- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: 05 Sep 2003 12:10:02 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Hello,
The agenda for the 8 Sep TAG teleconf is available
as HTML [1] and as text below.
_ Ian
[1] http://www.w3.org/2003/09/08-tag.html
========================================================
[1]W3C | [2]TAG | Previous: [3]18 Aug teleconf | Next: 15 Sep 2003
teleconf
[1] http://www.w3.org/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html
Agenda of 8 September 2003 TAG teleconference
Nearby: [4]Teleconference details · [5]issues list ([6]handling new
issues)· [7]www-tag archive
[4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/#remote
[5] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist
[6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jul/0054.html
[7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/
Note: The Chair does not expect the agenda to change after close of
business (Boston time) Thursday of this week.
1. Administrative (15min)
1. Roll call. Regrets: RF, DC, IJ, TBL. Scribe?
2. Accept the minutes of the [8]18 Aug teleconf?
3. Accept this [9]agenda?
4. Next meeting 15 Sep teleconf?
[8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html
[9] http://www.w3.org/2003/09/08-tag.html
1.1 Scheduling
Completed action SW 2003/08/18: Review work plan from Vancouver F2F to
help with schedule ([10]done)
[10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Aug/0037.html
See below for information about [11]Arch Doc scheduling.
1.2 Bristol meeting planning (6 - 8 Oct)
See [12]meeting page for information about suggested hotels.
[12] http://www.w3.org/2003/10/06-tag-mtg
Completed action SW 2003/08/18: Suggest hotel ([13]done)
[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Sep/0004.html
2. Technical (75min)
2.1 NamespaceDocument-8
Status of work on [14]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.
From 21 July ftf meeting, due 31 August.
* Action PC 2003/04/07: Prepare finding to answer this issue,
pointing to the RDDL Note. See [15]comments from Paul regarding TB
theses. From 21 July ftf meeting, due 31 August.
* Refer to draft TAG [16]opinion from Tim Bray on the use of URNs
for namespace names.
[14] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/07/21-tag#namespaceDocument-8
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0046.html
[16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jun/0003.html
2.2 Versioning and extensibility
* Completed Action NW, DO 2003/08/21: Finding on extensibility, due
15 August 2003 ([17]done)
[17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning.html
2.3 Status of overdue action items
* Action RF 2003/06/02: Rewrite section 3. From 21 July ftf meeting,
due 18 August
* [18]contentPresentation-26: Action CL (and IJ from ftf meeting)
2003/06/02: Make available a draft finding on
content/presentation. From 21 July ftf meeting, revision due 8
August.
[18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26
Findings:
* [19]whenToUseGet-7: 9 July 2003 draft of [20]URIs, Addressability,
and the use of HTTP GET and POST
+ DO said he had additional comments at 21 July 2003 ftf
meeting.
+ See [21]comments from Noah
[19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#whenToUseGet-7
[20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet-20030709.html
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0297.html
2.4 Architecture Document
Reference draft: [22]1 August 2003 Editor's Draft of the Arch Doc
[22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/webarch-20030801
What is TAG's expectation of editor at this point? For example:
1. IJ closes loop on introduction with TB, RF (DC?). There was
discussion at the [23]18 Aug teleconf about a [24]rewrite of the
abstract and introduction
2. Editor's draft 17 Sep
3. Reviewed at 22 Sep TAG teleconf
4. IJ incorporates comments, gets review from two TAG participants,
and requests 1 Oct TR publication
5. New TR draft published 1 Oct
6. TAG reviews 1 Oct draft for and at face-to-face meeting 6 Oct.
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html
[24] http://www.w3.org/2003/08/webarch-intro-20030813.html
2.4.1 Review of actions related to Architecture Document
Open action items:
* Action RF 2003/06/02: Rewrite section 3. From 21 July ftf meeting,
due 18 August.
* Action IJ 2003/06/16: Attempt to incorporate relevant bits of
"[25]Conversations and State" into section to be produced by RF.
* Action TBL 2003/07/14: Suggest changes to section about
extensibility related to "when to tunnel".
* Action CL 2003/07/21: Create an illustration of two resources, one
designated by URI without fragment, and one designated by same URI
with fragment...
