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

Draft minutes from 20 May 2010

From: Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 16:28:22 +0200
Message-ID: <C822EE96.10E5E%daniel.appelquist@vodafone.com>
To: "tag" <www-tag@w3.org>
Draft minutes from last week are at
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/20-minutes and as text below.

Dan
--

   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

              Technical Architecture Group Teleconference
                              20 May 2010

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Dan Connolly, Jonathan Rees, Larry Masinter, John Kemp, Henry
          Thompson, Daniel Appelquist, Ashok Malhotra, Noah Mendelsohn

   Regrets
          Tim Berners-Lee, T.V. Raman

   Chair
          Noah Mendelsohn

   Scribe
          Daniel Appelquist

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Convene, review minutes and agenda
         2. [5]Approve minutes 13-May
         3. [6]F2F Logistics
         4. [7]Overdue Actions
         5. [8]tracking security issues in/near HTML 5
         6. [9]Overdue actions
         7. [10]Agenda Planning for F2F
         8. [11]Sniffing
         9. [12]Next week's agenda.
     * [13]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 20 May 2010

   <scribe> Scribe: Dan

   <scribe> ScribeNick: DKA

   <DanC> Scribe: Dan A.

   <noah> zakim troubles, trying again

Convene, review minutes and agenda

   <johnk> work for me

Approve minutes 13-May

   +1

   <DanC> RESOLVED: to approve
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/13-minutes

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/13-minutes

F2F Logistics

   DanC: Yves will be attending in my stead.

   Noah: I was aware - and appreciate that.

   DKA: Dan Do you want to attend via video?

   Noah: My view of the video - if anyone wants it we can do it. I
   remain nervous about the Ash cloud. At this point we should assume
   we're all going. If that happens, I can fall back to video from w3c.

Overdue Actions

   Noah: We have a lot of overdue actions. I'd like to go over these
   with emphasis on the ones from people who haven't been on recent
   calls.

   ACTION-342?

   <trackbot> ACTION-342 -- Noah Mendelsohn to ask the TAG again about
   more formally tracking security issues in HTML5 -- due 2010-05-18 --
   OPEN

   <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/342

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/342

   Noah: Shall we close this?

   HT: Jonathan?

   Larry: What do you mean when you say "in HTML5"?

   Danc: I interepreted it as "in and around html5" - so e.g. Strict
   transport security.

   <masinter> there are things bouncing between W3C HTML WG, WEBAPPS,
   IETF hard to track

   Noah: This action is a bit broad - I'd like to close it or
   restructure it so I can track progress.

   Larry: For example, sniffing has security implications. How broad is
   the scope of security? There are a lot of design questions that
   might have security implications.
   ... e.g. Origin header, origin calculations, http extension...
   ... we need to scope it.

   <masinter> how to track this without scoping it?

tracking security issues in/near HTML 5

   Noah: Suggestions: we could appoint someone who is going to track
   security issues with html5 - and put this under the banner of
   "architecture of webapps"

   <johnk_> notes: [16]http://www.w3.org/Security/wiki/Main_Page

     [16] http://www.w3.org/Security/wiki/Main_Page

   <johnk_> what is missing from that wiki?

   <johnk_> (if anything)

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to perhaps rephrase the question as: "are
   the existing collaboration mechanics sufficient? or should we try to
   get some security review thingy set up?"

   DanC: Are the existing collaboration mechanisms sufficient? Or
   should we try to get some kind of security review set up.

   Larry: I don't have a strong opinion.

   DanC: that suggests closing the action.

   +1 to closing it unless we have something specific to pin this on...

   <masinter> I'm uncomfortable there are things that aren't being
   tracked, but I don't have anything specific that I know needs to be
   tracked.

Overdue actions

   Noah: ok let's close this - and we can [pick it up in the f2f]

   ACTION-347?

   <trackbot> ACTION-347 -- Jonathan Rees to research 303 caching
   change in HTTPbis -- due 2010-01-05 -- CLOSED

   <trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/347

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/347

   ACTION-427?

