- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: 11 Sep 2003 12:47:34 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Hello,
The agenda of the 15 Sep 2003 TAG teleconf is available
as HTML [1] and as text below.
- Ian
[1] http://www.w3.org/2003/09/15-tag
=======================================================
Agenda of 15 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: CL
2. Accept the minutes of the [8]8 Sep teleconf?
3. Accept this [9]agenda?
4. Next meeting 22 Sep teleconf?
[8] http://www.w3.org/2003/09/08-tag-summary.html
[9] http://www.w3.org/2003/09/15-tag.html
Upcoming events:
* 12 Sep: DO sends comments on [10]get7 finding
* 17 Sep: Next Editor's draft of arch doc
* 18 Sep: Next draft from NW/DO of extensibility draft finding
* 22 Sep telcon: Review of Editors' draft of arch doc
* 29 Sep telcon: Focus on Findings
* 1 Oct: TR page draft of arch doc
* 6-8 Oct ftf: arch doc review primarily, publishing expectations
[10] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet-20030709.html
2. Technical (75min)
2.1 NamespaceDocument-8
Status of work on [11]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 [12]comments from Paul regarding TB
theses. From 21 July ftf meeting, due 31 August.
* Action PC 2003/09/08: Providing WebArch text as well for this
issue.
* Refer to draft TAG [13]opinion from Tim Bray on the use of URNs
for namespace names.
[11] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/07/21-tag#namespaceDocument-8
[12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0046.html
[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jun/0003.html
2.2 Findings
* Completed action IJ 2003/07/21: Update Deep linking finding (i.e.,
create a new revision) with references to [14]German court
decision regarding deep linking. No additional review required
since just an external reference. ([15]Done)
* [16]whenToUseGet-7: 9 July 2003 draft of [17]URIs, Addressability,
and the use of HTTP GET and POST
+ Action DO 2003/09/08: DO to send additional comments, due 12
Sep.
+ See [18]comments from Noah
* [19]contentTypeOverride-24: 9 July 2003 draft of [20]Client
handling of MIME headers
1. [21]Comments from Roy on charset param
2. [22]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. [23]Comments from Chris Lilley
4. Change "MIME headers" to "server metadata" in title?
[14] 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
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Sep/0020.html
[16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#whenToUseGet-7
[17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet-20030709.html
[18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0297.html
[19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentTypeOverride-24
[20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0051.html
[22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Jul/0076.html
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0113.html
_________________________________________________________________
2.3 Architecture Document
Reference draft: [24]1 August 2003 Editor's Draft of the Arch Doc. See
also [25]rewrite of the abstract and introduction.
[24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/webarch-20030801
[25] http://www.w3.org/2003/08/webarch-intro-20030813.html
2.3.1 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
"[26]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 [27]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).
* 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
[28]18 Aug teleconf suggested done, but can't find evidence.
[26] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Conversations
[27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/tim
[28] 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 [29]TBL's
draft?
* Representations
1. TB, IJ 2003/08/21: Integrate findings. What does this mean?
[29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/tim#URI-persistence
2.4 Findings
See also [30]TAG findings home page.
[30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings/
2.4.2 Draft findings that require more discussion
* [31]xmlIDSemantics-32:
1. [32]Chris Lilley draft finding.
2. Action CL 2003/06/30: Revise this draft finding with new
input from reviewers.
* [33]contentPresentation-26: Action CL 2003/06/02: Make available a
draft finding on content/presentation. From 21 July ftf meeting,
revision due 8 August.
* [34]metadataInURI-31: 8 July 2003 draft of "[35]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 [36]TB email on Apple Music Store and use of URI
schemes instead of headers
+ See comments from [37]Mark Nottingham and [38]followup from
Noah M.
* [39]abstractComponentRefs-37
+ Action DO 2003/06/23: Point Jonathan Marsh at options. Ask
them for their analysis.
* NW, DO 2003/09/08: Produce new draft of Extensibility/Versioning
finding, due 18 Sep.
