W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-wg-announce@w3.org > October to December 2010

{minutes} HTML WG F2F minutes, Lyon, France, Nov 4-5 Part 2 (3rd time's the charm)

From: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:26:41 +0900
To: public-html-wg-announce@w3.org
Message-ID: <20101109222519.GE20694@sideshowbarker>
The HTML WG F2F minutes for the sessions that occurred in room Rhone_3B in
Lyon (IRC channel #html-wg2) are available at:

  http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html

and are copied below.

     * Topics
         1. intro from Alexey
         2. IANA, rel, MIME, charset
         3. URI/IRI [URL]
         4. Testing
         5. epub
         6. link relations
         7. Testing 2
         8. Pushing policy
         9. staging area
     * Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

intro from Alexey

   Alexey: I call you about the organization chart
   ... I want to project the IANA slide that I think was skipped
   yesterday

   (setting up projector)

   (IETF and IANA is projected)

   Alexey: IANA manages registries, and there are multiple entities
   that affect what IANA does
   ... If IETF adopts a procedure or defines a policy, IANA is required
   to follow it
   ... IANA does give input on what the policy should be
   ... IANA follows what IETF says in RFCs
   ... the other entity that affects IANA is the IAB (Internet
   Architecture Board) - talks to IANA about policy decisions like
   licensing
   ... IESG approves RFCs and so defines the formats, IAB controls the
   policy experts
   ... If people are unhappy with IANA policies they should not blame
   IANA - except in the case where IANA is slow in updating something

   AVK: can blame them about format, URL persistence

   Alexey: there is a document, RFC5226 which defines standard
   procedures for registries
   ... IETF can make any format that it wants, but there is a typical
   format for registries
   ... registries can have different policies, templates, levels of
   restrictiveness
   ... most permissive level is first come first serve
   ... examples include vendor names
   ... on the other end of the spectrum, the strictest ones require a
   standards track RFC
   ... in the middle is a procedure called "specification required"
   ... requires a stable specification from an IETF-recognized
   standards organization

IANA, rel, MIME, charset

   HS: Is there an official definition of what is a recognized
   standards organization? there are different opinions

   Alexey: no, it's not defined; people don't want to fix the list
   ... general criteria are: long established, stable document

   HS: why is stability a requirement? if the software moves faster
   than the registry, then the registry is out of date

   Alexey: depends on the registry - many registries are for developers
   ... for example, as a developer you may want to find all the link
   relations

   AVK: but as a developer, I find current IANA registries useless
   ... wikipedia is a better reference for URI schemes than IANA is
   ... vetting by experts makes registries incomplete and inaccurate

   HS: you said not just software implementors or others
   ... for years, image/svg+xml wasn't in the registry
   ... when Apple shipped MPEG-4, the type wasn't in the registry
   ... I can't think of any constituency for whom the registry says all
   that they want to know, or even close

   AVK: apart from pedants, maybe

   Alexey: a couple of comments on this
   ... different registries have different policies
   ... at the time when the registry was established, there was IETF
   consensus that this was the desired policy
   ... as time goes on, it may be that reality shows that a particular
   policy was too strict (or too permissive)
   ... maybe part of the answer is to revise the policy

   HS: in the days of classic MacOS when Carbon was still used a lot,
   and you needed four char type and creator codes, it seemd that the
   value for those codes was smaller than the space for MIME types
   ... so you'd think you'd have a greater need than for MIME types to
   limit who can get what, but Apple operated a registry on first-come
   first-serve basis and nothing bad came out

   <anne> MJS: you mentioned that it is possible to change the policy

   <anne> ... assuming that some of the folks here are interested in a
   much more permissive policy

   <anne> ... what would be the process to get the IETF to change

   <anne> Alexey: talk to the AD and talk to other people to initiate
   discussion

   <anne> Alexey: I'm happy to help with the progress

   Alexey: the other half of the answer
   ... there is a reason there are expert reviews for some of the
   registries, like MIME types
   ... people do make stupid mistakes in MIME types, so there is an
   opportunities to fix this

   HS: one of the supposed mistakes is using the text/* subtree for a
   lot of stuff, and there I would claim the mistake on the IETF side

   AVK: what proportion of MIME types are not in use when they are
   registered? it seems like most of them already are deployed by the
   time you go to register them, so it might be too late to fix

   Alexey: in the ideal world, people should ask experts up front

   <Julian> !

   Alexey: one example is that you can't use UTF-16 of textual types

   HS: that's bogus

   AVK: still insisting the case now is misguided

   JR: one thing that Anne mentioned - some registries have a
   provisional system
   ... but not MIME types

   Alexey: vendor prefix ones are first-come first-server

   JR: other question -regarding the media type registration RFC, Larry
   has started discussing revising it in the TAG
   ... for example, people sniff for types - we could make that more
   robust

   HS: I want to complain more about CR/LF
   ... the history of CR/LF restriction and the fact that text/*
   defaults to US-ASCII in the absence of charsets...
   ... this is an artifact of a leaky abstraction from SMTP
   ... US-ASCII default is a theoretical most prudent default from the
   time when in email there wasn't an obvious default
   ... but neither of those considerations apply to HTTP
   ... HTTP can send text that has line breaks that are not CR/LF
   ... in fact for HTML, LF-only is preferred
   ... it makes no sense to say that all these types like HTML,
   JavaScript and CSS are "wrong"
   ... instead it would make more sense to say that CR/LF does not
   apply to HTTP
   ... for some types, for historical reasons we need to default to
   Windows -1252 or UTF-8
   ... pretending these need to be registered under the application/*
   subtree doesn't help anyone
   ... it only serves the RFC canon that HTTP and SMTP match, but that
   doesn't help authors or implementors
   ... line breaks should be based on transport protocol
   ... types themselves should be able to define their default charset

   JR: if you look at the thing that Larry brought to the TAG about
   MIME on the Web...
   ... he mentions all these problems
   ... line break thing doesn't make sense on the Web
   ... HTTP appears to use MIME, but doesn't, and doesn't need to
   ... charset is also an issue for HTTP
   ... conflict between MIME, HTTP and XML types on text/*

   HS: I actually implement RFC2023
   ... I have a checkbox for saying ignore it

   <anne> (There's a t-shirt saying "I support RFC 3023")

   HS: if I shipped the validator without the "ignore it" box, people
   couldn't use the validator

   JR: what's the default?

   HS: defaults to supporting it

   Alexey: comment on Web vs email - this needs to be discussed in IETF
   ... if Web requires modified version of MIME, let's do it
   ... there is a new WG in applications area

   <anne> APPSAWG

   <weinig> http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/charter/

      http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/charter/

   HS: it feels frustrating to actually have to discuss this
   ... that people don't believe what they see on the web

   AVK: the feeling is that the IETF is so much behind, and then we
   have to get in and tell the old timers what the new world looks like
   ... we're not sure it is worth our time
   ... we have moved on

   Alexey: it is occasionally helpful to talk to people who designed
   the original
   ... especially when it comes to character set - I think there is
   agreement from the original author

   AVK: I talked about some of the discussion about moving away from
   text/plain drafts, and people there express fear of Unicode....
   ... W3C is kind of slow too, but at least we think HTML and Unicode
   are ok

   HS: well, W3C isn't ready to publish HTML5 as HTML5 yet

   JR: IETF thinks HTML and Unicode are fine, just not for their
   documents

   Alexey: there is provisional registration

   AVK: for header fields, you need spec even for provisional
   ... person guarding the header field registry was too conservative

   JR: does header name registry have a public mailing list
   ... registry lists should be public

   Alexey: can you draw cases like this to my attention? it might be
   implementation of process failures

   AVK: but if we look at URI schemes..