   <trackbot> ACTION-427 -- John Kemp to read 4 distributed
   extensibility proposals and summarize them w.r.t. proposals TAG has
   discussed to date -- due 2010-05-13 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427

   <masinter> re "security", perhaps bringing this up in W3C Core
   Mission issues?

   <DanC> action-347: overtaken by action-427

   <trackbot> ACTION-347 Research 303 caching change in HTTPbis notes
   added

   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 2010-05-17 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357

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

   Henry: I think we should close it.

   Noah: any objections?

   [none noted]

   Larry: back to security - I'm fine with closing the action - the
   issue of how W3C deals with security issues - I'd bring that up in
   the "core mission" discussion.

   <ht> I will try to get myself up-to-date on the state of the various
   alternative extensibility/namespace proposals that were on the HTML5
   agenda before the XML/HTML call next friday

   <masinter> 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 2010-05-17 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357

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

   Noah: Agreement to close action-357.

   <DanC> close action-357

   <trackbot> ACTION-357 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 closed

   ACTION-390?

   <trackbot> ACTION-390 -- Daniel Appelquist to review ISSUE-58 and
   suggest next steps, due 2010-03-03 -- due 2010-05-18 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390

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

   <masinter> I don't understand what problem this is supposed to
   address

   <masinter> issue opened almost 3 years ago... is there really a
   problem?

   <noah> I think this was about things like W3C servers getting
   overloaded with requests for popular resources

   DKA: I will try to make some progress on this for next week.

   ACTION-410?

   <trackbot> ACTION-410 -- Larry Masinter to let the TAG know that the
   IRIEverywhere plan in HTML WG went as planned -- due 2010-04-13 --
   OPEN

   <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410

   Noah: should we close this?

   Larry: ah . ammm ...nnnnn

   <DanC> action-58: DKA intends to look at it this week w.r.t. whether
   it should be on the ftf agenda

   <trackbot> ACTION-58 fix .htaccess in 2007/09 so that .owl files get
   the right mime type notes added

   Larry: I have nothing to tell the tag at this time.
   ... Maybe postpone the action?

   Noah: Maybe edit the title - or add a note with status?

   <jar> action-390 due in 1 week

   <trackbot> ACTION-390 Review ISSUE-58 and suggest next steps, due
   2010-03-03 due date now in 1 week

   Larry: I am not ready to report on it right now.

   <DanC> action-58: due +1 week

   <trackbot> ACTION-58 fix .htaccess in 2007/09 so that .owl files get
   the right mime type notes added

   <DanC> action-410 due 1 Nov

   <trackbot> ACTION-410 Let the TAG know that the IRIEverywhere plan
   in HTML WG went as planned due date now 1 Nov

   ACTION-411?

   <trackbot> ACTION-411 -- Larry Masinter to take the next step on
   announcing IRIEverywhere -- due 2010-04-13 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/411

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/411

   Larry: My concern is that my plan for IRI everywhere wasn't
   sufficient. There are some other documents that might also need
   updating.

   <DanC> action-410?

   <trackbot> ACTION-410 -- Larry Masinter to let the TAG know whether
   and when the IRIEverywhere plan in HTML WG went as planned -- due
   2010-11-01 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410

   DanC: We resolved the issue and Larry was to announce the
   resolution.

   Larry: I'm not ready to do that until things are clearer.

   Noah: Withdraw this action?

   Danc: I'd like to put it in "pending review".

   Larry: I'll come back next week.

   ACTION-415?

   <trackbot> ACTION-415 -- John Kemp to edit ftf minutes day 1
   (Wednesday 24 March) -- due 2010-04-02 -- CLOSED

   <trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/415

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/415

   ACTION-414?

   <trackbot> ACTION-414 -- Henry S. Thompson to prepare a draft
   agenda, including goals and means, for a proposed afternoon session
   with invited guests, and circulate for discussion prior to a
   decision, on the subject of addressing the persistence of domain
   names -- due 2010-05-17 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/414

     [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/414

   <DanC> action-411: LMM says this isn't going quite as expected...
   we'll discuss soonish; mail from Larry would help

   <trackbot> ACTION-411 Take the next step on announcing IRIEverywhere
   notes added

   Noah: Will we want an afternoon free at the f2f?

