See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: noah
<scribe> scribenick: Noah
<DanC> that's all 8 of us
SW: We will meet next week, Dec. 20th
Regrets for Dec 20: Chris
Scribe for Dec. 20: Dan
Minutes for Dec: 6th accepted without dissent http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Dec/att-0009/tag-telcon-20041206.html
Agreement to accept minutes of F2F of Nov 29th & 30th: (http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/11/29-30-tag.html)
Steve suggests that there may be a panel or working session on Versioning at the tech plenary.
Stuart will talk to David Ezell tomorrow.
Dan gives update on recent work on arch doc.
<DanC> 9 Dec draft http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041209/#id-resources
<DanC> 9 Dec draft http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041209/
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041209/diff-from-pr.txt
In the discussion below, we work through the diffs at: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041209/diff-from-pr.txt
First comment is in response to comments from University of Edinburgh (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0171.html)
Now discussing the following diff from above:
This document is an example of an information resource. It consists of
words and punctuation symbols and graphics and other artifacts that
can be encoded, with varying degrees of fidelity, into a sequence of
bits. There is nothing about the essential information content of this
- document that cannot in principle be transfered in a representation.
+ document that cannot in principle be transfered in a message. In the
+ case of this document, the message payload is the representation of
+ this document.
Argh...getting behind...we are working through the diff-from-pr file. I will note any substantive discussion.
Dan reports "the director" is OK with all these, but has asked us as TAG to consider Nokia's comment (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0170.html)
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PR-webarch-20041105/#id-resources
We are discussing Nokia comment #3, regarding namespaces.
Nokia's comment was:
3. Section 4.5.3. XML Namespaces, third paragraph
Current Text:
"... If namespace URIs that end with a punctuation or other non-Name character are chosen, then simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local name creates a URI for a secondary resource (the identified term). This technique is used for many [RDFXML] namespaces."
Replacement Text:
"... Simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local name creates a URI for the identified term. This technique is used for [RDFXML] namespaces."
<DanC> note NM's suggestion [[
<DanC> Replacement Text:
<DanC> "... Simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local
<DanC> name creates a URI for the identified term. This technique is
<DanC> used for [RDFXML] namespaces."
<DanC> ]]
<DanC> oops; that was not NM's suggestion
Right, that was Nokia's suggestion (to which NM actually objects)
Tim:The minimum we should do is to clean up the text:
<timbl_> [RDFXML] uses simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local
<timbl_> name to creates a URI for the identified term.
<timbl_> I wish that RDFXML had added "#", but there we are.
Noah: I like that somewhat better than Nokia's proposal. My concern with Nokia's is that it appears to apply even to namespaces that don't end in some sort of separator character.
Tim: right, and there's still the question of whether the concatenated URI is actually one that the owner intended to assign for the purpose
NW: I somewhat agree with Noah's concerns. Maybe we can talk about URI's ending in non-name characters?
Stuart: Noah, would you drop the whole para
NM: Yes, I guess so.
SW: I hear 3 proposals as follows:
From Norm: change reference to # to "separator characters"
From Noah: drop the para
From Tim: text quoted above?
SW: anyone who can't live any of these?
NW: yes, I don't like dropping the para (Norm, I didn't get the reason)
NW; drafting proposed text...
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PR-webarch-20041105/#xml-namespaces
NM: that's name char from XML rec?
NW: yes
DC: we're talking about XML namespaces here
I think this is the net of Norm's proposal:
"For flat namespaces, concatenation is one useful mapping. If namespace URIs that end with a that end with a punctuation or other non-Name character are chosen, then simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local name creates a URI for a secondary resource (the identified term). This technique is used for many [RDFXML] namespaces."
Some discussion of colon as an edge case.
NW: important point, we need an algorithmic way of breaking these apart once they're together. By making sure there's a non-name char, we ensure that property.
TBL: In webarch, is this an example?
NW: it's a suggestion.
TBL: Suggesting you can use anything other than # prejudges httprange-14, at least insofar as once you use an x/y form to refer to a non-document resource.
Stuart: Tim, do you object to the proposal to drop the text?
<DanC> (I sent "test case: colons in paths?" to uri@w3.org)
TBL: we talk about fragids elsewhere
NW: perhaps we're at impasse. Nokia objects to #, Tim
wants #, each feeling the other prejudges http-range14. Therefore,
suggest Tim's text as best compromise.
... It mentions what RDF does, nothing more.
SW: I note some popular RDF namespaces end in "/"
<DanC> reviewing, yes, I like: [[
<DanC> <timbl_> [RDFXML] uses simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local
<DanC> <timbl_> name to creates a URI for the identified term. ]]
<Norm> Proposal: For flat namespaces, concatenation is one useful mapping. This technique is used for many [RDFXML] namespaces.
<DanC> (hmm... in fact, it's used for all RDFXML namespaces)
<timbl_> Note that one set of mappings, such as those which either insert a hash sign or use simple allows the local identifier in XML syntax to be equal to the the fragment identifier in the URI syntax.
<DanC> timbl, please do not refer to hash characters.
<Norm> Proposal: For many flat namespaces, concatenation is one useful mapping. This technique is used by [RDFXML]
<DanC> i still prefer: [RDFXML] uses simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local name to creates a URI for the identified term.
NM: How about: s/used by [RDFXML] namespaces/used by many [RDFXML] namespaces/?
For many flat namespaces, concatenation is one useful mapping. This technique is used by [RDFXML] namespaces."
Proposal (again with correction): \
"For many flat namespaces, concatenation is one useful mapping. This technique is used by [RDFXML].""