   Alexey: it's hard for me to defend the people who designed the
   procedure
   ... there was a discussion about relaxing registration of certain
   types of URIs
   ... so we could register things like skype or yahoo IM

   AVK: we are trying to register about: - there should be some
   registration pointing to the draft
   ... and for many headers, browsers have to know about them even if
   they are unregistered
   ... difficulty of using registry causes incentive to use X- names
   and just not registry

   JR: one thing we should look at is accountability - there needs to
   be a public mailing list for header registration
   ... also Larry will join us to talk about IRI

   AVK: I would rather just get rid of IANA and have a W3C registry,
   with a community-managed wiki

   HS: to consider how the XHTML2 WG was doing things - at some point
   it was obvious that just giving feedback wasn't going to change the
   way they did things
   ... so instead of trying to change the way they did things, another
   group did something else, and that became the group people paid more
   attention to
   ... there is a feeling that fixing IANA is so difficult that it
   would just be easier to set up a wiki

   AVK: we could just compete

   Alexey: this is not helpful

   AVK: I would like a registry that would tell me X-Frame-Options
   exists
   ... I don't think this will ever fly at IANA

   HS: I have no experience of registration, but the language tag
   registry is a very positive role model

   Alexey: when I talk to IANA, they listen

   AVK: I think the problem is the process

   Alexey: I can help you initiate changing the process

   AVK: not sure I am interested in helping to fix the process if there
   is an easier path

   HS: we should mention willful violations of the charset registry
   ... it would be useful for the main charset registry to be the place
   to go to find out what you need to implement
   ... the thing is that ISO-Latin1 should actually be interpreted as
   Windows-1252
   ... another example is that instead of Shift-JS you need to use the
   Microsoft tables not the ISO tables

   LM: I note that my draft covers many of these issues

   HS: not in this much detail; I will give feedback

   <Julian>
   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-masinter-mime-web-info-01

      http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-masinter-mime-web-info-01

   LM: I hope in the cases where there are willful violations, that the
   right thing to do is to fix the registry

   AVK: in the case of the charset registry, there might be a need for
   separate registries for Web clients vs other clients

   HS: for example the Java platform uses the IANA names for charsets
   with their real meaning
   ... it would not be good to change Java, so the registry should
   include both sets of info
   ... JAva could add an API for Web content decoders

   LM: I think this is a three-phase process
   ... (1) identify the problem
   ... (2) identify which things need to change (w/o being explicit
   about how)
   ... (3) then there needs to be action on the change
   ... I would like to identify the problem and the kinds of changes
   first
   ... only then decide whether to make a wiki, change the process, etc

   AVK: if you are already working on this, then that's great

   LM: I would be happy to have co-authors

   Alexey: at minimum we should talk

   LM: I think we should bring it into a working group or take it up as
   an action item
   ... MIME is a part of the Web architecture that we have adopted
   without adopting it

   JR: we talked earlier about text/html and encoding

   LM: again I think we should describe the problem first
   ... same thing might be said for URI schemes

   HS: given last call schedule (1H2010), how realistic is it that
   changes of these magnitude could go through the IETF
   ... seems unlikely

   LM: my view is that a W3C document entering LC can make reference to
   documents at similar or behind level of maturity
   ... they don't need to be final until you go to REC

   MS: (explains W3C process)

URI/IRI [URL]

   HS: one reason I'm skeptical about the rate of change at IETF is the
   URL thing
   ... we had rules in the HTML5 spec abut transforming href values to
   IRIs
   ... it was argued that IRIbis was supposed to solve it
   ... I remember there was a schedule

   LM: it's quite off

   HS: at the date when there was supposed to be a deliverable, they
   haven't even started
   ... we shouldn't send things to the IETF to die
   ... I was really annoyed when I wanted to fix a bug relating to URL
   handling in Firefox and the spec did not have what was needed
   ... I think that for URLs the process has had it chance and din't
   deliver

   RI: the original schedule was very aggressive and we never really
   expected meeting it

   LM: it was wildly optimistic
   ... the problem with most standards activities is that there's
   nobody home except for people who showed up
   ... if you look at the archives, there was really a fallow period,
   but since then it is picking up
   ... meeting next week in beijing
   ... people who care about URLs in HTML should show up online

   HS: there is also the problem that if people are already showing up
   in some venue, then moving the work to a different venue and then
   complaining that people didn't show up in the other venue is not
   productive

   LM: the problem really is that what was in the HTML document before
   was wrong
   ... unfortunately there is complexity due to need to coordinate with
   IDNA and bidirectional IRIs

   HS: you need something that takes a base IRI, a relative reference
   as UTF-16, and a charset, and you get a URI/IRI back
   ... my point is that the HTML spec doesn't need to deal with
   rendering any kind of address
   ... it just cares about resolution / parsing
   ... nothing about how to render an IRI
   ... what is required is someone writing down the real-world
   algorithm for this resolution thing
   ... and it needs to be somewhere that you can reference it

   RI: if it were in the IRI specification would it be ok for you

   HS: what I am annoyed about is that we had something that was right
   or fixable, was removed or delegated, and now we have to rewrite it
   ... I am now betting on Adam delivering it

   JR: I would like to say one thing
   ... we need to find the right separation between things that are
   just part of the attribute and things that are part of the the
   resolving algorithm
   ... I think whitespace discarding is not part of the resolutions
   ... there might be a step before resolving that is part of
   extracting from an attribute

   AVK: in the running code, whitespace stripping happens at the
   resolving end

   LM: it would be nice if you could copy from the location bar into
   other apps

   HS: we are not talking about the location bar

   JR: what about space-separated lists of URLs

   AVK: this is a different case

   LM: motivation for trying to start the work in the IETF was to make
   sure that URLs in HTML and in other apps weren't different
   ... it is true that the work has been delayed, but activity has been
   restarted

   Alexey: you need to open bugs

   LM: Adam was at the last meeting
   ... there is an IETF document of how to do IETF document

   HS: it's great the kinds of URLs that the web uses were the same as
   what other things use it, that would be great
   ... but the Web is constrained

   JR: this was very useful, which I'm not sure was expected; we have
   another point about link relations, which is on the agenda

   ack

   MS: in the future, we shouldn't delete things until the replacement
   is ready

   LM: chairs from IRI working group are prepared to add an additional
   charter item

   AVK: Adam is a bit reluctant to go back to the IETF

   <anne> (that was my impression)

   RI: it seems like there are discussions coming up in beijing where
   we need to be talking between the HTML WG and IETF

   LM: editors will be remote, so remote participation might be good
   ... how about file: URLs

   HS: they are not really on the Web
   ... best thing to do for USB key is relative URLs

   <r12a> whether it's beijing or not, i think we need to find a way to
   pursue this dialog with HTML5 folks and chairs/editors of the IRI
   spec

   RI: is something gonna happen
   ... action items?

   LM: don't be skeptical - if you believe it will work

   <scribe> ACTION: Henri to give feedback to Larry on MIME etc draft
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action01]

   <scribe> ACTION: Anne to give Alexey info about registry problems
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action02]

   <MikeSmith> started lunch break?

   MikeSmith, we're about it

   <MikeSmith> k

   er, about to

   session adjuourned

   <anne> fwiw, testing was half an hour delayed

   <anne> not sure if anyone is actually in the other room yet

   <anne> but since you just signed in...

   <Julian> isn't testing at 5pm (50 mins from now?)