   <DanC> action-414 due monday

   <trackbot> ACTION-414 Prepare a draft agenda, including goals and
   means, for a proposed afternoon session with invited guests, and
   circulate for discussion prior to a decision, on the subject of
   addressing the persistence of domain names due date now monday

   Henry: [Yes at maximum.]

   ACTION-427?

   <trackbot> ACTION-427 -- John Kemp to read 4 distributed
   extensibility proposals and summarize them w.r.t. proposals TAG has
   discussed to date -- due 2010-05-13 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427

   <DanC> . action-427 due 6 June

   John: Haven't completed. Hope to have written something by the time
   the f2f comes around.

   Noah: let's block space for ACTION-427 at the f2f .

   <DanC> action-427 due 6 June

   <trackbot> ACTION-427 Read 4 distributed extensibility proposals and
   summarize them w.r.t. proposals TAG has discussed to date due date
   now 6 June

   John: Yes.

   ACTION-340?

   <trackbot> ACTION-340 -- John Kemp to summarize recent discussion
   around XHR and UMP -- due 2010-05-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340

   <johnk_> ACTION-340?

   <trackbot> ACTION-340 -- John Kemp to summarize recent discussion
   around XHR and UMP -- due 2010-05-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340

     [29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340

   Noah: My assumption was to schedule it for next week.

Agenda Planning for F2F

   Noah: I want input from you on the f2f agenda.

   <DanC>
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/06/f2factionplan_nomarkup.html

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/06/f2factionplan_nomarkup.html

   <johnk_> yes

   Noah: First 2 items both critically important: getting writing done
   on "architecture of web applications"
   ... We need to do more substantive reviews of more substantive
   pieces of writing.
   ... Raman has proposed an initiative - regarding XML-HTML
   architectural issues..... The TAG may wish to get involved...
   ... We could try to get Raman on the phone at some point - though
   time zones are bad.
   ... good overall goals?

   +1

   <johnk_> +1 to high-level goals

   Noah: We have a large number of actions - many of which are open and
   promising some progress for (or after) the f2f. Have sorted the
   actions to relate them to the priorities...

   <DanC> (same actions are in the Web Applications section of
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-
   09?bygroup )

     [31] 
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-09?bygroup

   Ashok: [on ACTION-355] I will have something. I'm writing something
   for ACTION-430. I'd like to speak to John about ACTION-416.

   <DanC> action-430: AM is doing some writing; expects something short
   for the ftf

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

   Noah: ACTION-355?
   ... Larry - you have ACTION-382, ACTION-424, ACTION-425...

   <DanC> ACTION-355: JK is trying to get some work done between
   day-job obligations; won't be clear which stuff he can manage for
   the ftf until ~28May

   <trackbot> ACTION-355 Explore the degree to which AWWW and
   associated findings tell the interaction story for Web Applications
   notes added

   Larry: First should be pending review - ACTION-424.

   <DanC> (note
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-
   09?bygroup is always current ;-)

     [32] 
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-09?bygroup

   ACTION-425?

   <trackbot> ACTION-425 -- Larry Masinter to draft updated MIME
   finding(s), with help from DanA, based on www-tag discussion -- due
   2010-05-31 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [33]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/425

     [33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/425

   <DanC> (hmm... rather
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?bygroup&duebefore=
   2010-06-09 )

     [34] 
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?bygroup&duebefore=2010-06-09

   Noah: If you're going to do some writing - should I schedule it for
   the f2f?

   Larry: yes.

   ACTION-382?

   <trackbot> ACTION-382 -- Larry Masinter to review Web Arch web
   material and make proposals for changes or TAG action -- due
   2010-05-31 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [35]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/382

     [35] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/382

   Larry: I need an hour on the phone with Ian...

   <DanC> action-382: LMM spent some time with Ian Jacobs but hasn't
   finished what he was thinking about

   <trackbot> ACTION-382 Review Web Arch web material and make
   proposals for changes or TAG action notes added

   ACTION-412?