* Action TB 2003/08/18: Bring some Vancouver ftf meeting photos to
IJ attention (of whiteboard, re: CL action about illustration of
two resources)
* Action IJ, CL 2003/07/21: Discuss and propose improved wording of
language regarding SVG spec in bulleted list in 2.5.1.
* Action TBL 2003/07/21: Propose a replacement to "URI persistence
...person's mailbox" in 2.6 and continue to revise [26]TBL draft
of section 2.6 based on TAG's 23 July discussion.
* Action DC 2003/07/21: Propose language for section 2.8.5 showing
examples of freenet and other systems.
* Action TB 2003/08/04: Write a definition of "XML-based"
* Action IJ 2003/08/04: s/machine-readable/something like: optimized
for processors, w/ defn that includes notion that it can be
processed unattended (by a person).
* Completed action NW 2003/08/04: Redraft 4.10.2 to include some
good practice notes (e.g., use namespaces!) ([27]done)
* Completed action NW 2003/08/04: Rewrite para 4 of 4.10.4
([28]done)
* Action TB and CL 2003/07/21: Propose a replacement sentence in
section 3.2.2.1 regarding advantages of text formats. IRC log of
[29]18 Aug teleconf suggested done, but can't find evidence.
[25] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Conversations
[26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/tim
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0002.html
[28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0008.html
[29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0076.html
The following action items were follow-up from the 22 July
face-to-face meeting in Vancouver:
* Identification and resources
1. TBL 2003/08/21: Write replacement text for Moby Dick example
in section 2.6 (on URI ambiguity). Is this done in [30]TBL's
draft?
* Representations
1. TB, IJ 2003/08/21: Integrate findings. What does this mean?
[30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/tim#URI-persistence
_________________________________________________________________
2.2 Findings
See also [31]TAG findings home page.
[31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings/
2.2.1 Draft findings nearing closure
* [32]contentTypeOverride-24: 9 July 2003 draft of [33]Client
handling of MIME headers
1. [34]Comments from Roy on charset param
2. [35]Comments from Philipp Hoschka about usability issues when
user involved in error correction. Is there a new Voice spec
out we can point to for example behavior?
3. [36]Comments from Chris Lilley
4. Change "MIME headers" to "server metadata" in title?
* Action IJ 2003/07/21: Update Deep linking finding (i.e., create a
new revision) with references to [37]German court decision
regarding deep linking. No additional review required since just
an external reference.
[32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentTypeOverride-24
[33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html
[34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0051.html
[35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jul/0076.html
[36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0113.html
[37] http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Sort=3&Datum=2003&Art=pm&client=3&Blank=1&nr=26553&id=1058517255.04
2.2.2 Draft findings that require more discussion
* [38]xmlIDSemantics-32:
1. [39]Chris Lilley draft finding.
2. Action CL 2003/06/30: Revise this draft finding with new
input from reviewers.
* [40]contentPresentation-26: Action CL 2003/06/02: Make available a
draft finding on content/presentation. From 21 July ftf meeting,
revision due 8 August.
* [41]metadataInURI-31: 8 July 2003 draft of "[42]The use of
Metadata in URIs"
+ Action SW 2003/07/21: Produce a revision of this finding
based on Vancouver ftf meeting discussion.
+ Action DO 2003/07/07: Send rationale about why WSDL WG wants
to peek inside the URI.
+ See also [43]TB email on Apple Music Store and use of URI
schemes instead of headers
+ See comments from [44]Mark Nottingham and [45]followup from
Noah M.
* [46]abstractComponentRefs-37
+ Action DO 2003/06/23: Point Jonathan Marsh at options. Ask
them for their analysis.
[38] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlIDSemantics-32
[39] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDSemantics-32.html
[40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26
[41] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#metadataInURI-31
[42] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/metaDataInURI-31
[43] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0151.html
[44] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0048.html
[45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0055.html
[46] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#abstractComponentRefs-37
2.2.3 Expected new findings
1. Action IJ 2003/06/09: Turn [47]TB apple story into a finding.
2. Action PC: Finding on namespace documents, due 31 August 2003
[47] http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/04/30/AppleWA
2.3 Issues
The TAG does not expect to discuss these issues at this meeting.