   <anne> no

   <anne> it's a double block

   <Julian> oh

   <anne> yes

   <anne> we are setting up

   <anne> dbaron, ^^

   <hsivonen> dbaron, we are in Rhone 3b

   <hendry> scribenick hendry

   <oedipus> scribenick: hendry

Testing

   me: to find the connection type, it's not slow or rather blocking is
   it?

   it's a fast operation Andrei: yes, we fire online when the type
   changes

   type just caches last seen connection type

   http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

      http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

   [ scribe apologies for pasting in wrong buffer ]

   maciej: how to particpate in tasks tf, testing framework

   <plh> kk: and goals for LC

   kk: the TF meet every two weeks
   ... there is a wiki with schedule, there is a server with hg
   ... philippe has mirrored that work at http://dvcs.w3.org

      http://dvcs.w3.org/

   <plh> --> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/ HTML test suite repository

      http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

   kk: same content on both servers

   <plh> --> http://test.w3.org/html/ HTML Testing Area

      http://test.w3.org/html/

   kk: asking what to test ... localstorage, x-domain messaging, doing
   spec analysis
   ... looking at features which are shipping
   ... submitted some canvas tests

   <plh> --> http://test.w3.org/html/tests/submission/PhilipTaylor/
   Canvas test suite

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/submission/PhilipTaylor/

   kk: getElementsByClassname tests from Opera
   ... distinction between approved and un-approved tests

   <plh> --> s/Philipp Taylor/Philip Taylor/

   kk: bugzilla to process the test

   <plh> --> http://test.w3.org/html/tests/harness/harness.htm Test
   harness

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/harness/harness.htm

   jonias: what is the harness ?

   anne: same as XHR

   kk: tests run automatically
   ... video tests is hard to automate
   ... self-describing test
   ... some exceptions that you can't poke in the OM and you can't test
   it

   hsivonen: can you do some REFerence tests ?

   jonas: yes, there are some things

   kk: there are some things you can't test with REF tests, for e.g.
   Audio

   hsivonen: multi-testing question

   plh: some tests are manual and some tests are automatic

   kk: existing tests not using the testharness, it might not be worth
   re-writing them

   plh: it's a bug, it shows the buttons, though its automatic

   kk: waits for 5 seconds before going to next test

   maciej: this UI is broken

   kk: can we get all the requirements up front ?
   ... esp we need a plan with REF tests

   maciej: propsed categories; script driven, ref test, manual test
   ... too awkward with 100k tests ... takes too long to run

   plh: the test can indicate itself, if it's manual or automatic

   anne: if the test loads the test harness, we know it's an automatic
   test ( no need to categorise )

   hsivonen: just have 3 directories

   dbaron: you can harness the harness

   kk: we should do it in one file

   hsivonen: the easier way is to use directories

   jonas: i don't care

   maciej: text file is harder to maintain than a directory, not big
   deal either way

   <plh> scripts/

   <plh> reftests/

   anne: we want directories for *types* of tests

   <plh> manuals/

   dbaron: painful to use dirs as metadata, as you may need to move
   them around

   kk: maybe we will come up with a new dir in some months time,
   prefers a text file as it wont change location

   jonas: bigger problem to have a function call when the test finishes
   so we don't have to wait 5 seconds after each one loads

   anne: there is logic in the harness to handle this & async tests

   hsivonen: [ didn't quite understand your implicit mochi test comment
   ]

   <dbaron> plh: need a way to copy all the additional files that tests
   depend on

   <hsivonen> I find that I almost always have to use the explicit
   finish function for scripted tests, so it's not a win to finish
   tests implicitly on onload

   jonas: we need to somehow markup dependencies

   sweinig: in the common case there will be no deps

   hsivonen: should we decide whether to allow data URLs ?

   anne: common resources makes sense

   hsivonen: you want to use data URLs for near 0 load times

   [ why does jonas use data URLs? didn't get his argument ]

   kk: ie9 supports dataURIs
   ... might be a problem that browsers do not support dataURIs

   jonas: we need to list our deps and assumptions
   ... can we assume browsers have ES5, foreach is nice

   maceij: we should not use ES5 until it's widely implemented

   jonas: queryselector test cases were held up by WebIDL

   kk: e.g. of WebIDL false positive in canvas read only thing

   jonas: do we have any existing docs of assumptions?

   kk: there is just the source code
   ... can someone take an action to document them?

   anne: read the XHR tests :-)

   <krisk> testing wiki http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

   jonas: these tests are already in directories

   kk: suggests documenting the tests in the wiki

   hsivonen: ... something about re-writing the "mochi tests" ??

   anne: i'm fine with re-writing / using another harness

   kk: first anchor test is very simple, it's not hard to migrate to
   james's harness

   jonas: make some requirements for making the tests portable between
   harnesses [ IIUC ]

   hsivonen: something about integration layer, which allows reporting
   into your own system (thanks anne)

   <plh> --> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/ mercurial

      http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

   plh: you can commit a test if you have a W3C account

   dbaron: might need to be aware with hg's push caveats [ to plh ]

   <plh> ACTION: plh to work with systeam to make sure we keep track of
   hg push [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action03]

   maciej: not great security, since hg trusts the client's config WRT
   who wrote the patch

   dbaron: you might want logs
   ... Mozilla have a tool called push-log for this problem

   jonas: i can see now the tests are seperated by directory

   <dbaron> The source for pushlog is in this hg repository:
   http://hg.mozilla.org/hgcustom/pushlog/

      http://hg.mozilla.org/hgcustom/pushlog/

   jonas: is there a description file ?

   <anne> http://test.w3.org/html/tests/

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/

   <anne> http://test.w3.org/html/tests/harness/approvedtests.txt

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/harness/approvedtests.txt

   kk: see http://test.w3.org/html/tests/harness/approvedtests.txt
   ... we will add extra info

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/harness/approvedtests.txt

   jonas: remove domain so it's not server specific
   ... we have a test file per dir
   ... i want to walk this from the cmdline
   ... i want relative paths

   kk: we might need some absolute stuff

   jonas: i'm pulling via hg

   kk: there is no absolute need for absolute urls

   hsivonen: mochi-tests point to localhost

   jonas: something clearly identifiable for a search & replace to get
   the tests working
   ... you can get different types of relative paths
   ... it's important that we can accomodate them in a "search &
   replace"
   ... we need to scale
   ... it's not workable to ban absolute paths

   hsivonen: we need to document the "clearly identifiable" bit, like
   test.w3.org and test2.w3.org

   jonas: we have to say it's OK to use abs paths

   hsivonen: worried about some dir namespace collision
   ... get rid of prefixes

   jonas: OK

   <krisk> That is fine

   kk: how to delimit the file ?

   jonas: i don't care
   ... though, since it's hand-written, make it easy & little to type

   sam: is there a preferred lengthmicroformats.org with CSS tests
   there was a wide range
   ... bad = long test & lots of permutations

   hsivonen: we know a bad test when we see it

   maceij: there is a fuzzy boundary

   jonas: io bound if we have a million tests ... we need to keep it
   somewhat reasonable

   sam: there are examples of tests that can be merged

   adrian: there is a review process

   kk: you could file a bug, raise issues

   adrian: of course if it's approved, it doesn't mean it can't change
   again

   sam: if all the tests pass, then the bugs are in the specs

   kk: tests do content negotiation (canPlayTypepermanence) WRT
   choosing a codec the runtime supportS

   hsivonen: mochi tests that we (mozilla) use, requires server side
   javascript

   plh: was a lot of trouble already to support PHP for security
   reasons

   sam: we have tests that use python, php, curl for certain load tests

   <dom> (we evoked this in WebApps the other day; we can probably
   consider more server-side stuff at some point, but we need to need
   to have requirements documented earlier rather than ater)

   <dom> (and please consider limiting the number of needed
   languages/platforms as much as possible)

   jonas: we can generalise "slow load tests" so it doesn't
   neccessarily require PHP
   ... some security concerns here

   plh: we need to review PHP files before they become live

   jonas: we need it one the same server for same origin type cases

   <dom> if same server == test.w3.org, that's part of the plan

   hsivonen: we need a mechanism to load things slowly for example

   <dom> (use a DTD for that)

   hsivonen: avoid echo, we should return existing (approved) files

   jonas: is there sensitive data WRT XSS-ing

   plh: should be fine

   <anne> safest might be w3test.org or some such

   kk: what happens if 10 million tests are in the Q to be approved

   dbaron: biggest risk is a test that claims to test something, but
   doesn't actually test it

   sam: we should only accept tests that use the new harness
   ... the tests here are about testing regressions

   kk: worried about approval rate, esp. if only he does it

   plh: if a subset of tests are passed by everyone, they are probably
   good

   anne: 1) is it good enough hsivonen 2) ... [ didn't get that ]

   maceij: lets do a cost benefit analysis

   <adam> Accidentally testing something that is not a requirement at
   all

   maceij: 1st category testing undefined behaviour
   ... 2nd -- testing something contrary to a requirement
   ... -- at least one browser will fail this

   [ can someone write what maceij said pls ? ]

   scribe: 3rd cat testing something where it doesn't actually test it
   ... review should catch them all
   ... almost certain something will be wrong
   ... how much time should be spent on review versus benefit
   ... test approved == matches what the spec says

   dbaron: from exp within CSS, review is more work than writing to
   test... so its not worth doing for an existing contributor

   s/writing to test/writing the test/

   dbaron: figure out why the test is failing sooner than later
   ... imp report: 1) run all tests 2) bug in test suite or in browser
   (v. time consuming)
   ... figure out WHY tests are failing

   hsivonen: we should flag tests that fail in all browsers
   ... we can't assume the spec is neccessarily 100% correct

   <hsivonen> we should flag tests that fail in 3 engines

   maceij: low skilled tests don't need to be approved, better if
   everyone is just running them [ IIUC ]

   anne: we should distribute the testing

   maceij: don't have ref test when you could have a script test
   ... distributed test is more likely to succeed

   hsivonen: do we have any way to feed the test info to the WHATWG
   HTML5 section info box things

   kk: could be an admin problem if links change

   <krisk> see
   http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/getElementsByClassName/00
   1.htm for an example of a script based test

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/getElementsByClassName/001.htm

   <freedom> nobody in 3B yet? there will be an EPUB related meeting
   right?

