See also: IRC log
<pratul> Agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2007Dec/0002.html
Pratul: is there any objection to the minutes?
no objections heard.
Pratul: minutes are
approved
... W3C has deadline for publication on 12/21/2007
... given that it takes about 5 days for the webmaster to go
through the publication process, we should have goal to send
the LC draft to webmaster by 12/14
... LC does not mean that no further discussions are possible.
It only means that the WG has no more open issues. New issues
can be brought up by the community.
ginny: I have second thoughts on the the 2 levels of compliance. I changed my mind and I believe there should only be a single level. This is better for interop.
Pratul: Zulah has asked to defer the discussion on EPR scheme and the compliance level bug.
Kumar: ginny, can you add a specific proposal for 4675?
ginny: yes
Pratul: any objections to the
changes to 4687?
... no objections heard. Mark it as fixed
Pratul: any objections?
... no objections heard. Please mark as fixed.
Kirk: Is the sentence "Whether new schemes satisfy these conditions will be
clear from their scheme definitions." clear enough? I think we should change it to something more specific/positive.
<ginny> Fix per comment #12 to include rewording of last sentence in bullet #1 to state that scheme authors should specify whether the scheme satisfies condition a and b.
Pratul: Agreed. Are there
objections to other changes?
... no objection heard.
ginny: I will mark it back as editorial.
Pratul: Zulah wants to discuss EPR scheme. We should defer the discussion to Thu call.
Kumar: I am not sure why we need
to add this text. Consistency of ref schemes is only relevant
in the context of reference resolution. The text to be added is
already covered under reference resolution.
... at least we should change the section title to reflect the
fact that the section is about comparing ref targets. This
could be done as a part of the bug# 4992
Pratul: This is about adding a
comment to the schema. Any objections?
... No objections heard. Resolve as editorial.
Kumar: One question about changes
for bug# 5291. There used to be a section that described the
steps involved in reference resolution. This section seems to
have been removed. This section should be put back.
... I will open a bug for this.
Pratul: Let us continue the discussion on Thu. We should try to get closure on all issues at that time.
Last Scribe Date Member Name Regrets pending 2007-08-30 Lipton, Paul until mid-December 2007 2007-10-15 Waschke, Marvin 2007-10-17 Eckert, Zulah 2007-11-08 Smith, Virginia 2007-11-12 Wilson, Kirk 2007-11-15 Lynn, James 2007-11-19 Valentina Popescu 2007-11-26 Boucher, Jordan 2007-11-29 Gao, Sandy 2007-12-03 Kumar, Pandit Exempt Arwe, John Exempt Dublish, Pratul Exempt MSM Exempt PHMinutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.128 (CVS log)