Chris: apologizes for the late start
<rubys> scribe: dsinger
JoeW; wants to know how to make comments on HTML5
Chris: start with an email on the WG list; it depends somewhat on the issue. wording etc. can be on list, anything big like charter, bring to the chairs' attention
<ChrisWilson> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
<pimpbot> Title: Input for Agenda Planning for the HTML Weekly - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<ChrisWilson> action-114?
<trackbot> ACTION-114 -- Cynthia Shelly to report progress on ARIA TF -- due 2009-05-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/114
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-114 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<DanC> (what was that technical problem?)
Cynthia: ARIA is making progress, expects to bring some matters back to HTML in the next couple of weeks
Cynthia: implementation
is also
progressing, more on Windows than the Mac...
... ongoing discussions in ARIA on over-riding semantics in
HTML,
but many don't want to go there.
<DanC> e.g. radio buttons vs check boxes
<ChrisWilson> action-103?
<trackbot> ACTION-103 -- Julian Reschke to register about: URI scheme -- due 2009-05-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/103
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-103 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
Julian: discussion on URI-review started, some feedback, and a new draft is being worked on
<DanC> (I don't remember where the uri-review list is... searching...)
Julian: summarizes what Bjorn said. Nits about fragments, some IRI considerations, dependency on HTML 5 - and we'd like to avoid that
<DanC> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review/current/msg00869.html From: Bjoern Hoehrmann
<pimpbot> Title: Re: [Uri-review] Request to review about URI scheme (at www.ietf.org)
Julian: which makes circular
normative
references
... wonders whether there is a similar action on
Larry, which
maybe should be merged...(into one on Julian)
<Julian> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review/current/msg00869.html
<pimpbot> Title: Re: [Uri-review] Request to review about URI scheme (at www.ietf.org)
<ChrisWilson> action-99?
<trackbot> ACTION-99 -- Sam Ruby to review @profile -- due 2009-05-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/99
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-99 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
Sam: no-one seems to want to own review of @profile, can we make this action merely 'raised'?
DanC: wonders if we could close it, but Julian would object doing that
someone: wonders if an executive decree can solve it, but no 'executive' is willing to go there
<DanC> (yes, it makes sense to defer @profile until discussion of extensibility is also wound down.)
<DanC> let's keep metadata profiles (head/@profile) in HTML for use in GRDDL etc.
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jul/0571.html
<pimpbot> Title: let's keep metadata profiles (head/profile) in HTML for use in GRDDL etc. from Dan Connolly on 2007-07-09 (public-html@w3.org from July 2007) (at lists.w3.org)
Sam:
we need an owner. The editor
has made his opinion known, and we
need an owner
... there has been extensive discussion, but
we need the
extensibility discussion
... we also need a
resolution the editor is willing to write
and can live with
DanC: thinks that the HTML 4 text could (should?) be used
Julian: mostly agrees with DanC, but notes we need to review whether multiple profiles are allowed
<DanC> (re multiple, it's clear enough to me that HTML 4 allows many. It's subsequent XHTML 1.x drafts that were less clear.)
Chris: is trying to look at
extensibility with his colleagues, and so he'll run with this
for
the moment
... feels that we have most of the text, and
given a discussion
of extensibility, we may be able to solve it,
and merely
'raised' is not good enough
DanC: notes Chris also owns Decentralized extensibility (41), and Chris agrees the two are related
<DanC> (hmm... I wonder about changing the issue name from head-profile to microdata. )
DanC: some discussion of what uses what and for what purpose
<ChrisWilson> action-121?
<trackbot> ACTION-121 -- Dan Connolly to submit id for URLs in HTML 5 -- due 2009-05-31 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/121
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-121 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009May/0643.html
<pimpbot> Title: Updating the IRI spec to include "web addresses" from Larry Masinter on 2009-05-31 (public-html@w3.org from May 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
DanC: there is continuing editorial action here; some material will stay in HTML 5
Julian: we need an I-D to
be
submitted by Larry, but he's on vacation for two weeks. He's
also trying to organize a face to face (IETF) on the IRI spec
and
possible revision
... but an IRI revision would be (at
best) in the autumn. we
probably need to define a term and the
mapping to IRI in a
separate spec.