   <oedipus> according to the agenda, EPUB discussion in 3B starting
   8:30 french time
   http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/TPAC_2010_Agenda#Room_3B__.28IRC_
   .23html-wg2.29

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/TPAC_2010_Agenda#Room_3B__.28IRC_.23html-wg2.29

   <mgylling> Reads 09:00 to me

   <mgylling> To anybody who is physically there: does 3B have call-in
   facilities?

   <oedipus> guess the first half hour will be spent in common again
   then breakout to 3B

   <freedom> seems not

   <freedom> I am in 3B physically now

   <mgylling> freedom, thanks.

epub

   <MichaelC> scribe: Julian

   ms: markus to give overview

   mgylling: (remotely)

   <mgylling> www.idpf.org

   mgylling: epub standard for ebooks, around for several years,
   expanding in popularity, large adoption
   ... idpf.org
   ... based on xhtml, subsets defined
   ... current ebpub 2.0
   ... uses XHTML1.1 mod
   ... is a fileset, ZIP container, different document types
   ... container called OCF

   <freedom> http://www.idpf.org/specs.htm

      http://www.idpf.org/specs.htm

   mgylling: some of the formats in epub defined by w3c
   ... some of the metadata formats owned by epub itself
   ... is undergoing rev to 3.0
   ...charter: update & alignment with modern web standard

   s

   use HTML5 as grammar

   is not allowed by current specs but already happening

   need to formalize & stabilize

   on HTML5 vs XHTML5: epub decided to use X*

   based on requirement for existing reading systems to be upgradeable

   MS: asks about design philosophies
   ... drive spec based on what current UAs already can do?

   mg: docs used to be static
   ... <script> SHOULD/MUST be ignored
   ... but scripting is going to be added
   ... problems with legacy readers
   ... and non-browser-based impls
   ... it's clear that this will be needed in the future

   MS: devices coming to market with have full browser engines

   Julian: usability of spec for being referenced

   ?

   mg: not a problem yet
   ... we're not forking
   ... defining profiles and extensions, follow the HTML5 style

   Julian: how does ext work for you?

   mg: XHTML5 is supposed to allowed namespace-based extensibility

   ms: feedback on this is welcome
   ... epub I18N requirements -> CSS WG -> vertical text support
   ... does not seem to affect HTML though
   ... is there something the HTML WG need to do?

   mg: books / ebooks slightly different domain
   ... missing semantics for books
   ... distinguish node references and nodes
   ... skippability

   page breaks

   have looked at role attributes for extensibility

   mjs: extending role not recommended because owned by aria
   ... needs coordination with PFWG
   ... maybe dedicated elements

   or attributes

   what affects rendering should be in HTML

   mg: book semantics, chicago manual of style

   in transcript, replace "node" by "note"

   MC: asks about roles

   MG: uses custom attributes

   <MichaelC> Role attribute extensibility:
   http://www.w3.org/TR/role-attribute/#extending-the-collection-of
   -roles

      http://www.w3.org/TR/role-attribute/#extending-the-collection-of-roles

   MG: fastest way for now (own NS)

   MC: role module *does* allow extensibility

   <MikeSmith> RRSAgent:, make minutes

   MC: PF and HTML need to coordinate on r@ole

   @role

   <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to discuss role extensions, future
   aria, etc.

   MG: ownership of @role

   mjs: HTML defines @role by refererence to ARIA spec

   MC: aria defines on HTML to define @role

   <MichaelC> s/aria defines/aria depends/

   mg: request to clarify the HTML spec wrt role extensibility

   <fantasai> RRSAgent: make minutes

   mg: on metadata in epub
   ... NCX doesn't have metadata at all anymore

   <MichaelC> ARIA on host language role attribute

      http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/host_languages#host_general_role

   mg: core metadata will continue to come from outside HTML/head

   <mjs> -> role attribute in HTML5:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#annotations-for-assis
   tive-technology-products-aria

      http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#annotations-for-assistive-technology-products-aria

   mg: reading systems need to get the metadata from the package file

   HS: on role attribute

   <fantasai> hsivonen: ARIA spec defines aria- attributes, but does
   not define role attributes

   <fantasai> hsivonen: requires that a host language define a role
   attribute with certain characteristics

   <fantasai> hsivonen: HTML5 tries to do this

   <fantasai> hsivonen says something about tricky wordsmithing

   <fantasai> hsivonen: Way forward would be to figure out roles that
   current AT vendors need (?) and define tokens for them, and have
   ARIA promise not to conflict

   <fantasai> hsivonen: The role module spec relies on CURIEs for
   extensibility

   <fantasai> hsivonen: ... not good for EPUB

   <fantasai> hsivonen: I don't expect web engines to support CURIEs,
   relies on namespace stuff ... lookup DOM L3

   <fantasai> hsivonen: Best way forward is to ask PF to set aside the
   names that you expect to use

   <fantasai> hsivonen: Doesn't make sense to pretend different groups
   dont' know about each other

   <fantasai> hsivonen: We're communicating, so let's coordinate.

   <MichaelC> ARIA taxonomy

      http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/rdf_model.png

   <fantasai> ?: I'm ok with approach Henri is suggesting, but
   coordination with PF is important sooner rather than later

   <fantasai> MichaelC: Everything would have to fit into our taxonomy

   <fantasai> hsivonen: Implementations don't care about the taxonomy,
   that's only to help out with spec design

   <fantasai> hsivonen: If PF promises that this set of names is not
   going to be used, and picks different names if it decides to expand
   in that area, then we don't have to worry about all this
   extensibility stuff

   <mjs> ack q+

   <fantasai> MichaelC: For author understanding, we want to pick
   tokens that match the most appropriate terminology

   <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say if you want to follow the
   approach Henri suggests, should coordinate with PFWG sooner than
   later and to say ARIA roles are part of a taxonomy

   <fantasai> hsivonen: They're just tokens, it doesn't really matter

   <fantasai> mjs: Instead of debating in the abstract, let's just send
   the list of suggested roles to PF asap

   <hsivonen> DOM 3 namespace lookup doesn't work for CURIEs in
   text/html DOMs, so don't expect browsers to implement CURIEs

   <fantasai> mjs: If they don't like the tokens proposed, then they
   can respond about that.

