W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Draft minutes of TAG telcon of 2011-01-20 available

From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:27:42 -0500
Message-ID: <4D45D7CE.7020606@arcanedomain.com>
To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
CC: www-tag@w3.org


On 1/30/2011 4:13 PM, Yves Lafon wrote:
> ...online at
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/01/13-minutes.html
>

I think you meant

...online at

http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/01/20-minutes.html


Right?  Thank you very much for preparing these.

Noah


> and for vt-100 users...
>
>
> - DRAFT -
>
> TAG teleconference
>
> 20 Jan 2011
>
> [2]Agenda
>
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/01/20-agenda
>
> See also: [3]IRC log
>
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc
>
> Attendees
>
> Present
> Jonathan_Rees, Larry_Masinter, TV_Raman, Noah_Mendelsohn,
> Ashok_Malhotra, Dan_Appelquist, Yves_Lafon, Henry_Thompson,
> John_Kemp
>
> Regrets
>
> Chair
> Noah
>
> Scribe
> Yves
>
> Contents
>
> * [4]Topics
> 1. [5]approval of minutes
> 2. [6]administrative items
> 3. [7]Overdue Action Items
> 4. [8]Web Application State
> 5. [9]overdue action
> 6. [10]AOB?
> * [11]Summary of Action Items
> _________________________________________________________
>
> <jar> Scribe: Yves
>
> Agenda for next week will include 'mime on the web' document
>
> no regrets
>
> jar to scribe
>
> approval of minutes
>
> RESOLUTION: Minutes of 14 january 2011 (
> [12]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/01/13-minutes ) are approved
>
> [12] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/01/13-minutes
>
> administrative items
>
> status report has been published
>
> f2f is in 3 weeks, need to work on the agenda
>
> <DKA> I will be there.
>
> yves will participate remotely
>
> the meeting room will be announced
>
> <noah> ACTION: Noah to do F2F local arrangements [recorded in
> [13]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc]
>
> [13] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-512 - Do F2F local arrangements [on Noah
> Mendelsohn - due 2011-01-27].
>
> <noah> ACTION: Noah to do F2F agenda [recorded in
> [14]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc]
>
> [14] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-513 - Do F2F agenda [on Noah Mendelsohn -
> due 2011-01-27].
>
> <noah> ACTION-511?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-511 -- Larry Masinter to send email framing TAG
> work on registries -- due 2011-01-20 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/511
>
> [15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/511
>
> Possible topics for the f2f might include... client-side storage,
> ietf prague meeting and related issues, persistent domain and
> Larry's tdb, HTML-XML with Norm Walsh, registries (see action-511),
> also 10th anniversary of the TAG
>
> <DKA> How about: deep linking?
>
> jar: time to talk about AWWSW
>
> <Larry> architecture of the world wide semantic web
>
> DKA: widget and offline applications, trying to unify approaches
> taken in widget, webapps and HTML5's appcache
>
> <jar> action-201?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-201 -- Jonathan Rees to report on status of AWWSW
> discussions -- due 2011-01-25 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/201
>
> [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/201
>
> Noah: might be good to have an email discussion to start work on
> this topic
>
> DKA: also API minimization
>
> <Larry> TAG products: W3C architecture web site. Meet with W3C staff
> (Jaffee, others) to talk about TAG products, involvement with WG
> chartering & architecture
>
> Noah: same, we need an email to frame discussions
>
> <DKA> +1
>
> DKA was +1ing meeting with Jeff or Ian
>
> <DKA> Lunch with Jeff might be a good idea.
>
> Overdue Action Items
>
> DKA: a few AI needs to be retired
>
> <noah> ACTION-390?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-390 -- Daniel Appelquist to review ISSUE-58 and
> suggest next steps -- due 2010-10-18 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390
>
> [17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390
>
> DKA: we need to figure out how to make progress on this issue
>
> <Larry> issue-59 is related to deep linking
>
> Yves: There was a discussion after Wilileaks denial of service. Is
> this related to such resilience issues?
>
> <Larry> taking the direction on ISSUE-58 like "deep linking", we
> could document what we know about the issue and what the
> considerations are, and write a "best practices" around it
>
> <Zakim> ht, you wanted to talk about w3c persistent resources
>
> DKA: agree that it makes sense
>
> <jar> ... and P2P HTTP
>
> <Larry> or even a blog post
>
> ht: we can have a slot even a small one on that topic of the f2f, I
> made an XML Catalog and handed that over to the systeam, need to
> track progress there.
>
> <Zakim> Larry, you wanted to suggest a "note"
>
> we can ask Ted Guild to join for a few minutes on that topic
>
> Larry: it is appropriate to do a note, a blog post or something like
> that to close the action (re: issue-58)
>
