- 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