   <trackbot> ACTION-412 -- Dan Connolly to try the clarification
   question, blog item, or wiki approach to metadata-in-uris vs CSRF --
   due 2010-05-21 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [36]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/412

     [36] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/412

   DanC: Yes.

   Noah: [going over structure of remaining f2f actions...]

   John: I think ACTION-340 is related to webapps arch...

   Noah: I'll move that up to category 1.

   <DanC> action-340: JK/NM agree this should be moved up to the "yes,
   for ftf discussion" list

   <trackbot> ACTION-340 summarize recent discussion around XHR and UMP
   notes added

   DKA: Should we put on the schedule a brainstorm or something
   regarding the structure of the WebApps Arch?
   ... E.e. the structure?

   Noah: Would you like to do something in advance on this?

   Larry: I like the idea - if there's something you think is important
   - to prepare a structured discussion. This is an area where getting
   someone to lead the discussion is a good way to raise it.

   <DanC> . ACTION DKA: prepare discussion of structure of what we want
   to say[?] about web apps

   <DanC> . ACTION DKA: prepare discussion of structure of what we want
   to say[?] about web apps; perhaps sketch a table of contents

   DKA: I'm happy to take an action.

   Noah: We have a couple of ToCs...
   ... The TAG has not reached consensus that what we are trying to
   produce is a "document."

   <masinter> I'd welcome a concrete proposal, good way to get
   discussion

   Noah: Reach out to people by email and get feedback.

   <scribe> ACTION: DKA to prepare discussion of structure of what we
   want to do about web apps architecture... [recorded in
   [37]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]

     [37] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-434 - Prepare discussion of structure of
   what we want to do about web apps architecture... [on Daniel
   Appelquist - due 2010-05-27].

Sniffing

   ACTION-386?

   <trackbot> ACTION-386 -- Larry Masinter to review draft-barth-sniff
   and send comments, cc TAG -- due 2010-04-08 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [38]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386

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

   Larry: Things have moved on... I've tried to get others to review. I
   did a review of version 3. I don't think version 4-5 took most of my
   review comments into account. I want other parties (other than
   browser vendors - e.g. firewall vendors) to take a look.
   ... so far they haven't post their comments back.

   Noah: What should we do with the action?

   Larry: open for suggestions...

   ACTION-387?

   <trackbot> ACTION-387 -- Henry S. Thompson to review JK/NM's stuff
   on sniffing, authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
   [39]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html --
   due 2010-05-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW

     [39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html

   <trackbot> [40]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387

     [40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387

   Henry: Not likely to take this much further before the f2f. We could
   revisit it with Yves in the room.

   Larry: We could ask Yves to prepare to discuss this issue
   specifically. It's part of the W3C-IETF liaison.
   ... I disagree with decoupling [the barth mime types document] from
   this.

   DanC: Another way to look at this: We'd like the HTML and HTTP specs
   to be specific. The HTML spec cites the Barth draft normatively. The
   HTTP spec doesn't acknowledge. The HTML spec says "sniff", the HTTP
   spec says "don't."

   John: Not any more - the HTTP spec is vague on it now. I come back
   to the f2f - we came to the conclusion that sniffing is bad and you
   shouldn't do it - however in practice people do do it. We should see
   if we can acknowledge the reality of sniffing without condoning it.
   ... At that meeting we agreed that the Barth draft represented a
   [good?] single algorithm for sniffing.
   ... Larry didn't like referencing that draft.
   ... But what's our general position?

   Larry: I have a position but I'm not sure anyone else does.

   John: I have a position: i believe the work on "authoritative
   metadata" and "Self-describing web" is good.
   ... think the sniffing draft is a step forward.
   ... I'd like to understand how [Larry thinks] it's not a step
   forward.

   Larry: it's one step forward 3 steps backward.

   <DanC> (how is the HTTP spec vague? "Such recipients SHOULD NOT
   override the specified type it there are known security risks and
   they SHOULD provide for users to disable such heuristic Content-Type
   detection.")

   <noah>
   [41]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html

     [41] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html

   Noah: Not comfortable with John's paraphrase.