   <fantasai> mjs: I don't think this meta-conversation is getting us
   anywhere

   <Zakim> Julian, you wanted to let Mike speak

   <fantasai> hsivonen: I'd like to add a note about why CURIEs are bad
   idea in this space

   <fantasai> hsivonen: So, frex, how Gecko exposes roles to interface
   to JAWS, Gecko picks the first role it recognizes and exposes that
   as the MSAA role

   <hsivonen> IAccessible2

   <fantasai> hsivonen: And then exposes the entire value of the role
   attribute as the xml-roles property in the iAccessible2 interface

   <fantasai> hsivonen: It follows that the namespace mapping context
   of the CURIE binding context is not exposed at all

   <MichaelC> scribe: fantasai

   hsivonen: If you wanted to do something with CURIE, you wouldn't do
   CURIE processing.
   ... You would wind up exposing to JAWS the prefix and local name

   <freedom> IAccessible2,
   http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/accessibil
   ity/iaccessible2

      http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/accessibility/iaccessible2

   hsivonen: Therefore I advise against relying on the mapping context,
   because the existing ... doesn't expose the mapping to IAccessible2
   and therefore to JAWS

   markus: Does Gecko expose the roles regardless of whether it
   recognizes it?

   hsivonen: Yes. All the data is passed through, in case JAWS wants to
   violate ARIA and look at things itself.
   ... Gecko doesn't police whether JAWS follows ARIA spec

   MikeSmith: I just wanted to state where things stand.
   ... It's not inconceivalbe that the language features you need for
   EPUB could be considered as native elements and attriutes to be
   added to HTML5 itself. It's not too late for that.
   ... It's not too late to ask, anyway.
   ... I'm sure we're going to get LC comments asking for new elements
   and attributes.
   ... There will be a lot of people who haven't looked at the spec
   yet, or want opportunity to have their request considered.
   ... Proper way to change the spec is file a bug against the spec.
   ... Cutoff for pre-LC was Oct1. Everything after that date will be
   considered an LC comment.
   ... I don't think that you should self-censor, and just assume
   there's no chance of getting any new language feature requests for
   native elements and attriutes considered.
   ... That's not what we want
   ... I don't want to say you have nothing to lose, because there's
   cost in time to everyone
   ... But something for EPUB to consider, whether you want to make
   requests for new elements/attributes.

   <hsivonen> Gecko exposes the value of the role attribute to JAWS but
   not any kind of CURIE prefix mapping context, which mean using
   CURIEs wouldn't really work with the URL and you'd end up
   hard-coding a known prefix and the resolution to an absolute URI
   would be fiction

   MikeSmith: Not mutually exclusive: could also pursue extensible
   approach, too

   <hsivonen> thus bad idea to use CURIEs

   MikeSmith: It's a good idea, although some things we need are likely
   to be considered out-of-scope for HTML5

   Markus says something about e.g. notes

   fantasai asks if that wouldn't be <aside>

   mjs: Just want to reinforce Mike's comment that we would definitely
   like to hear all the requests, even though we are late in the game
   and probably aren't going to add major new feature.
   ... But requests that are modest in scope and important for a
   particular use case will be considered
   ... We're not 100% frozen yet, but in a few months we will be. So
   better to get those requests in now rather than later.
   ... Any other comments?

   fantasai: Wouldn't notes be an <aside>?

   Markus: Notes would be a subclass of <aside>

   Markus says something about an href role

   mjs: Talking about footnotes and end notes?

   Markus: Yes. Need to distinguish those for formatting

   MikeSmith: Don't we have a bug open on having more roles for <a>?

   mjs: If particular semantic of linking to footnote or endnote might
   be more appropriate as a rel value

   hsivonen: Maybe have a CSS pseudo-class detecting the note type from
   what the <a> points to instead of requiring author to specify

   Markus: Reponse from EPUB authors say that overall, it's really
   good. There are a number of additions from XHML1 that we love.
   ... We're already very close to having it work for books, only a few
   minor concerns.
   ... So not looking for any major surgery here.

   fantasai: I think they should define a microformat for subclassing
   notes.

   hsivonen: HĞİkon and Bert already defined a microformat for books,
   although I don't think they addressed notes.

   Bert: yes. A lot of that has been added to HTML5, though: <article>,
   <section>, etc.

   mjs: HTML5 just recommends a plain <a>, with no distinguishing
   markup

   hsivonen: footnotes are a thorny issue in CSS. Prince supports
   something, but it's not optimal
   ... I was reading Dante's Inferno in HTML5. It doesn't make any
   sense to read it without footnotes.

   mjs: Yeah, I read a Terry Pratchett book that was supposed to have
   footnotes, but they were all endnotes and it didn't work so well

   <Bert> Boom! (BOOk Microformat)

      http://www.alistapart.com/articles/boom

   hsivonen: I think we should figure out the CSS layout model first,
   then fit the markup to that.
   ... If we come up with markup first, and it doesn't fit the CSS
   layout model, making it work in layout could become very
   complicated, involving many pseudo-classes, etc.

   meeting closed?

   <Bert> (Contrary to what I remembered, BOOM *does* have footnotes,
   not just sidenotes: <span class=footnote>)

   discussion of role attributes

   mjs: You need centralized extensibility for accessibility, so the
   a11y technology understands the roles

   hsivonen: If you're on Windows, what FF can do is more than with the
   AS api on Mac

   <MikeSmith> http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/w/list

      http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/w/list

   hsivonen: So maybe it's a bad idea to design stuff with the
   assumption that you have IAccessibible2 on Windows
   ... Alternatively, could consider it a bug that AS doesn't have this
   feature

   <hsivonen> s/AS/AX/

   anne: The only case you'd notice it is JAWS was updated before
   voiceover

   hsivonen: I'm guessing the upgrade rate of JAWS is a non-issue in
   practice

   <MikeSmith>
   http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/wiki/Annotations

      http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/wiki/Annotations

   Julian: You might not believe how backwards some people are in
   upgrading their browser

   hsivonen: Big parts of ARIA have been designed with the assumption
   of an enterprise stuck with IE7 for years after ARIA has been
   deployed in JAWS

   <MikeSmith>
   http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/wiki/DesignPrinciples

      http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/wiki/DesignPrinciples

   hsivonen: Design decisions make assumptions about which part of the
   system will be upgraded first. Might not have been the best design
   decisions.

   <MikeSmith>
   http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/wiki/HTML5Subsetting

      http://code.google.com/p/epub-revision/wiki/HTML5Subsetting

   fantasai: So is EPUB subsetting HTML5?

   MikeSmith: not sure

   mjs: Engines are unlikely to enforce any subsetting

   fantasai: True, but such content could be non-conformant for EPUB 3.
   ... Not all EPUB implementations are based on browser engines

   ?: Are there many that are not?

   fantasai: I know of at least two
   ... and I haven't actually looked into the issue

   <kennyluck> fantasai: When I was at Tokyo, I found a EPUB
   implementation that implements CSS but not based on browser

   <kennyluck> .. I also found one EPUB implementation that's not based
   on browser at all

   <kennyluck> ... yet it renders vertical text quite nicely

   <kennyluck> ... (It does not support CSS)

   fantasai: uses effectively a UA stylesheet only

   hsivonen: Are the CSS implementatiosn any good/

   fantasai: Don't know, haven't done any testing

   discussion of converting HTML5 to EPUB

   would need to split into multiple files for EPUB impl's tiny brains
   :)

   <mgylling> Yes, splitting files is done a lot due to memory
   constraints in certain handhelds

   <mgylling> A popular one has a 300k limit IIRC

   <MikeSmith> 12 minutes to caffeine

   <freedom> which means EPUB doesn't encourage authors to write long
   chapters?

   <mgylling> hehe, yes, need to keep it short ;)

   <mgylling> I expect these max file size recommendations to be gone
   soon, just another generation shift needed in devices

   <freedom> mg: do it, my iPhone 4 has 512MB now

   <mgylling> freedom, right. Note that this is not spec restrictions;
   these are conventions that has arisen in the ecosystem

   <freedom> OK, bad implementation, not bad spec

link relations

   <scribe> ScribeNick: fantasai

   mjs: Subtopics include
   ... Idea of using microformats
   ... another is that we have a number of specific issues

   <mjs> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/124

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/124

   <mjs> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/127

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/127

   <mjs> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/118

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/118

   <mjs> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/119

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/119

   mjs summarizes the open issues

   mjs: Does anyone else have other subtopics?

   <adam> *u must be dozing off*

   <anne> no kidding

   <Zakim> MikeSmith, you wanted to show XPointer registry and to
   discuss potential need for a role registry similar to need for a rel
   registry

   MikeSmith: Somehow I ended up the one responsible for registering
   all link relations for HTML5
   ... So, I guess I can put some kind of report on that? What should I
   be doing.

