W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2003

[Agenda] 16 Jun 2003 TAG teleconf (Findings review, issues walkthrough)

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: 12 Jun 2003 07:28:08 -0400
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1055417287.900.462.camel@seabright>


The agenda for the 16 June 2003 TAG teleconference is
available at HTML [1] and as text below.

 - Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/16-tag.html


                  Agenda for 16 June 2003 TAG teleconference

1. Administrative (15min)

    1. Confirm Chair (SW), Scribe (IJ). Regrets: PC
    2. Accept minutes of [7]9 Jun teleconference[8]?
    3. Accept this [9]agenda?
    4. Next meeting: 23 June?
    5. Face-to-face meeting scheduling details:
          + Monday 1pm start time?
          + Convene for lunch on Monday before Monday start time?
          + On Weds, adjourn at 12:30 or 5pm?
    6. Summer meeting planning; see [10]request from Stuart
    7. TAG partcipation in XML 2003? See [11]email from Paul

      [7] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/09-tag-summary.html
      [8] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/02-tag-summary.html
      [9] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/16-tag.html
     [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jun/0048.html
     [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jun/0027.html

2. Technical (75 mins)

  2.1 Architecture document (10 minutes)

   The TAG does not expect to discuss the Arch Doc at this meeting,
   except to review action items.
    1. [12]26 Mar 2003 Working Draft of Arch Doc:
         1. Action DC 2003/01/27: write two pages on correct and
            incorrect application of REST to an actual web page design.
            DC requests to withdraw this one.
         2. Action DO 2003/01/27: Please send writings regarding Web
            services to tag@w3.org. DO grants DC license to cut and paste
            and put into DC writing.
         3. Action DC 2003/03/17: : Write some text for interactions
            chapter of arch doc related to [13]message passing, a dual of
            shared state. DC refers us to [14]Conversations and State

     [12] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-webarch-20030326/
     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Mar/0018.html
     [14] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Conversations

   Actions from 2 June meeting:
    1. RF to rewrite section 5. Section 5 is expected to be short.
    2. TB to rewrite section 4 based on his [15]proposal for rewriting
       section 4and suggestions from the TAG from 2 Jun teleconf.
    3. CL to make available a draft finding on content/presentation.
    4. DO to update [17]description of [18]issue abstractComponentRefs-37
    5. SW: to continue work on and make available a draft finding related
       to the opacity of URIs.
    6. NW: Take a stab at proposed new 4.5, wherever it ends up.
    7. DO: Write up a couple of paragraphs on extensibility for section
    8. IJ: to start incorporating detailed suggestions on Arch Doc made
       by the TAG (see [19]IRC log for details)

     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003May/0101.html
     [16] http://www.tbray.org/tag/wa-c4.html
     [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0089.html
     [18] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/24-tag-summary.html#abstractComponentRefs-37
     [19] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/02-tagmem-irc.html

   Actions from 9 June meeting:
    1. IJ:
         1. compare 3.2 text with RFC2396 version 3; compare and
            harmonize; leaving about the same amount of text.
         2. add a new 3.x section on allocating URIs; taking some text
            from rfc2396bis/3.2 and expanding slightly on social aspects.
         3. integrate RF's 3.5 into from RFC2396bis into arch doc section
         4. See additional notes in minutes of [20]9 Jun teleconference
    2. DO/PC: Send draft of AC announcement regarding TAG's last call
       expectations/thoughts to tag@w3.org.

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/09-tag-summary.html

  2.2 Findings (20 mins)

   See also: [21]findings.

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings

   Next steps for draft findings:
     * [22]Client handling of MIME headers; see [23]summary of comments.
     * [24]URIs, Addressability, and the use of HTTP GET and POST; see
       [25]summary of comments. See also [26]comments from Larry
     * [27]How should the problem of identifying ID semantics in XML
       languages be addressed in the absence of a DTD?

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html
     [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003May/0099.html
     [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet-20030509.html
     [25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003May/0099.html
     [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003May/0104.html
     [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDSemantics-32.html

   Action IJ 2003/06/09: Turn [28]TB apple story into a finding.

     [28] http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/04/30/AppleWA

  2.3 Issues the TAG intends to discuss (30 mins)

   The TAG expects to do a walk-through of the open and pending
   [29]issues in order to determine:
     * Which ones we are near closing
     * Which ones we can commit to close w.r.t. last call of the arch doc

     [29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html

   Then, we expect to work on issues we think we are near closing.