   <noah> Such incorrect labeling of content is contrary to Web
   architecture, and it

   <noah> undermines many of the valuable Web characteristics described
   by this

   <noah> finding.

   <noah> Nonetheless, in part because such mislabeled content is
   common, certain

   <noah> browsers and other user agents have been coded to guess or
   "sniff" the

   <noah> intended content type, particularly for responses that are
   explicitly

   <noah> typed as text/plain.

   <noah> Such sniffing breaks the chain of accountability

   <noah> described in this finding, making it more difficult for a
   user to hold the

   <noah> publisher responsible for a document's contents.

   <noah> Other negative consequences of sniffing are described in the

   <noah> [AuthoritativeMetadata].

   <noah> For example, "sniffing" can also expose the user

   <noah> agent to security vulnerabilities; these can to some degree
   be minimized

   <noah> by using more secure algorithms, such as the ones described
   in

   <noah> [BarthSniff].

   Noah: [It doesn't] endorse BarthSniff.

   <DanC> (I still struggle with " many servers ... serve incorrect
   Content-types". what the server spits out is correct by definition,
   from the architectural point of view.)

   Larry: this is part of the discussion on mime types. What I don't
   like is that the mime type labeling is incorrect.

   <DanC> (perhaps "serve misconfigured mime types")

   Noah: I understand that once it's on the wire it's by definition
   correct. I'm saying - back before it's served, if I tell my server
   to serve a jpeg as tex/plain that that is incorrect.
   ... people are negligent are setting the switches... [configuration
   of mime types].
   ... or people are unable to set the switches.

   +1 to Noah -

   Larry: I doubt that.

   Noah: [chronology of mime type pain on the web]
   ... USer agent guys are committed to sniffing because [of a
   perception] that the servers are [often] misconfigured.

   Larry: I'm not sure I believe the story.

   <Zakim> ht_home, you wanted to address the "do we have a position"
   question

   <ht_home>
   [42]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.htm
   l

     [42] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.html

   Henry: i am in the same general space that john is - our existing
   findings are good, they can be improved, and Barth is a step
   forward.

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to talk about what proposed text says

   <masinter> some steps forward and some steps backward

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to sympathize with larry in a couple ways
   (1) the future is longer than the past, and (2) what suggests the 1
   algo...

   DanC: Today I sympathize with Larry - First of all, the future is
   longer than the past. We should try to get things to be better. On
   converging on one algorithm...

   <noah> I'm just a little frustrated: we had an action to review some
   text. Henry decided he'd prefer not, which is ok, but I think the
   first question is: does anyone else want to review the proposed
   text?

   <masinter> i just checked again, and sniffing PDF is really causing
   a lot of bugs, the browsers should stop doing it

   DanC: [whenever a new content type comes along the same forces will
   head toward a new algorithm]

   Larry: Sniffing PDF is a bug. There are no reasonable use cases
   where PDF files are mislabeled that should be sniffed. The proposal
   in the document should be removed.

   Noah: there was an action on Henry to look at particular text that
   has been drafted. Should we kill off ACTION-387?

   DanC: I'm interested to see fixes [but none to propose].

   Noah: if the incorrect bit could be replaced would you view the rest
   as a step forward?

   DanC: This week I don't think we should endorse the barth draft.

   Noah: I don't view it as an endorsement.

   DanC: It "endorses" it as "accepted and securre"

   Larry: there's nothing in [barth
   ... ] that is is secure.

   Noah: John - we're now hearing substantive concerns with the text...
   should we leave that as it is?

   Henry: No! [suggests putting it on the back burner]
   ... You think it's good, John thinks it's good, DanC thinks it good
   except for one word, I [think it's good].

   John: We don't have to approve it or endorse it...

   <DanC> (I can live with endorsing the barth draft; I don't prefer
   it, though)

   Larry: I don't think there's an algorithm that's generally accepted
   as approved.