   Julian: Let's start with a description of .. right now
   ... I'll summarize where IETF is right now.
   ... It all started with realization that HTTP has a Link header
   that's supposed to be equivalent to Link element in HTML
   ... And that there are documents on the web which are not HTML and
   for which it would be useful to expose linking
   ... Lots of people think it would be a good way of expressing link
   semantics independently of HTML
   ... So Mark Nottingham started on the work of writing a new def of
   Link in HTTP
   ... And establishing a registry that could be used in HTML as well,
   but would not necessarily be used in HTML
   ... The IANA registry also includes the link relations registry that
   was established for the Atom feed format, which is similar but not
   identical to HTML.
   ... So there are overlapps, but it included syndication-related
   things and not everything that HTML has
   ... So there was lots of discussion on procedural things, and
   licensing of the registry.
   ... Can talk about that later.
   ... Took a long time for spec to come out, but has finally been
   published.

   <Julian> http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc5988.html

      http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc5988.html

   Julian: That's a very old style: you send an email to an IETF list,
   and a group of designated experts to register that or ask questions.

   <Julian> http://paramsr.us/link-relation-types/

      http://paramsr.us/link-relation-types/

   Julian: Mark has started making this more modern by, first of all,
   providing a web page explaining how to register, has a template to
   help with you write the registration and submit for you to the
   mailing list

   <Julian> http://paramsr.us/tracker/

      http://paramsr.us/tracker/

   Julian: The designated experts now also has an issue tracker
   ... So people can watch where there registration requests are
   progressing
   ... Makes the IANA process a bit more pleasant

   <Julian>
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xh
   tml

      http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml

   Julian: Here's the registry riht now
   ... This contains link relations defined in Atom, Atom extensions,
   and HTML4
   ... and some parts for HTML5

   <Julian> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations

      https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations

   hsivonen: ? has been recognized as an entity that has reasonable ?
   measures in place
   ... It seems that the domain name is owned by ???
   ... as an individual
   ... And whatwg.org is also owned by an individual

   Julian: I'm not sure how that affects our impression of whether
   microformats.org is stable or not

   <MikeSmith> s/???/Rohit Khare/

   mjs: My biggest disappointment about the RFC is that it doesn't have
   provisions for individual registrations
   ... It would be useful to have a central repository where all of
   these can be listed so people know what's in use, even if it doesn't
   have a formal spec
   ... I think Mark should make a provisional registry.
   ... Mark said the registry would be so lightweight it wouldn't be
   necessary
   ... But that has not proven to be true.

   <hsivonen> moreover, even proven to be false

   Julian: We have provisional registries in other IANA things, and
   nobody's used them.

   <MikeSmith>
   http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations/current/thre
   ads.html

      http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations/current/threads.html

   mjs: I think if you find something that's almost never used, then
   creating something that has higher barrier to entry, then creating
   something with a higher barrier to entry isn't going to increase use

   Julian: People don't use provisional registries because they don't
   care enough.

   mjs: microformats.org list has even lower barrier to entry, and it
   is used

   Julian: One difference between IANA registry and wiki page is that
   wiki is completely HTML focused
   ... So they don't consider relations among other formats other than
   HTML
   ... They don't think about use on PDF or video

   mjs: Most people invent link relations for HTML. I don't think it
   makes sense to force them to address these abstract link uses that
   may or may not be practical.
   ... It makes more sense to me to provisionally register the link
   relations, and then encourage them to think about generalizing to
   other formats.

   hsivonen: It might be not about people not caring, but about
   provisional registration being dysfunctional
   ... I also agree with mjs that in some cases people don't care about
   nonHTML use cases. In that case we should just do HTML.

   Julian: we talked about ... provisional registry [that hsivonen
   mentioned] yesterday, and I totally agree this problem needs to be
   investigated.
   ... I think we try.
   ... I think we should try to encourage people to think of link
   relations applied to non-HTML content

   mjs: I think encouragement is fine. But if encouragement fails, what
   happens? Should the link relation then be undocumented because
   encouragement was unsuccessful?

   Julian: ... nobody's mailed a link relation and asked designated
   experts to help make the link relation more generic

   mjs: You've raised the barrier by tring to make it generic, the
   person doesn't care about making it generic, so it ends up being
   unregistered

   anne: You don't need that to get it in the registry, but to get it
   endorsed

   hsivonen relates hixie's experience with trying to register a link
   relation

   hsivonen: If what hixie wrote wasn't enough, then I think we have a
   problem.

   Julian: My point of view was that he didn't seriously try. He wanted
   to prove it didn't work.
   ... I don't think it will be productive to continue on this path.

   mjs: When I looked at the original templates hixie submitted and
   compared them to what the RFC said, I couldn't see any mechanical
   procedure that determined they failed to qualify
   ... So it seems anyone trying to register would require multiple
   email go-around
   ... Same problems result in failure to register MIME types and URL
   schemes

   MikeSmith: I have been going through the process of making requests
   using the mandated procedures

   <MikeSmith>
   http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations/current/thre
   ads.html

      http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations/current/threads.html

   MikeSmith: You can see there the discussions about the registry
   ... It does take multiple go-arounds in email for these.
   ... One is for some of the link relation names or types, they are
   already being used in other contexts
   ... One of those was 'search'.
   ... If you look at that, it was specified somewhere else.
   ... Regardless of how you do this, there has to be some discussion
   about what this description should say
   ... I don't see any way to get around that, if you have multiple ppl
   want to define the same thing.
   ... Other issues were with how it's defined in the spec itself.
   ... 'up' is one of those. Had to go back to WG and get a resolution
   for it
   ... .. Maciej... having to change the description of the link
   relation so that it's more generic, and less about HTML
   ... I'm not thrilled with that.
   ... Don't really care about doing that at this point in the
   procedure.

   <hsivonen> (one of the top Google hits for the metaphor is from one
   of our co-chairs:
   http://intertwingly.net/blog/2005/05/11/Fetch-Me-A-Rock )

      http://intertwingly.net/blog/2005/05/11/Fetch-Me-A-Rock

   MikeSmith: I think many ppl are not going to be thrilled about
   changing what they think is a perfectly reasonable discription of
   their use case to handle some speculative use cases
   ... That's alwasy going to be a troublesome thing for someone to do

   s/disc/desc/

   MikeSmith: In the spirit of going through the procedure and taking
   it to the end to see if it ends up being something it works or not
   ... But I do think we have to keep open the possibility that we
   decide that it doesn't work.
   ... I don't think it's a given that just because it's an RFC and the
   registry exists, that we've commited to this is how we do it.

   <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/2005/04/xpointer-schemes/

      http://www.w3.org/2005/04/xpointer-schemes/

   MikeSmith: I think it's still a possibility that this isn't working
   the way we would like it to work, let's try something else.
   ... There is something else, plh asked me to point out.
   ... Is the xpointer registry.

   <anne> +1 to W3C doing web registires

   MikeSmith: This is another way of registering something that is
   similar

   <anne> s/registires/registries/

   MikeSmith: I think the biggest ... difference between things that
   have been successfully regsitered
   ... and those that are still being reviewed
   ... i.e. provisionally registered
   ... All you need to do to request a provisional registration, you
   just start by typing in a name of some kind

   it gives you a form asking for a description, and optionally a spec
   URL

   MikeSmith: This is a middle ground between a wiki page

   and

   <hsivonen> This looks good to me

   MikeSmith: At least it's got a form-driven interface
   ... I think this is a good middle ground
   ... If the IANA registry provided a way of doing this, I think that
   would be something we could agree on

   Julian: IANA registry has something very similar
   ... The only thing is that instead of being automatically
   registered, it gets sent to the email list
   ... If we made a provisional registration out of the sumission, that
   would be the same.

   <Julian> http://paramsr.us/tracker/

      http://paramsr.us/tracker/

   <anne> The requirements for XPointer are first-come-first-serve

   Julian: and then someone on the mailing list to the tracker page

   <anne> This is not at all the case for the link registry

   <anne> well, the one the IETF/IANA uses

   hsivonen: How do you know the tracker issue is filed and where that
   is?