> Noah: we don't have consensus yet on the resolution
>
> <Larry> I think it's possible to document the divergent opinions and
> note that there isn't consensus, and that doing so is a valuable
> exercise
>
> DKA: if we can't agree during the f2f on progress there, we should
> drop it.
>
> Larry: I disagree that we need consensus on solutions to make
> progress on documenting the problem and possible solutions
>
> <DKA> I could change the name of the action to "write up a problem
> statement definition draft" prior to the f2f.
>
> <noah> ACTION-439?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-439 -- Daniel Appelquist to introduce
> signature-based approaches to access control -- due 2010-10-14 --
> OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/439
>
> [18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/439
>
> Larry: it's the same issue in "Mime and the Web", not sure about
> solutions, but it's valuable to outline the issues
>
> <Larry> +1 DKA if you would do so
>
> DKA: action 439 should be dropped
>
> <noah> close ACTION-439
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-439 Introduce signature-based approaches to access
> control closed
>
> <noah> ACTION-461?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-461 -- Daniel Appelquist to draft "finding" on Web
> Apps API design -- due 2010-12-31 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/461
>
> [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/461
>
> <noah> ACTION-488?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-488 -- Daniel Appelquist to solicit at TPAC
> perspectives on what TAG could/should do on APIs Due: 2010-11-09 --
> due 2010-10-28 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/488
>
> [20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/488
>
> DKA: we should convert this action to a concrete one on API
> minimization
>
> Noah: if we decide to do a more general finding on web apps API then
> we should keep this one
>
> DKA: After Lyon's meeting, I think that we need to work on smaller
> issues
>
> <noah> ACTION: Appelquist to draft finding on API minimization Due:
> 2011-02-01 recorded in [21]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc]
>
> [21] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-514 - Draft finding on API minimization
> Due: 2011-02-01 [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2011-01-27].
>
> <noah> close ACTION-461
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-461 Draft "finding" on Web Apps API design closed
>
> <noah> ACTION-480?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-480 -- Daniel Appelquist to draft overview
> document framing Web applications as opposed to traditional Web of
> documents Due: 2010-11-01 -- due 2010-11-09 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/480
>
> [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/480
>
> <noah> ACTION-480 Due 2011-02-01
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-480 Draft overview document framing Web
> applications as opposed to traditional Web of documents Due:
> 2010-11-01 due date now 2011-02-01
>
> <noah> ACTION-484?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-484 -- Daniel Appelquist to alert chairs,
> ac-forum, www-tag of TAG availability for Monday session at TPAC --
> due 2010-10-27 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/484
>
> [23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/484
>
> <noah> close ACTION-484
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-484 Alert chairs, ac-forum, www-tag of TAG
> availability for Monday session at TPAC closed
>
> <noah> ACTION-488?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-488 -- Daniel Appelquist to solicit at TPAC
> perspectives on what TAG could/should do on APIs Due: 2010-11-09 --
> due 2010-10-28 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/488
>
> [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/488
>
> <noah> close ACTION-488
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-488 Solicit at TPAC perspectives on what TAG
> could/should do on APIs Due: 2010-11-09 closed
>
> <noah> ACTION-489?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-489 -- Daniel Appelquist to prepare early draft of
> TAG thoughts on implications of Evercookie. Due: 2010-12-08 -- due
> 2010-10-28 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/489
>
> [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/489
>
> <Larry> i think this is subsumed by privacy actions
>
> DKA: might be linked to action-509, so we should close 489
>
> Larry: the problems that evercookie explore are not covered by web
> architecture
>
> like cleaning local storage for cookies
>
> Noah: how about client-side storage work from Ashok?
> ... Evercookie is client-side storage
>
> Larry: it's not explicit client-side storage, as it uses
> fingerprinting
> ... we need to make sure that client-side storage work mention
> evercookie
>
> <noah> ACTION-475?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-475 -- Ashok Malhotra to write finding on
> client-side storage, DanA to review -- due 2011-03-21 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/475
>
> [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/475