   <masinter> yet

   John: they made a change in http bis that loosened the language
   there. They relaxed the text and made it more vague (than 1.1). If
   we loosen things up - then we are making sniffing a little more
   endorsed. That changes the dynamics.
   ... If there is an algorithm that is secure and accepted then we
   should endorse it

   Henry: I agree that the current http draft went too far. We've
   agreed that they need to add something that says "sniffing is bad" -
   I don't agree that we have to get them to do anything at all with
   respect to barth. What could be achievable could be to get the
   http-bis dra
   ... aft to say "sniffing is bad."

   <DanC> action-370>

   <DanC> action-370?

   <trackbot> ACTION-370 -- Henry S. Thompson to hST to send a
   revised-as-amended version of
   [43]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.html to
   the HTTP bis list on behalf of the TAG -- due 2010-05-17 --
   PENDINGREVIEW

     [43] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.html

   <trackbot> [44]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/370

     [44] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/370

   <ht_home>
   [45]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.htm
   l is my attempt to do 370

     [45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.html

   <masinter> i like
   [46]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0659.htm
   l

     [46] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0659.html

   <masinter> Yves proposed text for HTTPBIS

   Noah: We could leave a note in the action and put if off...

   <ht_home> That's what I would like to discuss at the f2f, with Yves

   ACTION-387?

   <trackbot> ACTION-387 -- Henry S. Thompson to review JK/NM's stuff
   on sniffing, authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
   [47]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html --
   due 2010-05-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW

     [47] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html

   <trackbot> [48]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387

     [48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387

   <DanC> (in sum, I suggest: close action-386 as lmm did it. leave
   action-370 as pending review and take it up with yves in London, and
   leave 387 pending review for London discussion too.)

   Henry: let's talk about ACTION-370 [with Yves] in the f2f.

   <DanC> action-387: LMM, DC expressed concerns about "incorrect"

   <trackbot> ACTION-387 Review JK/NM's stuff on sniffing,
   authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
   [49]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
   notes added

     [49] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note Yves's latest offering and to and
   to

   Noah: Proposal on ACTION-387: we will update it to have a due date a
   few months and add notes that it is being put off to await progreess
   on action-370 and when that happens we will address concerns about
   the word "incorrect" and also the issue of security.

   Larry: I'd like to include in the discussion - combine the
   discussion of ACTION-424 and ACTION-425 with this.

   Noah: We need to get at the more fundamental "What do mime types
   mean?"

   Henry: I think it's entirely reasonable to discuss this [at the f2f]

   <DanC> action-424: LMM prefers to discuss this before 387, 370 at
   the London ftf

   <trackbot> ACTION-424 Start discussion on www-tag about additional
   finding/web architecture around MIME types in web architecture,
   updating existing findings notes added

   Noah: I'm going to make a note on ACTION-387 to discuss it [at the
   f2f] along with ACTION-370.

   <noah> Note that Larry would like 370 to be discussed after 424/425

   <DanC> action-387 due 7 Jun

   <trackbot> ACTION-387 Review JK/NM's stuff on sniffing,
   authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
   [50]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
   due date now 7 Jun

     [50] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html

   ACTION-386?

   <trackbot> ACTION-386 -- Larry Masinter to review draft-barth-sniff
   and send comments, cc TAG -- due 2010-04-08 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [51]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386

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

   DanC: Done to my satisfaction.

   Noah: My sense is let's close.

   close ACTIOn-386

   <trackbot> ACTION-386 Review draft-barth-sniff and send comments, cc
   TAG closed

Next week's agenda.

   Noah: HTML language reference and media types; ACTION-340; XML-HTTP
   request and UMP - CORS security

   <masinter> i'll be here on 27th

   <masinter> send me email reminding me

   <DanC> sending, larry

   Ajourned.

   <DanC> lmm, confirm you can scribe next week, pls?

   <masinter> yes

   <noah> Larry, can you scribe next week please?

   <noah> thank you!

   trackbot, make minutes

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: DKA to prepare discussion of structure of what we want
   to do about web apps architecture... [recorded in
   [52]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]

     [52] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [53]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([54]CVS log)
    $Date: 2010/05/26 14:21:42 $

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




Received on Wednesday, 26 May 2010 14:30:29 GMT

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