- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 18:18:11 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
First TAG teleconference, 7 Jan 2002
All TAG participants were present: Tim Berners-Lee (TBL, Chair),
Tim Bray (TB), Dan Connolly (DC), Paul Cotton (PC), Roy Fielding
(RF), Chris Lilley (CL), David Orchard (DO), Norm Walsh (NW),
Stuart Williams (SW). Ian Jacobs (IJ) scribed the meeting.
Next meeting: 14 Jan 2002.
See also IRC log:
http://www.w3.org/2002/01/07-tagmem-irc
The participants are invited to send corrections to this meeting
record to www-tag@w3.org.
- Ian
---------------------
Agenda:
1) Introductions
a) Participant background
b) Burning issues
2) Architecture questions
3) Administration
a) Meeting planning
b) Editing access
---------------------
------------------------
Summary of action items:
TBL: Find out what kind of editing access to the W3C Web site
will be available to TAG participants.
PC/IJ: Summarize issues suggested on www-tag (including
technical comments, liaison request). (An initial
categorization of input may be found in the IRC log.)
DO: As part of preparation for TAG panel at W3C's Technical
Plenary 2002, solicit input from chairs on what issues the
TAG should address, and which documents the TAG should
produce.
------------------------
------------------------
1) Introductions:
------------------------
Participants introduced themselves by summarizing their
professional background as it relates to TAG work; some
biographical/background information is in the IRC log.
Participants also identified some issues important to them:
- TBL: Interested in a clean Semantic Web Architecture
infrastructure. More work is required on "composability":
ensuring that W3C Recommendations and other Web technologies
work together (e.g., how the hand-off from HTTP to MIME to XML
Namespaces should work).
- RF: Figure out what W3C WGs have been working on while I've
been out of touch...
- DO: Need a coherent Web Architecture document (or documents)
that would allow us to identify holes in the design. Also, a
better description of the model might help us simplify the
technologies.
- CL: Need to identify what W3C can do to enable XML
clients. Don't want to have to rely on broken HTML legacy any
longer than necessary. Also: Composability.
- NW: Concerned mostly with the general complexity with the
direction of things. A better model might help us simplify.
- DC: Need to be able to carry out mundane tasks on the Web,
with a variety of clients (e.g., one should be able to do
banking on the Web without being required to use a special
client). Interested in the value of formal systems to
standards processes.
- TB: Want coherency and simplicity. While we want to build a
Web where users can do more things, they should still be able to
"look at the source (e.g., of pages or code)" and figure out
what's going on.
- PC: Composability. Want to make sure that the specs we
have work together. Also interested in how XML and Web services
will go forward. Also interested in relationship between TAG and
other organizational units inside and outside W3C (e.g.,
horizontal review groups within W3C).
- SW: Would like to see W3C specifications focus on model rather
than syntax. I'd like to see an articulation of what something
is trying to accomplish rather than imperatives about how to do
it.
The TAG will continue to identify architectural issues, and will
review the suggestions sent to www-tag.
Action PC/IJ: Summarize input on www-tag (including technical
comments, liaison request). An initial categorization of input
may be found in the IRC log.
------------------------
2) Architecture questions
------------------------
As this was the group's first meeting, some meta-questions were
asked:
a) What does "Web architecture" mean? To some, the term refers
to a "top-down description" of various technology modules and
how they relate. To others, the term refers to a set of
invariants (that should not change for any Web architecture).
b) Should the TAG focus on documenting the past or planning for
the future, or both?
c) How should the TAG write down architectural principles?
Should formal language be used?
The Chair observed that several TAG participants considered Roy
Fielding's dissertation to be good material on Web Protocols,
and invited the remaining participants to review chapters 4
and 5 and indicate whether they should form a basis for a written
Web architecture.
Roy Fielding's Dissertation, entitled "Architectural Styles and
the Design of Network-based Software Architectures":
http://www1.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/top
Chap 4:
http://www1.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/web_arch_domain
Chap 5:
http://www1.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style
The Chair also asked participants to review the early sections of
Tim Berners-Lee's "Web Architecture from 50,000 feet":
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Architecture
------------------------
3) Administration
------------------------
=======
Meeting planning:
=======
The TAG expects to meet weekly for 90 minutes. Minutes and the
IRC logs of these remote meetings will be public.
The TAG has not yet scheduled a first face-to-face meeting. Some
people from the TAG will be part of a panel at the W3C Technical
Plenary 2002 [1]. The TAG may meet around the time of WWW2002 and
the May 2002 AC meeting.
Action DO: As part of preparation for TAG panel at W3C's
Technical Plenary 2002, solicit input from chairs on
what issues the TAG should address, and which documents the
TAG should produce.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/07/allgroupoverview
=======
Editing access to the Web Web site:
=======
The group briefly discussed mechanisms by which the TAG
participants would be able to write to the W3C site (e.g.,
CVS, Wiki, mail archives, etc.).
Action TBL: Find out what kind of editing access to the Web site
will be available to TAG participants.
--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Tuesday, 8 January 2002 18:18:13 UTC