>
> Ashok's action amended to reflect that
>
> <noah> close ACTION-489?
>
> <noah> close ACTION-489
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-489 Prepare early draft of TAG thoughts on
> implications of Evercookie. Due: 2010-12-08 closed
>
> <noah> close ACTION-495
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-495 Organize something with Geo for Friday
> morning. closed
>
> <noah> ACTION-505?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-505 -- Daniel Appelquist to start a document wrt
> issue-25 -- due 2010-12-09 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/505
>
> [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/505
>
> <noah> ISSUE-25?
>
> <trackbot> ISSUE-25 -- What to say in defense of principle that deep
> linking is not an illegal act? -- open
>
> <trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/25
>
> [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/25
>
> DKA: document started, quite empty for now
>
> need to start an email discussion on what we should put there
>
> <DKA> [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/rightToLink.html
>
> [29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/rightToLink.html
>
> Noah: how about bumping the due date and have an action to start
> discussion?
>
> <noah> ACTION-505 Due 2011-01-25
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-505 Start a document wrt issue-25 due date now
> 2011-01-25
>
> <noah> ACTION-507?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-507 -- Daniel Appelquist to with Noah to suggest
> next steps for TAG on privacy -- due 2011-01-19 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/507
>
> [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/507
>
> Noah: should we discuss this at the f2f?
>
> DKA: bump the due date after the f2f
>
> <noah> ACTION-507 Due 2011-03-01
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-507 With Noah to suggest next steps for TAG on
> privacy due date now 2011-03-01
>
> Web Application State
>
> everybody read this week or last week's version of the document
>
> [31]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/01/HashInURI-20110115
>
> [31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/01/HashInURI-20110115
>
> Ashok: I will work on Yves' comment on the next version of the
> document.
> ... We need to work on what we want to recommend
> ... actually sections 4 and 5
>
> Noah: it would be great to discuss the pro and cons of the two main
> solutions
>
> Ashok: when I asked why they were using one solution r the other, I
> got back "it's how they did it" as a reply
>
> Noah: we might change the title of the document as mentionning the
> hash sigh seems like implementation detail
>
> Larry: wondering if we are looking at this through the right side of
> the telescope. We need to say "how do you design an app that will
> use URIs in a meaningful way"
>
> from the point of view, not of the user, but of the implementer.
>
> Noah: in agreement
> ... things like being able to email an URI that will convey the
> right meaning in the context of email and not the JS program
>
> The document should answer questions like when to use # sign or ?
>
> Larry: as a user you don't have the choice, it's the app designer
> who make this decision
>
> <Zakim> ht, you wanted to try to uplevel even further
>
> ht: we might go even higher up. People are building application for
> web brwosers to have apps on the desktop. The crucial bit of advice
> is about choosing uri for wide use. But it's also possible to have
> names that are not used for wide distributon
>
> <noah> HT: Not all of these names are meant for wide use
>
> <noah> Google maps names >are< intended for wide use
>
> ht: ex, in emacs, my message number are local only
> ... the fact that web software make easy to create uris for that is
> generating the issue, like using numbering that is not meant for
> broadcast
>
> Yves: Responding to Larry's point on talking to designers. My note
> talked in part about implementation details such as ability to push
> something into a CDN because you used #, has an impact.
> ... I agree we need high level views, but implementation details are
> important too
>
> Ashok: I had a paragraph related to the CNN use case where they
> create private URIs
>
> <Zakim> noah, you wanted to say I want to emphasize names that are
> meant for wide use
>
> <Ashok> Noah: yes, some states/URIs are private but sometimes these
> are used in other contexts ... so be careful
>
> Noah: while application can have pprivate state changes, it may be
> an issue that apps are choosing private URIs for things that needs a
> wider audience, like email identifier
>
> <Zakim> johnk, you wanted to wonder whether we should include the
> usage of # to hide metadata from the Referer usage in this document?
>
> <johnk> [32]http://waterken.sourceforge.net/web-key/#where
>
> [32] http://waterken.sourceforge.net/web-key/#where
>
> john: value before the # can be used for ACL and value after the #
> can be used locallly as not sent to the server
>
> <johnk> example URI:
> <[33]https://www.example.com/app/#mhbqcmmva5ja3>
>
> [33] https://www.example.com/app/#mhbqcmmva5ja3>