   Julian: You don't

   ?: Why can't you do a web-based form?

   Julian: Can't do that in IANA. IANA doesn't have web-based forms.
   Lives in last century.
   ... The form that posts to email is a compromise.

   hsivonen: So why does HTMLWG/W3C want to deal with an organization
   that lives in the last century

   <weinig> s/?:/Sam

   hsivonen: Instead of using xpointer registry code?

   Julian: It depends on whether you think the link relations should be
   synced with other formats or not

   sicking: Why couldn't you let W3C do the syncing to IANA?

   MikeSmith: Before ? pointed out xpointer, I didn't know we did
   registries

   mjs: Sounds like building a registry along the lines of xpointer
   would be a great idea

   <MikeSmith> s/?/PLH/

   mjs: Any volunteers to do that?
   ... write it up as a Change Proposal?
   ... It's a little past deadline, but since we have new info on the
   W3C registry option, would be a good thing to do

   MikeSmith: Guess I should talk to plh about this.

   hsivonen volunteers

   MikeSmith: plh asked me to point out the open issue about Role
   ... We talked about it this morning. Similar potential need to have
   a role registry
   ... plh isn't sure xpointer way is the right way to go, but wanted
   us to be aware that it exists

   anne: I think we should do role more centralized, because it affects
   implementations directly.

   hsivonen: In last meeting I asked EPUB to ask PF to set aside some
   tokens for them once getting commitments from AT vendors that they
   will support these roles

   mjs: Other things in HTML5 might benefit from this
   ... e.g. <meta> names
   ... There was a third thing

   Julian: canvas context?

   mjs: Seems more like role, in that it has implementation
   implications and should therefore be centralized

   hsivonen: Yes. for role, e.g. you need coordination among AT vendors
   and browsers etc.
   ... Not good to have a registry. Rare to make a new role.
   ... PF should be able to set that aside without a formal process.

   anne: Other one is meta http-equiv, which has a different namespace
   than meta name
   ... And canvas context, you do sorta need a place that says which
   are the contexts and which are compatible with which.
   ... Currently all are incompatbile, so not an issue now, but might
   change.

   hsivonen: New canvas context is even rare

   r

   ?: Still need a list of them

   ??: No, could just be defined by the specs that define them

   hsivonen: I don't see this as being a problem right now.

   <kennyluck> s/??/mjs/

   hsivonen: There are three canvas contexts in the world, and one is
   proprietary

   anne: we're removing them, 'cuz features have been added to 2d
   ... Might want a variant of WebGL that is compatible with 2D
   ... But still it's very limited

   mjs: There's probably only a single-digit number of these, and
   should all go through HTMLWG anyways

   fantasai: For link relations, seems like the idea is to have a
   provisional xpointer registry
   ... What about if someone wants to port a provisionally registered
   link rel to IANA, for more general use?

   discussion

   hsivonen: Dont't think we want to hijack Atom registrations

   Julian: If we decide not to go with IANA registry, need to decide
   whether we want to continue with registration of HTML5 link
   relations in IANA

   mjs: I think registering HTML5 link rels in IANA is unrelated to
   progress of HTML5
   ... It's not a requirement for us. It just makes the IANA registry
   more complete.

   mjs expresses that he doesn't care whether MikeSmith finishes the
   registration since it's not required for HTML5

   MikeSmith: It's not a lot of work, think it makes sense to finish
   offf.

   mjs: what about the ones where the designated experts require
   changes to the definitions

   MikeSmith: filed issues on that

   mjs: For us, the importance of a registry is as an extension point.

   sicking: Seems to me that the best caretakers of the link registry
   so far has been the microformats people
   ... So I want whatever solution we choose here to work for them.

   mjs: Idea of using page on microformats wiki was proposed, but
   nobody's written up a change proposal for that either.
   ... Anyone want to volunteer to write that up?

   sicking: Ok, I'll do it.

   mjs: So post to the mailing list and say how long it will take you?
   ... I think we should make an exception here, because we have new
   information that will help us make a better decision

   Julian: Microformats.org is not a new idea

   sicking: New information is our experience with IANA

   Julian: Half have gone through. A number are held on bugs being
   fixed in HTML
   ... Then we have to review the updated spec.

   mjs: If the spec isn't updated, what happense?

   Julian: We'd probably accept the registration anyway.

   mjs: So why is the registration being held up?

   Julian: If the description is updated at HTMl5, then the IANA
   registration would have to be updated multiple times.

   hsivonen: Why is updating IANA registry multiple times a problem?

   Julian: I don't think it makes a big difference either way

   fantasai: Then I suggest you ask the IANA registers to finish the
   registration for any link relations that will be registered with the
   current text, and then update the registry when the problems they've
   pointed out have been addressed with updated text.

   <scribe> ACTION: Julian to Ask the IANA designated experts if this
   would be an acceptable model [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action04]

   <Julian> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/127

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/127

   ISSUE-127

   Julian: ... Means in theory the semantic of the link relation can
   change depending on whether it's on <link> or <a>

   <MikeSmith> trackbot, associate this channel with #html-wg

   <trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

   <trackbot> If you want to associate this channel with an existing
   Tracker, please say 'trackbot, associate this channel with #channel'
   (where #channel is the name of default channel for the group)

   <MikeSmith> issue-127

   <MikeSmith> issue-127?

   <trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

   Julian: I think the link relation should be defined the same for
   both, and the usage affect details like scope
   ... I think the section should be revised to not imply that rel
   values on <link> and <a> could be substantially different
   ... The IANA registry has an extension point so that each
   registration can have multiple columns

   <MikeSmith> issue-127?

   <trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

   <kennyluck> trackbot, associate this channel with #html-wg

   <trackbot> Associating this channel with #html-wg...

   Julian: That was requested by Ian

   <MikeSmith> issue-127?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-127 -- Simplify characterization of link types --
   raised

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/127

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/127

   Julian: E.g. to have a column that says whether the linked resource
   is required to be loaded, or just informational relation

   <MikeSmith> ACTION: Julian to Ask the IANA designated experts if
   this would be an acceptable model [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action05]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-196 - Ask the IANA designated experts if
   this would be an acceptable model [on Julian Reschke - due
   2010-11-12].

   mjs: It seems that in practice the spec does what's requested, so
   it's more an editorial issue

   Julian: This distinction applies both to the spec and also to the
   registry
   ... I don't think having the distinction in the registry is a good
   idea.
   ... We don't seem to have any good cases for that.
   ... The observation is, we currently have a table in the spec that
   has columns for effect on <link> and effect on <a> and <area>
   ... In this table, both are exactly the same
   ... except for two values, which in one column it's listed they're
   not allowed
   ... And in these case there are bugs on whether that distinction is
   a good idea.

   <kennyluck>

   fantasai: Setting stylesheet on <a> doesn't make sense to me

   mjs: 'stylesheet' and 'icon' would have no effect outside <a>, even
   if we add them

   Julian: ...
   ... We'll have to make a decision on that no matter where we put the
   registry. Defining things such that it's possible for relations to
   have a different deifnition on different elements is a bad idea.

   mjs: ok

   <kennyluck> s/<a>/<link>/

   <Julian> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/119

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/119

   Julian: This is about the 'up' relation.
   ... Someone thought it would be nice to change the definition to
   allow repetition of 'up'
   ... to e.g. have 'up up' mean grandparent

   mjs: That wouldn't work very well given the DOM api for rel, which
   lists unique tokens

   fwiw, I agree this seems like an ill-fitted idea...

   <Julian> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/118

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/118

   <anne> HTML5 says something different from HTML4?