<ChrisWilson> @dsinger - yes, action-99 was assigned to me
<pimpbot> ChrisWilson: Huh?
Julian: basically Larry's
proposal,
but in a separate document (not the IRI spec.)
... any
preference on direction, anyone?
<Julian> ...define "Web Address" and its mapping to IRI (RFC 3987)
DanC: there was objection to
're-defining URL', and so we preferred a new term ('web
address')
... getting the documents in the right places
with the right
content, gets us the right reviews by the right
people.
... so an I-D will get review from IRI experts
that'll never
happen if we leave it in HTML 5
...
reviews that Ian was concerned about malformed URLs (e.g.
%%) and
how they are handled
Julian:
would prefer to layer on
top of the existing spec. over
re-defining terms
... i.e. add a layer of handling
malformed addresses etc.
... notes that actually we permit
IRIs, so calling them URLs is
wrong from the start
...
then there is handling non-ascii in the query part, where
the IRI
handling is unsuitable...
... so 'web addresses' are close
to IRIs but not (alas)
identical
(general thanks for the review, and we wait to see what Larry comes up with)
<Julian> ...unsuitable for documents not encoded in UTF-8...
Julian: graciously volunteers to
take
on an action, and co-ordinate with DanC and Larry
... in
Larry's absence
(discussion of re-assigning actions etc.)
<DanC> ACTION: Julian coordinate with LMM and DanC to get an Internet Draft that addresses some HTML 5 href issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-html-wg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-125 - Coordinate with LMM and DanC to get an Internet Draft that addresses some HTML 5 href issues [on Julian Reschke - due 2009-06-11].
<DanC> action-125 due 2 July
<trackbot> ACTION-125 Coordinate with LMM and DanC to get an Internet Draft that addresses some HTML 5 href issues due date now 2 July
Julian: notes he'll be out for the next 3 meetings, alas
<DanC> close ACTION-121
<trackbot> ACTION-121 Submit id for URLs in HTML 5 closed
<ChrisWilson> action-86?
<trackbot> ACTION-86 -- Julian Reschke to review Thomas Broyer's IETF ID to see if we can postpone ISSUE-13 -- due 2009-06-01 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/86
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-86 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
Julian: is communicating with Thomas but requests 4 more weeks
<DanC> ACTION-86 due 2 July
<trackbot> ACTION-86 Review Thomas Broyer's IETF ID to see if we can postpone ISSUE-13 due date now 2 July
<ChrisWilson> action-111?
<trackbot> ACTION-111 -- Laura Carlson to work on process issues re: summary -- due 2009-06-26 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/111
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-111 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
Laura: a recommendation was sent yesterday, discussion has started
<Laura> PF Recommendation: @Summary from Janina Sajka
<Laura> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jun/0026.html
<pimpbot> Title: PF Response: Summary from Janina Sajka on 2009-06-04 (www-archive@w3.org from June 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
<Laura> Response from editor and ensuing discussion:
<Laura> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/thread.html#msg173
<pimpbot> Title: public-html@w3.org from June 2009: by thread (at lists.w3.org)
(Ian sent said rec.)
<Laura> The table summary issue seems to be at an impasse.
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0173.html
<pimpbot> Title: Re: PF Response: Summary from Ian Hickson on 2009-06-04 (public-html@w3.org from June 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
<Laura> For reference, the "Mechanism to Summarize a Table" issue is detailed at:
<Laura> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SummaryForTABLE
<pimpbot> Title: HTML/SummaryForTABLE - ESW Wiki (at esw.w3.org)
(people read...)
Laura: this has been an issue for
maybe two years, and is puzzled as to how to make
progress
... people are reminded of the profile problem
<Laura> RFC 2119 compatible definition text for HTML 5 has been drafted by HTML WG Members.
