See also: IRC log
<dbooth> Previous minutes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Sep/att-0003/05-grddl-wg-minutes.html
<dbooth> Motion to approve minutes?
<HarryH> PROPOSED: to approve GRDDL WG -- 5th Sept 2007 as a true record
<jjc> David to be phone chair
<HarryH> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Sep/att-0003/05-grddl-wg-minutes.html
<danja> next meeting - in a month?
<HarryH> (HarryH to participate via IRC)
<danja> sounds good
<HarryH> What time do people prefer?
<HarryH> (i.e. day)
<jjc> October 17?
<dbooth> PROPOSED: Next meeting Oct 17
<HarryH> Works for me.
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Sep/0018.html Harry proposal for once a month
<HarryH> Any objections?
<dbooth> RESOLVED: Next meeting Oct 17
<HarryH> Danja?
<danja> http://n2.talis.com/svn/playground/danja/misc/atom/
<danja> new xslt based on xslt 1.0
<dbooth> ACTION: danja and john-l to test and see if any XSLT is mature enough to add to ATOM namespace doc and has proper licensing (W3C Software license), as well as canvass all candidate XSLT authors for their opinion on ATOM/RSS 1.0 namespace. [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/19-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action01]
<HarryH> All actions have been done.
<HarryH> ACTION: DanC to remove base param from online GRDDL service and home2rss.xsl [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/19-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action02]
dbooth:DanC claimed victory on a couple of things
<HarryH> ACTION: DanC to get GRDDL service to offer text/n3 and text/plain for turtle [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/19-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action03]
<- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Sep/0016.html DanC's victory claim
<HarryH> Shall we continue to pester HTML validator and RDF validator to be GRDDL-enabled?
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Sep/0016.html DanC's victory claim
<dbooth> Harry, DanC's first action is also done?
<jjc> ?? Harry would is the link showing first action done?
[[
I claim victory on that.
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/grddl/
]]
<dbooth> I read that as applying to the second action.
<HarryH> Look at meeting minutes http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Sep/att-0003/05-grddl-wg-minutes.html
<dbooth> His comment seems to say that the first action should be continued.
<HarryH> He claimed victory then I think...
<HarryH> He forgot that he claimed victory in the previous meeting.
<dbooth> ok, so it's done.
<HarryH> Since that action applied only to previous version of GRDDL service.
<dbooth> ok, on to next item
<HarryH> So, does anyone want to continue pestering HTML validator and RDF validator?
<HarryH> I take that as a no :)
<HarryH> E-mail sent.
<dbooth> ACTION:Chime to comment to XHTML2 comment list about preserving head/@profile re GRDDL and backwards-compatibility. [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/19-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action04]
<HarryH> My only question is that what should I level of objection be if XHTML 2 is determined to elimate @profile?
<dbooth> ACTION: HarryH to tell XHTML2 WG to not change syntax [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/19-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action05]
<HarryH> I.e. shall I be vociferous or shall I just ignore them?
<HarryH> them = XHTML 2 WG
<dbooth> JJC: If it's a personal objection, it's up to him.
<HarryH> By ignore, I mean, state that while we are not satisified, we will not object if they deprecate @profile.
<dbooth> JJC: If they decide to ignore it, we can talk about it then.
<HarryH> Yes - and is this a comment from the "GRDDL WG" or from "me"?
I got the impression they are well-informed about the risk of being alienated from GRDDL aware-agents
<HarryH> It appears that the GRDDL WG will likely be closed by the time XHTML 2 becomes a Rec.
<dbooth> JJC: I'm assuming this issue won't get resolved until after the GRDDL WG is defunct.
jjc: comment won't be resolved until the group is finished
<dbooth> DBooth: Therefore it should be a personal objection?
<dbooth> JJC: Yes. Though if the GRDDL WG is still around, we can consider it then.
<HarryH> So, it's a personal objection.
<dbooth> DBooth: Yes.
<jjc> I believe this is harry's responsibility, and if the group is still around if and when the comment is inadequately addressed harry can ask GRDDL WG to support an objection
<dbooth> (Group agrees)
<HarryH> In which case, I will not be vociferous as long as they are informed that they are breaking GRDDL-compatibility that's fine.
<HarryH> Chime - you can close your action if you wish.
<HarryH> Do you?
<dbooth> Chime: I agree with that, and close my action too.
<rreck> good catch
<HarryH> ACTION:Chime to comment to XHTML2 comment list about preserving head/@profile re GRDDL and backwards-compatibility. [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/19-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action06]
<dbooth> Harry's action?
<HarryH> I claim victory on web-page. Anything anyone wants to see added that's not there?
<dbooth> ACTION: HarryH to update web-page [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/19-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action07]
<HarryH> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/
<dbooth> Anything else that should be done?
<jjc> Harry, press release update?
<HarryH> It seemed to go well.
<dbooth> I didn't get any calls from the press.
<dbooth> (But i wasn't really expecting any either.)
<HarryH> I don't think it made a huge splash.
<HarryH> I.e. CNN didn't cover it :)
<dbooth> Anything else shold be done?
<HarryH> But the amount of web traffic increased signficantly, and a few blog entries etc.
<HarryH> I cannot think of anything.
<dbooth> Any other business today?
<HarryH> OK, if not, let's close meeting.
<dbooth> Next scribe: Danny
<HarryH> Meeting Adjourned.