>
> Noah: Ashok, will you rearrange all the architectural questions?
> (general ones and ones under the CNN example)
>
> Ashok: will work on that
>
> <Ashok> I agree
>
> Noah: between sections 3 and 4 would be ideal
>
> Ashok: I will write (at worst possible changes, if not all changes)
> before the f2f
>
> <Ashok> Yves, comments most welcome
>
> <noah> ACTION-481 Due 2011-03-01
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-481 Update client-side state document with help
> from Raman due date now 2011-03-01
>
> Yves: In MediaFragment, If you're using # for video addressing,
> you're implying the secondary is part of the primary
>
> <noah> Doesn't that actually depend on the media type registration
> for the video type?
>
> <ht> [34]http://www.example.org/tool?param=7 is _intimately_ related
> to [35]http://www.exmaple.org/tool !
>
> [34] http://www.example.org/tool?param=7
> [35] http://www.exmaple.org/tool
>
> <Zakim> ht, you wanted to disagree with Yves!
>
> Ashok: I mentionned issues with relations to byte ranges as well
>
> Yves: In the case of ?, the with-parameter version has nothing to do
> with the w/o the parameter version, for the client
>
> HT: Did you mean that in the ? mark case the resources have nothing
> to do with each other?
>
> Yves: Yes
>
> ht: there is a difference between being 'by the book' not related
> and the reality, like [36]http://www.example.com/USA/ma/bos/xxx and
> [37]http://www.example.com/USA/ma/bos
>
> [36] http://www.example.com/USA/ma/bos/xxx
> [37] http://www.example.com/USA/ma/bos
>
> Larry: what would be the relation there?
>
> ht: it identify a parameter fonction
>
> Larry: which things are generic to URIs and which things are
> http-related?
>
> <noah> So [38]http://example.org/stuffcontainer?thingid={GUID} is
> bad practice? I don't believe that.
>
> [38] http://example.org/stuffcontainer?thingid=
>
> <noah> The point of this example is that GUID1 and GUID2 might
> denote quite unrelated resources.
>
> <Larry> does this apply only to "http:" or to all URIs?
>
> <Larry> there is a relationship between scheme://host/path and
> scheme://host/path?query in that the query can be created by a form
> with scheme://host/path as the target
>
> <ht> As far as I am concerned, I thought the http spec. _did_
> enforce that foo.html?a=b and foo.html?c=d and foo.html all are
> handled by the same 'resource'. . .
>
> noah: my concern is that using '#' sign is not a indication that
> it's a part of the resource without the '#' sign
>
> <Larry> note that mime-web-info talks about defining fragment
> identifiers....
>
> Yves: My comment was on the media fragments, and in that specific
> case there are some loose ends on media type registration
>
> <noah> [39]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/overdue
>
> [39] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/overdue
>
> overdue action
>
> <noah> ACTION-381?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-381 -- Jonathan Rees to spend 2 hours helping Ian
> with [40]http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/ -- due 2011-01-17 --
> OPEN
>
> [40] http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/
>
> <trackbot> [41]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/381
>
> [41] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/381
>
> <noah> ACTION-381 Due 2011-02-11
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-381 Spend 2 hours helping Ian with
> [42]http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/ due date now 2011-02-11
>
> [42] http://www.w3.org/standards/webarch/
>
> Noah: let's put that on the best-effort list
>
> <noah> ACTION-390?
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-390 -- Daniel Appelquist to review ISSUE-58 and
> suggest next steps -- due 2010-10-18 -- OPEN
>
> <trackbot> [43]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390
>
> [43] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390
>
> <noah> Yves will contribute on ACTION-390
>
> <noah> ACTION-390 Due 2011-03-01
>
> <trackbot> ACTION-390 Review ISSUE-58 and suggest next steps due
> date now 2011-03-01
>
> AOB?
>
> none
>
> ADJOURNED
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> [NEW] ACTION: Appelquist to draft finding on API minimization Due:
> 2011-02-01 recorded in [44]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc]
> [NEW] ACTION: Noah to do F2F agenda [recorded in
> [45]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc]
> [NEW] ACTION: Noah to do F2F local arrangements [recorded in
> [46]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc]
>
> [44] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc
> [45] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc
> [46] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-tagmem-irc
>
> [End of minutes]
> _________________________________________________________
>
>
> Minutes formatted by David Booth's [47]scribe.perl version 1.135
> ([48]CVS log)
> $Date: 2011/01/30 21:09:19 $
>
> [47] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
> [48] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>
>
Received on Sunday, 30 January 2011 21:28:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:30 GMT