353 -- due 2010-04-02 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/422

     [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/422

   action-428?

   <trackbot> ACTION-428 -- T.V. Raman to sketch a plan to contact
   stakeholders regarding distributed extensibility -- due 2010-04-22
   -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/428

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/428

   action-428?

   <trackbot> ACTION-428 -- T.V. Raman to sketch a plan to contact
   stakeholders regarding distributed extensibility -- due 2010-04-22
   -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/428

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/428

   action-430?

   <trackbot> ACTION-430 -- Ashok Malhotra to propose a plan for his
   contributions to section 5: Client-side state -- due 2010-04-29 --
   OPEN

   <trackbot> [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/430

     [29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/430

   action-430: AM: I've been thinking about this...

   <trackbot> ACTION-430 Propose a plan for his contributions to
   section 5: Client-side state notes added

   action-420 due +2 weeks

   <trackbot> ACTION-420 What is different about xhtml basic 1.1 (in
   particular re: namespaces) due date now +2 weeks

   NM: note end of May is about a week before the ftf

   oops! got that number wrong...

   ACTION-430 due +2 weeks

   <trackbot> ACTION-430 Propose a plan for his contributions to
   section 5: Client-side state due date now +2 weeks

   action-420 due 29 Apr

   <trackbot> ACTION-420 What is different about xhtml basic 1.1 (in
   particular re: namespaces) due date now 29 Apr

Writing resources re hyperlinking

   action-322?

   <trackbot> ACTION-322 -- Dan Connolly to ask W3C management for
   writing resources re hyperlinking -- due 2010-03-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/322

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/322

   <noah> DC: I've done it N times

   <noah> DC: Recent time I said "punt", nothing will happen, and
   people went "whoa, not sure I like that"

   "Personally, I think the issue is too important to ignore but I

   appreciate how hard it must be to find the specialised resources to

   address it.

   ---Rotan"

   <Zakim> jar, you wanted to say I spoke to Thinh Nguyen about this

   JAR: I talked with Science Commons counsel about this...
   ... he says there's little/no law in this area; the courts follow
   the technical standards and the technical community...
   ... he suggested that the way to make progress in the legal setting
   is actually to work on specs/standards
   ... he's willing to speak with us

   NM: is he in the BOS area?

   JAR: yes, and he's an IP/copyright/patent laywer

   DC: sounds like he could be the missing resource we've been looking
   for; if not to do writing, at least to review and let us know which
   things are likely to be helpful

   NM: in these deep linking cases, how do standards get into the
   conversation?
   ... do you put stuff like "intended purpose..." in specs?

   JAR: yes, I gather that's helpful
   ... I'm not sure what the technical scope of the spec would be, but
   it would have to be reviewed/ratified by the technical community
   ... Thinh may be able to help us out in this area

   DC: so I could summarize for Thinh

   ACTION-322: I'll try to summarize for Thinh

   <trackbot> ACTION-322 Ask W3C management for writing resources re
   hyperlinking notes added

   action-322?

   <trackbot> ACTION-322 -- Dan Connolly to ask W3C management for
   writing resources re hyperlinking -- due 2010-05-13 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [31]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/322

     [31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/322

   action-322: note "the lengths that sites go to today to disable deep
   linking."

   <trackbot> ACTION-322 Ask W3C management for writing resources re
   hyperlinking notes added

HTML Language Reference

   NM: noting LMM's regrets, not sure how far we can get on this...

   action-379?

   <trackbot> ACTION-379 -- Larry Masinter to check whether HTML
   language reference has been published -- due 2010-03-24 --
   PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [32]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/379

     [32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/379

   DanC: I've seen interest to publish something a la "HTML 5 syntactic
   tools" noting schemas, code, test suites, but wouldn't say "this is
   the golden schema"

   TVR: things have shifted; HTML 5 was once a reaction to everything
   XML; e.g. "validation? rules? no way." that group feels they've
   won...
   ... but there's an appreciation for checking tools
   ... that's the part we should gently encourage... machine
   processable rules

   AM: if you allow multiple schemas, you have to show that they accept
   the same sets of sentences

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to say I think this is about a RelaxNG
   schema that they already have

   TVR: well, no, I think a good target is a lattice of schemas
   ... take the table/tbody stuff...
   ... having one schema saying tbody is mandatory and another that
   says it's optional is sort of OK because [subtleties that are hard
   to summarize]

   NM: re moving on from schemas... I got the impression that there
   _was_ a schema that was being maintained, and we'd encourage
   publishing it...
   ... re multiple schemas... what usually happens is that none of the
   schemas expresses *exactly* the language... they accept all the
   valid documents and perhaps some others
   ... so how do we wrap up? well, without LMM and HT, with reluctance,
   we'll just leave this action pending

HTML5 Doctypes, Media-types, & support for older versions

   <johnk_> ACTION-407?

   <trackbot> ACTION-407 -- Henry S. Thompson to propose an update to
   DanC's prose from
   [33]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.htm
   l to explicitly reference or encorporate the HTML history, similarly
   to the way 2854 does -- due 2010-04-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW

     [33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.html

   <trackbot> [34]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/407

     [34] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/407

   [35]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/thread.h
   tml#msg1131

     [35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/thread.html#msg1131

   <noah>
   [36]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Apr/0103.html

     [36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Apr/0103.html

   same as
   [37]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/1052.htm
   l ?

