- From: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 03:54:39 +0900
- To: public-html@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20070802185434.GA2948@mikesmith>
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html Agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Aug/0071.html See also: IRC log http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-irc Present DanC, Julian, Gregory_Rosmaita, Marcin, MikeSmith, Dave_Singer, chaals, mjs[last_10_minutes], Lachy[IRC_only], Sander[IRC_only] Regrets Hixie Chair Dan Connolly Scribe MikeSmith * Topics 1. Convene HTML WG meeting of 2007-08-02T17:00:00Z 2. next meeting, regular meeting times 3. Email traffic shaping, working style 4. toward release of Design Principles 5. Detailed Spec Reviews, progress update 6. toward release of Design Principles 7. Test suite organization 8. definitions, accessibility, etc. 9. toward release of Design Principles * Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ Convene HTML WG meeting of 2007-08-02T17:00:00Z <DanC> minutes 19 July http://www.w3.org/2007/07/19-html-wg-minutes <DanC> updates to http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SpecReviews are most welcome, everybody http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SpecReviews next meeting, regular meeting times DanC: Key thing is to pick a time that Chris Wilson can make, but don't have a good idea of his schedule right now ... <DanC> any advice on a Seattle/OZ/Asia time, Lachy/ DanC: Gregory, Marcin, this time seems to be good for you (because you've made it more than once) ... <DanC> FYI, I'm going to "An Event Apart" in Chicago late in August DanC: [considering 16 August] ... I'll be at Event Apart, btw <DanC> PROPOSED: to meet 1st and 3rd Thursdays of the month at 11am Boston time; next meeting 16 Aug [currently 02:10am in Japan] DanC: Any reason not to schedule next call for 16 August? <DanC> RESOLVED: to meet 1st and 3rd Thursdays of the month at 11am Boston time; next meeting 16 Aug <DanC> ACTION: ChrisW to try to find a Seattle/OZ/Asia time [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action01] <DanC> note Lachy suggests a time 6 hours earlier for Seattle/OZ/Asia. I trust Chris W will read the record of this meeting Email traffic shaping, working style DanC: Hopefully, we will get an update from Chris Wilson, but lacking that, I will chair on the 16th ... Our strategy has been to reward the sort of e-mail I like, and ignore the rest ... <Dave_Singer> I do wonder if we should have a separate low-volume list for organizational and other 'formal' emails DanC: but that has not proven satisfactory to a lot of people ... I have heard from lots of people, that yeah, the HTML working group [mailing list] is no fun to work with ... I will go around the table, as it were, [to ask for thoughts] Gregory: Getting people to consciously put things up on the e-mail-thread part of the Wiki ... DanC: Only works in practice if people actually do the work Gregory: We are all talking around each other [still] instead of talking to each other ... <Gregory> working towards a common HTML WG vocabulary: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/CommonVocabularyAndDefinitions http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/CommonVocabularyAndDefinitions DanC: I think lots of people usefully followed up [on the "formal complaint" thread] Julian: I think it was good that the topic has been raised ... ... although commenting on discussions that have taken place on IRC is [perhaps going off a bit?] Marcin comments <DanC> poll is any thoughts on this agendum, # Email traffic shaping, working style <Lachy> personally, I think the formal complaint went too far, but I think it needs to be pointed out that there are people on both sides of the issues at fault (I took up the issue off list with some), each influencing the replies of the other and causing things to escalate <Gregory> underlying problem is that there are 2 tracks of discussion -- W3C and WHAT WG; now that HTML5 been accepted into W3C process, shouldn't formal (on-list) conversations be conducted on public-html so as to avoid bifurcation of efforts and cowpaths; WHAT WG has every right to exist and conduct conversations, but when the development path of HTML is concerned, the normative discussion forum should be public-html MikeSmith I think we should put boundaries on the discussion on the list ... scribe: for example, decide to limit the list discussion to just discussion of the interoperable behavior for existing elements ... ... and not discuss new elements nor discuss which elements should be conformant and which not Dave_Singer: I think it would not be out of line for the chairs to call people out if they are intemperate ... in their comments on the list ... and I think it would be useful to have a separate list [for certain kinds of messages] ... ... because it's hard to tell [which messages to read] ... chaals: I think it would be good for the chairs to be more active on the list ... ... [good to] reduce the overall volume of messages on the list ... <DanC> (hmm... did I start a FAQ? I was thinking about putting some advice in http://esw.w3.org/topic/MailingLists ... ) http://esw.w3.org/topic/MailingLists chaals: [encourage people to] treat each other with the kind of politeness and respect [that encourages further discussion on the list] ... ... people are terrified by the [current] volume of mail on the list ... ... opportunity for the chairs ... ... people need to realize -- that large parts of the community won't participate if they perceive the list environment as unfriendly ... ... and that will be our loss [because we want them to participate] ... [chaals discussing value of having a separate list for announcements] scribe: having that separate list and using it to make periodic (fortnight or monthly) announcements of a draft with some collected change notice would make it more reasonable way for people to follow the work of the group ... Gregory: Anything that is normative should occur on public-html ... ... because no everybody is subscribed to