   <Julian> this is about navigational link relations that changed in
   HTML5, potentially changing existing content

   hsivonen: fwiw, I think we should get rid of the up up up thing.
   ... It won't be supported in UI very well anyway

   Julian: The use case given was to build a navigation tree in the UA
   ... But I think there are better ways to address that use case

   hsivonen: When a browser user experience team wants to implement
   something, and asks for syntax for it, then we should conside rit.
   ... but at this point it just seems a theoretical idea
   ... So I would propose to just drop it

   Julian: I'd like to ask the chairs to bundle the timing for these
   issues so they don't get too spread out

   mjs: Could put them all together
   ... have been staggering them so you don't have to write proposals
   all at once

   http://fantasai.tripod.com/qref/Appendix/LinkTypes/ltdef.html

      http://fantasai.tripod.com/qref/Appendix/LinkTypes/ltdef.html

   meeting closed

   RRSAgent: make minutes

   RRSAgent: make logs public

Testing 2

   <anne> scribe: anne

   MJS: Lets make a testcase in this session and submit it
   ... in the later half of this session

   JS: I am willing to coming up with a format for tests
   ... and write a harness

   <mjs> ACTION: sicking to design a file format for describing tests,
   and to write a harness that will run the automated tests [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action06]

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

   <mjs> ACTION: Sicking to design a file format for describing tests,
   and to write a harness that will run the automated tests [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action07]

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

   trackbot, this is HTML WG

   <trackbot> Sorry, anne, I don't understand 'trackbot, this is HTML
   WG'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for
   help

      http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc

   <dbaron> trackbot, status

   <trackbot> This channel is not configured

   KK: I can update the wiki

   <MikeSmith> trackbot, associate this channel with #html-wg

   <trackbot> Associating this channel with #html-wg...

   <scribe> ACTION: kris to update the wiki [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action08]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-199 - Update the wiki [on Kris Krueger -
   due 2010-11-12].

   <scribe> ACTION: Sicking to design a file format for describing
   tests, and to write a harness that will run the automated tests
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action09]

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

   <scribe> ACTION: jonas to design a file format for describing tests,
   and to write a harness that will run the automated tests [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action10]

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

   <sicking> gaah, i don't exist

   <sicking> i irc, therefor i exist

   KK: What about XSS issues?

   PLH: I agree we cannot solve the XSS issues
   ... My goal is that we do not set up services on these domains
   ... so there is no problem, effectively

   AVK: as long as w3.org does not document.domain we are fine,
   otherwise it might be safer to use w3test.org

   MJS: There might be a problem in the future; everything should be
   safe if we do not use a subdomain

   JS: I have an idea for non-automatible tests, but we can discuss
   that later
   ... The way I would like us to do new things is write tests in the
   new format if it is compatible with our features

   MJS: We have a requirement for landing new features and we could
   require them to be written in the HTML format

   AvK: We have used this format successfully already
   ... e.g. for server-sent events and XMLHttpRequest

   MJS: one thing we might need to do is identify features in the
   specification which are not new but still need tests
   ... there is an HTML4 test suite

   AvK: I do not think we should start from that

   [people agree]

   HS: How does updating work?

   JS: We will have to figure it out

   HS: for html5lib WebKit first lands in WebKit, I land first in
   html5lib

   [HS implements for Gecko]

   SW: We are not opposed to change

Pushing policy

   AvK: I think if the test contributor is known the tests should just
   get in

   JS: I do not agree, I think we should have a staging area

   KK: I think so too

   MJS: I think it makes more sense that the testing in browsers
   happens later and that tests should get automatically in

   [scribe misses out on discussing Mozilla specifics]

staging area

   KK: Basically you have a set of tests, and wait for them to be
   approved

   MJS: What do you want the approver to actually do?

   KK: cursory review

   AB: I think it might be worth having almost automatic approval
   process
   ... for tests that pass in multiple user agents

   MJS: why does there need to be this approval step? it will happen in
   distributed form anyway

   AB: to increase the level of quality

   MJS: it does not seem to happen now

   AvK: agreed

   DB: I am not sure that a approval process is good for known
   contributors

   MJS: It seems like a waste of time of people to require people to
   manually run the tests in every browser before it is approved
   ... there will also be cases that fail in all browsers

   DB: it seems you want a staging area because you want a known good
   set of tests
   ... an alternative approach is to ship a release, rather than delay
   on trunk

   HS: not having a lot of process helped html5lib to move forward
   faster

   MJS: with a release you know it does not get worse

   KK: the idea of approved is that is done

   AvK: so far that has not worked I think

   MJS: I think you will always get more tests and with releases you
   know the delta and can review whether that is ok as you already know
   the previous release was ok

   [something about multiple vendors contributing tests being awesome]

   MJS: problematic tests can be removed from the release

   <hsivonen> fantasai: Microsoft testa a lot of value combinations.
   Mozilla tests tricky edge cases.

   <fantasai> fantasai: Different vendors take different approaches to
   testing, and thereby cover different aspects of the features.

   <fantasai> fantasai: By putting them together you get a more
   comprehensive test suite

   JS: if the release process does not work we can revise it

   KK: i like to lock things done

   DB: if browsers import the tests they will report the problems more
   quickly

   KK: in the current model the test can be pulled right away

   [mercurial haz magic]

   JS: If I find something wrong should I fix the test and mail the
   list

   KK: currently mail the list
   ... and open a bug

   MJS: I think people who report the bug should be allowed to fix the
   test

   AvK: you want to optimize for the case that is most common, and most
   common the bug reporter will be correct I think

   DB: you should notify the person who wrote the test

   JS: I am fine with attaching patches to bugs

   http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

   <plh> -->
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/2010Fe
   b/0014.html Mercurial server

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/2010Feb/0014.html

   <dbaron> hg clone http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

      http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

   http://tc.labs.opera.com/apis/EventSource/eventsource-close.htm
   is an example of a test following the non-written guidelines

      http://tc.labs.opera.com/apis/EventSource/eventsource-close.htm

   <dbaron> default-push = https://[USERNAME]@dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

   <dbaron> is a line that you'd want to add to .hg/hgrc after:

   <dbaron> [paths]

   <dbaron> default = http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

      http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html/

   http://annevankesteren.nl/2010/08/w3c-mercurial

      http://annevankesteren.nl/2010/08/w3c-mercurial

   <hsivonen> let's make one of these:
   http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/mochitest-maker/

      http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/mochitest-maker/

   <hsivonen> that is, we should have a tool like that for the W3C
   harness

   <krisk> see http://test.w3.org/html/tests/

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/

   <hsivonen> I'm already annoyed by having to wrap stuff in test()

   <hsivonen> so I can't do ok(false, "FAIL!"); in scripts that aren't
   supposed to run

   <plh> ACTION: Kris to add reftest handling in the test harness
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action11]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-200 - Add reftest handling in the test
   harness [on Kris Krueger - due 2010-11-12].

   <krisk>
   http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/getElementsByClassName/00
   1.htm uses a relative path

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/getElementsByClassName/001.htm

   <hsivonen> https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Mercurial_Queues

      https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Mercurial_Queues

   <hsivonen> you'll really want to use MQ

   Media Queries ftw

   <krisk> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

   <weinig> sicking: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Testing

   <plh> a reftest:
   http://test.w3.org/html/tests/submission/W3C/bidi-markup-export/
   html5-html/

      http://test.w3.org/html/tests/submission/W3C/bidi-markup-export/html5-html/

   <dbaron> trackbot, associate this channel with #html-wg

   <trackbot> Associating this channel with #html-wg...

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Anne to give Alexey info about registry problems
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Henri to give feedback to Larry on MIME etc draft
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: jonas to design a file format for describing tests,
   and to write a harness that will run the automated tests [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action10]
   [NEW] ACTION: Julian to Ask the IANA designated experts if this
   would be an acceptable model [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: Julian to Ask the IANA designated experts if this
   would be an acceptable model [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action05]
   [NEW] ACTION: Kris to add reftest handling in the test harness
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action11]
   [NEW] ACTION: kris to update the wiki [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action08]
   [NEW] ACTION: plh to work with systeam to make sure we keep track of
   hg push [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: sicking to design a file format for describing tests,
   and to write a harness that will run the automated tests [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action06]
   [NEW] ACTION: Sicking to design a file format for describing tests,
   and to write a harness that will run the automated tests [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action07]
   [NEW] ACTION: Sicking to design a file format for describing tests,
   and to write a harness that will run the automated tests [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/04-html-wg2-minutes.html#action09]

-- 
Michael(tm) Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 22:26:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:08:40 UTC