     [37] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/1052.html

   ah... 1052 is too old

   <noah> Response from Maciej:
   [38]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Apr/0104.html

     [38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Apr/0104.html

   <noah> DC: I think we wanted to check that things went well, seems
   to me they did

   DC: I'm content with where things are / where they're headed

   NM: so I guess we're done...

   TVR: well, it seems we've abandoned it

   DanC: We have succeeded on this one. It is not abandoned.

   TVR: isn't the media type registration closely related to the
   schemas stuff, which we've left in the someday pile?

   DanC: well, that's an interesting question, but separate from this
   one, which is about treatment of HTML 2/3.2/4

   action-407: indeed, the spec is being updated w.r.t. treatment of
   HTML 2/3.2/4

   <trackbot> ACTION-407 Propose an update to DanC's prose from
   [39]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.htm
   l to explicitly reference or encorporate the HTML history, similarly
   to the way 2854 does notes added

     [39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.html

   close action-407

   <trackbot> ACTION-407 Propose an update to DanC's prose from
   [40]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.htm
   l to explicitly reference or encorporate the HTML history, similarly
   to the way 2854 does closed

     [40] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.html

CVS Hints for TAG Members

   action-384?

   <trackbot> ACTION-384 -- Noah Mendelsohn to cVS usage edits -- due
   2010-05-11 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [41]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/384

     [41] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/384

   NM: done in
   [42]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/coordination/TAGGuide.html
   ... 14 April 2009

     [42] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/coordination/TAGGuide.html

   close action-384

   <trackbot> ACTION-384 CVS usage edits closed

pending actions

   close action-418

   <trackbot> ACTION-418 Initiate discussion of what the TAG thinks of
   JJ's proposed scoping work, and whether and if so how the TAG will
   participate closed

stakeholders regarding distributed extensibility

   action-428?

   <trackbot> ACTION-428 -- T.V. Raman to sketch a plan to contact
   stakeholders regarding distributed extensibility -- due 2010-04-22
   -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [43]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/428

     [43] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/428

   TVR: I wonder if "distributed extensibility" is a useful term;
   perhaps XML/HTML unification

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to talk about dist extensibility and RDFa
   1.1

   NM: there was a lot of discussion about RDFa 1.1 at WWW2010...
   ... I think they have a draft that uses head/@profile
   ... also, facebook has initiated stuff with RDFa and namespaces...
   ... though a developer of the facebook stuff was there and said they
   expect missing namespaces and they expect to make up the difference

   <raman> subject: Apr 22 . me - [ISSUE-41: Facebook open graph
   protocol]

   TVR: note mail of Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:09:20 -0700 with details

   TBL: they are producing RDFa, though they're perhaps not using RDF
   best practices... though they're just a few rules away

   timbl: The facebook RDFa has the problem that there are statements
   that are about things that the page is about, but they are instead
   written as statements about the page.

   NM: what's interesting to me is that just when the HTML 5 people
   were saying "nobody will use these namespace things", facebook goes
   and uses them

   TBL: there's the question of whether people will write code that
   recovers from missing namespace declarations

   <DanC_> [I wonder if they handle prefixes other than go:]

   <noah> I thought they made some use of dc:

   TBL: how about talking with Microsoft's AC rep re extensibility
   support?

   TVR: yeah... good idea...

   <Zakim> jar, you wanted to express desire for brainstorming session

   JAR: I can imaging ftf brainstorming about this would be useful
   ... even over breaks

   close action-428

   <trackbot> ACTION-428 Sketch a plan to contact stakeholders
   regarding distributed extensibility closed

   [44]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2010Apr/0038.html

     [44] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2010Apr/0038.html

   <noah> [45]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2010Apr/0040.html

     [45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2010Apr/0040.html

   <noah> > The TAG, under the leadership of Tim create a small focused

   <noah> > task-force charged with fixing XML namespaces to bring
   about

   <noah> > convergence of HTML and XML.

   TBL: yes, that makes sense, though we should be careful not to
   pre-judge which things will change
   ... I'm heartened by the optimism about getting these things
   together

   TBL polls for interest in participation... NM and TVR express
   interest

   NM: I'm particularly interested in a consensus that goes beyond the
   TAG

   TVR: yes, of course

   TBL: in fact, the suggestion is to "hatch" it outside the TAG

   <scribe> ACTION: DanC to help Tim get in touch with staff etc. re
   XML/HTML unification [recorded in
   [46]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc]

     [46] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-433 - Help Tim get in touch with staff
   etc. re XML/HTML unification [on Dan Connolly - due 2010-05-13].

   close action-428

   <trackbot> ACTION-428 Sketch a plan to contact stakeholders
   regarding distributed extensibility closed

   ADJOURN

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Ashok contact Jeff/PLH regarding particiapation in W3C
   core mission TF [recorded in
   [47]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc]
   [NEW] ACTION: DanC to help Tim get in touch with staff etc. re
   XML/HTML unification [recorded in
   [48]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc]
   [NEW] ACTION: NM to review client state finding update w.r.t. maps
   case recorded in [49]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc]

     [47] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc
     [48] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc
     [49] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-tagmem-irc

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [50]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([51]CVS log)
    $Date: 2010/05/11 17:41:42 $

     [50] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [51] 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 Tuesday, 11 May 2010 17:43:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:20 GMT