the whatwg list ... DanC: I assume our official mechanism is public-html ... <Gregory> plus one on announcement list DanC: on the other hand, there is actually HTML discussion taking place all over the place ... An announcement list [might] be a good idea ... ... I read a minority of the e-mail ... <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2007/01/HTML-WebAPI-position.html http://www.w3.org/2007/01/HTML-WebAPI-position.html DanC: there are long threads that go off into the weeds ... <Dave_Singer> indicate that you are willing to admonish if asked PRIVATELY <Dave_Singer> ? DanC: I expect other people to read those ... ... I read a much as I would expect a normal working-group member would read ... ... As far as taking people to task, Karl has been doing that ... ... e-mailing them directly, Cc'ing Chris and me ... Any ideas about the announcements mailing list? <Lachy> I manage to read less than half of the volume on public-html <DanC> ACTION: DanC to set up an announcement mailing list, noodling with chaals [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action02] chaals: Would also be useful to send out info about resolutions on the "announcements" list ... ... [case of people reading on the announcements list in order to figure out what's happened on the list during a particular period of time] DanC: Summaries of changes is something I think others can help Hixie with DanC, I do <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to respond to MikeSmith's suggestion of more focus and to respond to announcement of drafts, and noodle on summaries of cvs/svn logs MikeSmith: There were no commits to the spec during July ... since June 28 <Dave_Singer> the announcement list should be moderated, by the way (if possible) <Dave_Singer> and though I hate reply-to headers, if there is one, reply-to public-html DanC: [as far as shaping discussion], When you [explicitly] tell people to not think about elephants, they tend to think about elephants chaals: Saying, what exists in HTML 4, what exists in HTML5 [as limits for the current discussions] ... ... saying, otherwise, identify the problem [that you are trying to address in your message] ... saying, we are really trying to spec out HTML5 [and not digress into discussions about what is not implemented or not likely to be implemented any time soon] ... DanC thinks it's good suggestion to talk about limiting discussion ... scribe: but hasn't figured out how best to do it yet Julian: Helpful to have a statement of things that are clearly out of scope for the group ... DanC: Anything that is not in the charter is out of scope. ... for example, transport protocols are clearly not in scope toward release of Design Principles Detailed Spec Reviews, progress update <DanC> http://esw.w3.org/topic/MailingLists http://esw.w3.org/topic/MailingLists <scribe> ACTION: MikeSmith to write up a summary of changes for last [period of time], description of where changes go [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action03] DanC: 50 minutes into a 90 minute meeting today <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2F www.w3.org%2Fhtml%2Fwg%2Fwhowhat.xsl&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org %2F2002%2F09%2Fwbs%2F40318%2Ftasks83%2Fresults&content-type=&submit= transform http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fhtml%2Fwg%2Fwhowhat.xsl&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2002%2F09%2Fwbs%2F40318%2Ftasks83%2Fresults&content-type=&submit=transform <DanC> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/il16 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/il16 <DanC> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SpecReviews http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SpecReviews DanC: Spot checking ... ... anybody know if Lee has reviewed the Introduction? ... looks like Debi Orton has ... ... about Document Object Model ... ... Peter seems to have reviewed that ... ... has Lee reviewed it? ... <DanC> Detailed review of Section 1. Introduction. (Thursday, 26 July) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jul/1048.html DanC: As long as people put "detailed review" (as people seem to have done), [it's helpful] ... <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#scope http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#scope <DanC> "following items in scope" DanC: [discussing <canvas> within scope of charter] chaals cites relevant part of charter <DanC> "A serialized form of such a language using a defined, non-XML syntax compatible with the 'classic HTML' parsers of existing Web browsers." <DanC> and 3 existing web browsers grok canvas <DanC> hmm... DanC: Who's signed up to review the canvas spec? ... Ben Boyle and Sander ... ... doesn't seem that Ben has reviewed it yet (though he has reviewed other parts) ... <Sander> I'm still working on it, too DanC: Chris Wilson says that MS will complete their detailed reviews by end of August <Dave_Singer> no comments from me on detailed spec. reviews <DanC> Gregory: this has been a useful exercise. <DanC> Mike: definitely Gregory: Detailed review has been one of the most fruitful [uses of the list] chaals: been trying to do areview of accessibility features DanC: speaking of schedule, my goal for first public working draft of the HTML5 spec ... ... is that each part of the spec be read [carefully] by a member of the group ... ... [and that we can document that] ... ... that we have read, not [necessarily] that we like it ... ... first public working draft [FPWD] by September ... yeah DanC: Summary of CVS commits is a good thing to do. <DanC> DanC: I'll try to get regular summaries of spec commits; Mike has agreed to do it once toward release of Design Principles <DanC> . ACTION: ChrisW to ping mjs re pending comments on design principles DanC: I still have not synced up with Maciej, and last telcon, Chris said he would take this up <DanC> he did make some progress <DanC> . ACTION: Gavin_Sharp to review design principles in the next two weeks DanC: But I have not heard back from Maciej myself ... Does anybody know if Gavin