[31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlIDSemantics-32
[32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDSemantics-32.html
[33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26
[34] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#metadataInURI-31
[35] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/metaDataInURI-31
[36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0151.html
[37] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0048.html
[38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0055.html
[39] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#abstractComponentRefs-37
2.4.3 Expected new findings
1. [40]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.
2. Action IJ 2003/06/09: Turn [41]TB apple story into a finding.
[40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26
[41] http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/04/30/AppleWA
2.5 Issues
The TAG does not expect to discuss these issues at this meeting.
2.5.1 Identifiers ([42]URIEquivalence-15 , [43]IRIEverywhere-27)
[42] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#URIEquivalence-15
[43] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#IRIEverywhere-27
* [44]URIEquivalence-15
+ SW proposal: Track RFC2396bis where [45]Tim Bray text has
been integrated. Comment within the IETF process. Move this
issue to pending state.
* [46]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. [47]TBL draft not yet
available on www-tag.
+ See TB's [48]proposed step forward on IRI 27.
[44] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#URIEquivalence-15
[45] http://www.textuality.com/tag/uri-comp-4
[46] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#IRIEverywhere-27
[47] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Apr/0074.html
[48] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/0090.html
2.5.2 Qnames, fragments, and media types([49]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6,
[50]fragmentInXML-28, [51]abstractComponentRefs-37, [52]putMediaType-38)
[49] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
[50] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#fragmentInXML-28
[51] http://www.w3.org/2003/07/24-tag-summary.html#abstractComponentRefs-37
[52] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#putMediaType-38
* [53]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
+ Action DC 2003/02/06: Propose TAG response to XML Schema
desideratum ([54]RQ-23).
* [55]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.
* [56]abstractComponentRefs-37(discussed [57]above).
* [58]putMediaType-38
[53] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
[54] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xmlschema-11-req-20030121/#N400183
[55] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#fragmentInXML-28
[56] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#abstractComponentRefs-37
[57] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/07/21-tag.html#findingsInProgress
[58] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#putMediaType-38
2.5.3 New and other Issues requested for discussion.
([59]mixedUIXMLNamespace-33, [60]RDFinXHTML-35, [61]siteData-36 plus
possible new issues)
[59] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
[60] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#RDFinXHTML-35
[61] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#siteData-36
Existing Issues:
* [62]mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
* [63]RDFinXHTML-35
* [64]siteData-36
+ Action TBL 2003/02/24 : Summarize siteData-36
[62] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
[63] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#RDFinXHTML-35
[64] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#siteData-36
2.5.4 Miscellaneous issues
* [65]uriMediaType-9
+ IANA appears to have responded to the spirit of this draft
(see [66]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?]
* [67]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 [68]message from Larry Masinter w.r.t. Web services.
* [69]xlinkScope-23
+ See [70]draft, and [71]SW message to CG chairs.
+ Action CL 2003/06/30: Ping the chairs of those groups asking
for an update on xlinkScope-23.
* [72]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 [73]summary from Chris.
* [74]xmlFunctions-34
+ Action TBL 2003/02/06: State the issue with a reference to
XML Core work. See [75]email from TimBL capturing some of the
issues.
* [76]charmodReview-17
1. Action SW 2003/09/08: Follow up with I18N folks on status of
TAG's charmod comments.
2. [77]Mail from DC to I18N WG in light of new Charmod draft
* [78]rdfURIMeaning-39
[65] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#uriMediaType-9
[66] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0302.html
[67] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#HTTPSubstrate-16
[68] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0208.html
[69] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#xlinkScope-23
[70] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0094.html
[71] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Mar/0104
[72] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#binaryXML-30
[73] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0224.html
[74] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlFunctions-34
[75] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Feb/0309.html
[76] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#charmodReview-17
[77] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2003Sep/0019.html
[78] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist.html#rdfURIMeaning-39
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 [79]DOM issues list.
[79] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/09-dom-core-issues/issues.html
_________________________________________________________________
Ian Jacobs for Stuart Williams and TimBL
Last modified: $Date: 2003/09/11 16:38:55 $
--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2003 12:49:27 UTC