  2.4 New issues? (10 mins)

  2.5 Issues that have associated action items

     * [30]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
          + Action DC 2003/02/06: Propose TAG response to XML Schema
            desideratum ([31]RQ-23).
     * [32]whenToUseGet-7
          + Next step for [33]revised draft finding?
     * [34]namespaceDocument-8
          + Action TB 2003/04/07: Prepare RDDL Note. Include in status
            section that there is TAG consensus that RDDL is a suitable
            format for representations of an XML namespace. Clean up
            messy section 4 of RDDL draft and investigate and publish a
            canonical mapping to RDF. See TB's [35]1 June version.
          + Action PC 2003/04/07: Prepare finding to answer this issue,
            pointing to the RDDL Note. See [36]comments from Paul
            regarding TB theses.
          + Refer to draft TAG [37]opinion from Tim Brayon the use of
            URNs for namespace names.
               o RF: Folks assume that because the specs say so, URNs
                 will be persisitent. But persistence is a function of
                 institutional commitment and frequency of use.
     * [38]uriMediaType-9
          + IANA appears to have responded to the spirit of this draft
            (see [39]email from Chris Lilley).What's required to close
            this issue?
          + Action CL 2003/05/05: Propose CL's three changes to
            registration process to Ned Freed. [What forum?]
     * [40]URIEquivalence-15
          + SW proposal: Track RFC2396bis where [41]Tim Bray text has
            been integrated. Comment within the IETF process. Move this
            issue to pending state.
     * [42]HTTPSubstrate-16
          + Action RF 2003/02/06: Write a response to IESG asking whether
            the Web services example in the SOAP 1.2 primer is intended
            to be excluded from RFC 3205
          + See [43]message from Larry Masinter w.r.t. Web services.
     * [44]errorHandling-20
          + Action CL 2003/02/06: Write a draft finding on the topic of
            (1) early/late detection of errors (2) late/early binding (3)
            robustness (4) definition of errors (5) recovery once error
            has been signaled. Due first week of March.
     * [45]xlinkScope-23
          + Status report?
          + See [46]draft, and [47]SW message to CG chairs.
     * [48]contentTypeOverride-24
          + Next step on finding "[49]Client handling of MIME headers"
          + [50]Speech Recognition Grammar Specification Version 1.0,
            section [51]2.2.2 External Reference by URI
     * [52]contentPresentation-26
          + Action CL 2003/02/06: Create a draft finding in this space.
            Due 3 March.
     * [53]IRIEverywhere-27
          + Action CL 2003/04/07: Revised position statement on use of
            IRIs. CL says to expect this by 21 April.
          + Action TBL 2003/04/28: Explain how existing specifications
            that handle IRIs are inconsistent. [54]TBL draft not yet
            available on www-tag.
          + See TB's[55]proposed step forward on IRI 27.
     * [56]fragmentInXML-28 : Use of fragment identifiers in XML.
         1. Connection to content negotiation?
         2. Connection to opacity of URIs?
         3. No actions associated / no owner.
     * [57]binaryXML-30
          + Action TB 2003/02/17: Write to www-tag with his thoughts on
            adding to survey.
          + Next steps to finding? See [58]summary from Chris.
     * [59]metadataInURI-31
          + Action SW 2003/02/06: Draft finding for this one. See [60]SW
          + See also [61]TB email on Apple Music Store and use of URI
            schemes instead of headers
     * [62]xmlIDSemantics-32
          + See [63]Chris Lilley draft finding.
            Action NW 2003/05/05: Point Core WG to CL finding once made
     * [64]xmlFunctions-34
          + Action TBL 2003/02/06: State the issue with a reference to
            XML Core work. See [65]email from TimBL capturing some of the
     * [66]siteData-36
          + Action TBL 2003/02/24 : Summarize siteData-36
     * [67]abstractComponentRefs-37
          + See [68]issue description from David Orchard. Next steps?

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
     [31] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xmlschema-11-req-20030121/#N400183
     [32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#whenToUseGet-7
     [33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/get7-20020610.html
     [34] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#namespaceDocument-8
     [35] http://www.tbray.org/tag/rddl/rddl3.html
     [36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0046.html
     [37] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jun/0003.html
     [38] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#uriMediaType-9
     [39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0302.html
     [40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#URIEquivalence-15
     [41] http://www.textuality.com/tag/uri-comp-4
     [42] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#HTTPSubstrate-16
     [43] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0208.html
     [44] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#errorHandling-20
     [45] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#xlinkScope-23
     [46] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0094.html
     [47] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0104
     [48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentTypeOverride-24
     [49] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html
     [50] http://www.w3.org/TR/speech-grammar/
     [51] http://www.w3.org/TR/speech-grammar/#S2.2.2
     [52] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26
     [53] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#IRIEverywhere-27
     [54] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0074.html
     [55] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0090.html
     [56] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#fragmentInXML-28
     [57] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#binaryXML-30
     [58] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0224.html
     [59] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#metadataInURI-31
     [60] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003May/0050.html
     [61] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0151.html
     [62] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlIDSemantics-32
     [63] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDSemantics-32.html
     [64] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlFunctions-34
     [65] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0309.html
     [66] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#siteData-36
     [67] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/24-tag-summary.html#abstractComponentRefs-37
     [68] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0089.html

3. Other actions

     * Action IJ 2003/02/06: Modify issues list to show that
       actions/pending are orthogonal to decisions. IJ and PLH making
       substantial progress on this; hope to have something to show in


    Ian Jacobs for Stuart Williams and TimBL
    Last modified: $Date: 2003/06/12 11:24:46 $

Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
Received on Thursday, 12 June 2003 07:28:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:59 UTC