has completed that action? <chaals> [Yes, issue...] Gregory: Surveys get lost in the volume of mail DanC: I send little enough mail that I expect everybody to read anything I send. <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/dprv/ http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/dprv/ wfm <Dave_Singer> works for me DanC: Does that survey seem like a worthwhile exercise for the group? <Gregory> even i can get to the survey chaals: Yes, but should be clear [that it is to a draft of the design principles]. DanC: Looking at diffs since April 30th <Dave_Singer> universalaccess is a conflation of two defined terms: accessibility and universality DanC: question about design principle related to accessibility Dave_Singer: perhaps not a good choice of words for a design-principles document DanC: I could just issue that survey in its current untidy state. ... Question 6 is sort of about the end-game ... ... Anne is sufficiently available for my purposes. ... but I have been struggling to sync up with Maciej ... [discussion about Maciej's availability; appears that Maciej may be in a period of time where he's working on other things and may not be available much for a while] DanC: If we can't do a first working draft of the Design Principles doc in August [that is going to be a problem] <DanC> ACTION: DanC to take input on the survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/dprv/ for a few days and issue it [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action04] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/dprv/ DanC: I think I can add a survey question: Do you want to play an editor role? Test suite organization <DanC> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HtmlTestMaterials http://esw.w3.org/topic/HtmlTestMaterials <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2F www.w3.org%2Fhtml%2Fwg%2Fwhowhat.xsl&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org %2F2002%2F09%2Fwbs%2F40318%2Ftasks83%2Fresults&content-type=&submit= transform http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xslfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fhtml%2Fwg%2Fwhowhat.xsl&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2002%2F09%2Fwbs%2F40318%2Ftasks83%2Fresults&content-type=&submit=transform <Dave_Singer> maciej should be on the call in a few minutes DanC: We have dozens of people who have volunteered to help with work on test suites <Gregory> UAAG Test Suite: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/TS/html401/ http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/TS/html401/ Gregory: [mentions user-agent accessibility guidelines] <Gregory> UAAG WG: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA Gregory: I'm an active member of that group <Gregory> UAAG 1.0: http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10 http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10 <chaals> [team contact: Jan Richards (actually works for U of Toronto), Chair: Jim Allan] <DanC> EARL is cool; see http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/test_results http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/test_results DanC: I think EARL is really cool ... we used it in the GRDDL WG ... definitions, accessibility, etc. <Gregory> reference document - accessibility dependencies and resources listed on the wiki at: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/AccessibilityDependencies http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/AccessibilityDependencies DanC: I will start by talking about a observed pattern I see ... ... agreeing on definitions is the whole job ... ... of working on standards ... <Gregory> common working group vocabulary wiki page: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/CommonVocabularyAndDefinitions http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/CommonVocabularyAndDefinitions DanC: if anybody thinks, We'll just take a couple of weeks to work on agreement about definitions, well [it's not reasonable to expect that to get done quickly] <DanC> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML Gregory: purpose of that page is to [achieve consensus about terms] Gregory: a lot of us talk around each others using the same terms [but not using them in the same way] DanC: What about actual content? ... I think "fallback" is used in the spec some place. ... can others help me find that? <DanC> "fallback content: content that is to be used when the external resource cannot be used (e.g. because it is of an unsupported format)." -- http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/ http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/ DanC: "fallback content" is bolded in the spec toward release of Design Principles DanC: [talking with Maciej] mjs: I've been very busy <scribe> ACTION: Maciej to send out wrap-up about design principles by Thursday next week. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action05] <DanC> ADJOURN. <DanC> I guess we discussed [agendum 8] a little bit. not much Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: DanC to set up an announcement mailing list, noodling with chaals [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action02] [NEW] ACTION: DanC to take input on the survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/dprv/ for a few days and issue it [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action04] [NEW] ACTION: Maciej to send out wrap-up about design principles by Thursday next week. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action05] [NEW] ACTION: MikeSmith to write up a summary of changes for last [period of time], description of where changes go [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action03] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/dprv/ [PENDING] ACTION: ChrisW to try to find a Seattle/OZ/Asia time [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/02-html-wg-minutes.html#action01] [End of minutes] -- Michael(tm) Smith http://people.w3.org/mike/ http://sideshowbarker.net/
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2007 18:55:04 UTC