TB: how about dropping work "many"
<DanC> [[
<DanC> [RDFXML] uses simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local name to create a URI for the identified term.
<DanC> ]]
NM: two problems (a) still a general problem if there is no separator at all (b) I now notice that if there's no separator, you are also prejudging http-range14
Proposal, replace the entire paragraph with:
"[RDFXML] uses simple concatenation of the namespace URI and the local name to creates a URI for the identified term."
ALso in the proposal: merge with following paragraph.
Agreed without dissent.
<scribe> ACTION: Dan to talk to Steve Bratt regarding changes to namespace and #
SW: anything else to discuss with respect to webarch publication?
DC: You've seen press release, and there have been some
comments. You only need to speak up if you want to get into the
critical path.
... Goal is to get release out tomorrow, may slip to Wed.
NW: Slipping to Wed. would help Sun.
SW: Any other testimonials expected?
NW: Are we satisfied that the work we've done would satisfy Edinburgh?
DC: The director has been in contact with commentator.
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041209/diff-from-pr.txt
<DanC> @@ -2539,7 +2544,9 @@
NW: Patrick Stickler has sent some additional comments about a week ago.
DC: see the diffs, we've made some changes.
<Norm> Stickler: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0169.html
TBL: We seem to have dropped any mention that the namespace document is in any way connected to the URI that is the namespace name.
<timbl_> The information resource identified by an XML Namespace URI
<timbl_> + An information resource that contains useful information,
<timbl_> + machine-processable and/or human-readable, about terms in a
<timbl_> + particular XML namespace.
<DanC> (hmm... I thought the glossary was just excerpts from the main text. not so, evidently)
<Norm> not so
<timbl_> ^that an XML Namespace URI^
<timbl_> ^that an XML Namespace URI identifies
<Zakim> Norm, you wanted to ask about Edinburgh and Stickler and to
Non-scribe contribution. Note that Stickler says:
"I again propose to the TAG that the definition of 'namespace document' not reflect any presumption about what any given URI used as a namespace name might identify, but to restrict the definition of 'namespace document' to the distinguishing characteristics of that class of resource, and at most, to indicate that it is considered useful to use URIs which identify namespace documents as namespace names, without erroneously asserting that every URI used as a namespace name identifies a namespace document."
TBL: I don't see him objecting to saying that the URI which is a namespace name can be used to identify a namespace document
... Would Dave Ragett's (spelling?) book on HTML be a namespace document? Per our current definition, it would be.
<DanC> (I abstain from any definitions that are written out of the context of the rest of the document.)
<Norm> Proposal: An information resource identified by an XML Namespace URI that contains useful information, machine-usable and/or human-usable, about terms in a particular XML namespace. It is useful, though not manditory, that the URI employed as a namespace name identifies a namespace document.
SW: Notes that Patrick Stickler wrote:
"It is useful, though not manditory, that the URI employed as a namespace name identifies a namespace document.
<Stuart> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0169.html
SW: I'm OK with it, but not sure Patrick Stickler will be.
NW: but if we don't put this in, then the HTML book qualifies.
TBL: I'm not so sure he'd object.
<timbl_> I would not expect him to object to that.
DC: I think the objection was to the suggestion that >every< NS URI necessarily points to such a document.
<timbl_> +1 to Norm's proposal
SW: Calling the question on: "Proposal: An information resource identified by an XML Namespace URI that contains useful information, machine-usable and/or human-usable, about terms in a particular XML namespace. It is useful, though not manditory, that the URI employed as a namespace name identifies a namespace document."
Agreed unanimously.
<DanC> (hmm... now there are changes incoming from NDW and from IJ. interesting.)
NW: I've checked in already the two changes we've agreed to make today.
SW: anyone here in the critical path for press release?
DC: no
SW: anything more on webarch?
All: no
<DanC> (hmm... who said they'd do something soon in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/11/29-30-tag ? )
SW: any comments on the xml-chunk finding
NW: I've gotten some feedback, but haven't sorted it.
SW: possible agenda topic for next week?
<timbl> before we break, I have one heads-up off the record.
NW: yes, I could do that
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/11/29-30-tag#item08b
SW: let's have at least a brief telcon next week
<Norm> DanC: I've checked in the two changes we discussed today, am I off the critical path for the WebArch REC?
<DanC> hmm
<DanC> if you prefer, yes. you're welcome to provide eyeballs on the final text, title page, SOTD, that sort of thing
<DanC> i.e. as editor, you have right of review of the final bytes
<Norm> Ok. I'm happy to provide eyeballs. I wasn't asking in an effort to get out of working, just to make sure we didn't have a deadlock :-)
<DanC> ok, then I take it that you're not waiving that right, and you are, as of now, still on the critical path
<DanC> you may wave it at any time
<Norm> No, I'm not waiving it. I'll keep my eyeballs tuned :-)
<DanC> there, Noah, the logs are captured. Scribe duties include at least mailing a pointer to www-tag@w3.org
<DanC> bonus points for editing it
<DanC> there's a perl script that sorta makes nice HTML out of the IRC log, but if you haven't done it before, it's perhaps not worth bothering
<DanC> hmm... I'm not entirely clear how we disposed of Nokia's 1st 2 points.
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0170.html
<DanC> ugh... no "persistence" change in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041209/diff-from-pr.txt
<Norm> Gack. We started with point 3 so I assumed 1 and 2 had been done earlier.
<Norm> Personally, I'm happy with the changes they propose.
<DanC> let's see what Ian said about those... "I think TBL input is important here so I did not make any changes"
<DanC> phpht.
<timbl_> Norm?
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004OctDec/0170.html