2.3.1 Identifiers ([48]URIEquivalence-15 , [49]IRIEverywhere-27)
[48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#URIEquivalence-15
[49] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#IRIEverywhere-27
* [50]URIEquivalence-15
+ SW proposal: Track RFC2396bis where [51]Tim Bray text has
been integrated. Comment within the IETF process. Move this
issue to pending state.
* [52]IRIEverywhere-27
+ Action CL 2003/04/07: Revised position statement on use of
IRIs.
+ Action TBL 2003/04/28: Explain how existing specifications
that handle IRIs are inconsistent. [53]TBL draft not yet
available on www-tag.
+ See TB's [54]proposed step forward on IRI 27.
[50] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#URIEquivalence-15
[51] http://www.textuality.com/tag/uri-comp-4
[52] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#IRIEverywhere-27
[53] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0074.html
[54] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0090.html
2.3.2 Qnames, fragments, and media types([55]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6,
[56]fragmentInXML-28, [57]abstractComponentRefs-37, [58]putMediaType-38)
[55] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
[56] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#fragmentInXML-28
[57] http://www.w3.org/2003/07/24-tag-summary.html#abstractComponentRefs-37
[58] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#putMediaType-38
* [59]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
+ Action DC 2003/02/06: Propose TAG response to XML Schema
desideratum ([60]RQ-23).
* [61]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.
* [62]abstractComponentRefs-37(discussed [63]above).
* [64]putMediaType-38
[59] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
[60] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xmlschema-11-req-20030121/#N400183
[61] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#fragmentInXML-28
[62] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#abstractComponentRefs-37
[63] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/07/21-tag.html#findingsInProgress
[64] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#putMediaType-38
2.3.3 New and other Issues requested for discussion.
([65]mixedUIXMLNamespace-33, [66]RDFinXHTML-35, [67]siteData-36 plus
possible new issues)
[65] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
[66] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#RDFinXHTML-35
[67] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#siteData-36
Existing Issues:
* [68]mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
* [69]RDFinXHTML-35
* [70]siteData-36
+ Action TBL 2003/02/24 : Summarize siteData-36
[68] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
[69] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#RDFinXHTML-35
[70] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#siteData-36
2.3.5 Miscellaneous issues
* [71]uriMediaType-9
+ IANA appears to have responded to the spirit of this draft
(see [72]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?]
* [73]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 [74]message from Larry Masinter w.r.t. Web services.
* [75]xlinkScope-23
+ See [76]draft, and [77]SW message to CG chairs.
+ Action CL 2003/06/30: Ping the chairs of those groups asking
for an update on xlinkScope-23.
* [78]binaryXML-30
+ Action TB 2003/02/17: Write to www-tag with his thoughts on
adding to survey.
+ Action IJ 2003/07/21: Add link from issues list binaryXML-30
to upcoming workshop
+ Next steps to finding? See [79]summary from Chris.
* [80]xmlFunctions-34
+ Action TBL 2003/02/06: State the issue with a reference to
XML Core work. See [81]email from TimBL capturing some of the
issues.
* [82]charmodReview-17
1. Completed action IJ 2003/07/14: Move issue 17 to pending
rather than resolved.
2. Completed action DC: Remind I18N WG of what we are expecting
regarding issue 17; send this on behalf of the TAG ([83]Done
3. [84]Mail from DC to I18N WG in light of new Charmod draft
* [85]rdfURIMeaning-39
1. Completed Action DC 2003/08/18: Alert SWCG of this issues
([86]done)
[71] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#uriMediaType-9
[72] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0302.html
[73] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#HTTPSubstrate-16
[74] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0208.html
[75] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#xlinkScope-23
[76] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0094.html
[77] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0104
[78] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#binaryXML-30
[79] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0224.html
[80] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlFunctions-34
[81] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0309.html
[82] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#charmodReview-17
[83] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jul/0052.html
[84] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Sep/0019.html
[85] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#rdfURIMeaning-39
[86] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0003.html
3. Other actions
* Action IJ 2003/02/06: Modify issues list to show that
actions/pending are orthogonal to decisions. PLH has put the
issues list in production; see the [87]DOM issues list.
[87] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/09-dom-core-issues/issues.html
_________________________________________________________________
Ian Jacobs for Stuart Williams and TimBL
Last modified: $Date: 2003/09/05 16:07:32 $
--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Friday, 5 September 2003 12:10:04 UTC