<Laura> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SummaryForTABLE/SummarySpecification
<pimpbot> Title: HTML/SummaryForTABLE/SummarySpecification - ESW Wiki (at esw.w3.org)
Sam: wants to see the spec. text in context, so it could be (if desired) voted on
DanC: the arguments are not about integrated text, but about summary being harmful
Laura: says Steve wrote the text above
<Laura> If @summary is not reinstated in HTML5 or if the editor does not come up with an agreeable solution, formal objections will probably be filed.
<pimpbot> Title: HTML/SummaryForTABLE/SummarySpecification - ESW Wiki (at esw.w3.org)
Dave: wonders if the chairs should discuss it with the editor, and see if he agrees discussion is over and we should vote (and he'd accept the result of the vote)
Sam: thinks we should have a very clear text before we vote
<Stevef> gsnedders said: "points out we don't have consensus on a summary attribute" thats the case for lost of stuff in the spec.
Sam: feels that the editor would
want
such a vote at this point
... wants to know if there has
been a response to Ian's
contention that caption fills the
role?
<Laura> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/SummaryForTABLE
<pimpbot> Title: HTML/SummaryForTABLE - ESW Wiki (at esw.w3.org)
Laura: volunteers to make whatever improvements to that page are needed to have a clear vote
DanC: agrees with Sam, that Ian will want a vote, and that the onus is on those who feel the wiki is not good enough, to help improve it
<ChrisWilson> Laura, you're right, the version of 2009-06-04 13:14:01 is considerably better than when I last saw it
general feeling is to ask the group to get the Wiki page to a clear and un-biased description of the question, with a view to a future vote
<scribe> ACTION: Sam to send a call to the WG to update the Wiki page to adequately reflect both (all) viewpoints on summary, in prep. for a vote [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-html-wg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-126 - Send a call to the WG to update the Wiki page to adequately reflect both (all) viewpoints on summary, in prep. for a vote [on Sam Ruby - due 2009-06-11].
<ChrisWilson> action-115?
<trackbot> ACTION-115 -- Michael(tm) Smith to set up WBS for HTML WG participants to attend HTML WG f2f during TPAC 2009 -- due 2009-05-28 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/115
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-115 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
Dave: notes that CSS moved to early in the TPAC, so as not to overlap
<ChrisWilson> action-123?
<trackbot> ACTION-123 -- Ian Hickson to discuss choice of embedding vcard microdata instead of referencing IETF spec and defining conformance reqs for HTML5 -- due 2009-05-21 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/123
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-123 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
Julian: describes the
open/close/re-open/discussion/links that happened here
...
followed up on the mailing list, and asked for a reply, and
Ian
responded it was deep in the stack and an answer wasn't
likely
soon
Chris: feels we should make this open rather than pending review, and give Ian time to get it to the top of his stack
Sam: wants to point out to Ian that the mail he referred to isn't enough of a response
Julian: wonders if this all belongs, anyway, as (some of?) the use cases were not agreed to
Chris: re-opened it on Ian and moved the due date out
Julian: would like someone (a chair?) to follow up with Ian
Sam: will do such
<ChrisWilson> any other business?
<ChrisWilson> adjourned.
Chris: moves to adjourn
<Laura> bye
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/liek/like/ Succeeded: s/Cynthia?/Cynthia/ FAILED: s/Cynthia?/Cynthia/ Succeeded: s/it's/its/ Succeeded: s/volunteers/graciously volunteers/ Succeeded: s/DanC: wants to know/Sam: wants to know/ Found Scribe: dsinger Inferring ScribeNick: dsinger Default Present: +1.218.340.aabb, DanC, dsinger, Matt_May, Shepazu, Sam, Cynthia_Shelly, Joe_Williams, ChrisWilson, LauraCarlson, +49.251.280.aacc, Julian Present: +1.218.340.aabb DanC dsinger Matt_May Shepazu Sam Cynthia_Shelly Joe_Williams ChrisWilson LauraCarlson +49.251.280.aacc Julian Laura Found Date: 04 Jun 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-html-wg-minutes.html People with action items: coordinate danc julian lmm sam with WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]