- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 23:26:01 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1075782361.11343.21.camel@seabright>
Hello,
Minutes of the TAG's 2 Feb 2004 teleconf are available
as HTML [1] and as text below.
_ Ian
[1] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/02-tag-summary.html
========================================================
Minutes of 2 February 2004 TAG teleconference
1. Administrative (20min)
1. Roll call: SW, TBL, DC (Scribe), NW, CL, PC, RF, MJ, IJ. Regrets:
DO, TB
The TAG welcomed the newest TAG participant: Mario Jeckle. Mario
is involved in Web Services Choreography, some Semantic Web stuff,
and a Grid services project, as well as other Working Groups (XML
Schema, WSA, DI, XMLP).
2. Resolved to accept minutes of the [8]26 Jan teleconf
3. Accepted this [9]agenda
4. Reminder: No meeting 16 Feb.
5. Proposed next meeting: 9 Feb 2004 Videoconf. See [10]agenda
proposal from SW
[DanC_desk]
[8] http://www.w3.org/2004/01/26-tag-summary.html
[9] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/02-tag.html
[10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Feb/0001.html
... discussion of whether namespaceDocument-8 merits
discussion time... seems to merit ~ 1/2 hr...
... noting TBray's regrets
SW reviews 9Feb agenda proposal... we seem to be closing
about 2 or 3 issues per year; perhaps clustering would
help
DC: initial reaction: let's move admin out of our time
together
SW: pls help me flesh out the technical stuff. DC: will
do/try
PC: how about pending last call comments?
DanC_desk: please don't put Ian in the critical path for
responding to comments
1.1 Technical Plenary
1. Liaisons: In principle agreements and scheduling (see [11]email
from Stuart):
1. I18N
2. XML Schema
3. SVG
4. HTML. See [12]notes from IJ
5. Voice. See [13]notes from IJ
6. XML Core
7. WSDL
2. Action SW 2003/11/15: Take to tech plenary committee the TAG's
proposal. See [14]proposal from Stuart.
3. TAG ftf meeting observer requests (see [15]email from SW)
4. [16]TAG 2 Mar 2004 ftf meeting page
[11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0080.html
[12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0078.html
[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0087.html
[14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0072.html
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0074.html
[16] http://www.w3.org/2004/03/02-tag-mtg.html
[DanC_desk]
SW: CL, do you expect I18N stuff to merit ftf time in Cannes?
CL: no, I suppose not
SW: SVG?
CL: the SVG WG wants to meet and talk about linking, mixed
namespaces
ACTION CL: propose a time for SVG/TAG to meet in Cannes
SW: XML Core? I suppose not
[Zakim]
Chris, you wanted to say "I thought we decided not to discuss
linking at tp"
[DanC_desk]
CL, RF express interest in presenting webarch to Tech Plenary
SW: I expect TAG members participate in other panels for the
next few hours
1.1/3 TAG ftf meeting observer requests
SW: sent mail; no negative commentary; intend to say OK to the
few requests I see
1.1/4 TAG 2 Mar 2004 ftf meeting page. noted.
1.2 TAG meeting schedule in 2004
1. Action PC 2004/01/05: Propose meeting schedule for next 4 (or so)
TAG ftf meetings. Due: 23 Jan 2004. ([17]Proposal from PC)
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0077.html
[DanC_desk]
PC in sum: May (week before AC/WWW conf), ...
PC I see responses from just three...
CL I think I replied...
SW: in sum, ftf May, July, Nov
[Chris]
CL actually replied privately to Paul and will send a reply to
the list
[Norm]
Note that XML 2004 is in November this year
[DanC_desk]
TBL: possible conflict with Ottowa
[timbl]
[18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0077.html
[18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0077.html
[DanC_desk]
NW: 12-14 May is what I see from PC's mail
SW: I see conflicts with that
NW: I propose 24-26 May.
[Stuart]
[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0097.html
[19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0097.html
[DanC_desk]
"Wed-Fri May 12-14, F2F, Location TBD, (host TBD)" --
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0097.html
PC: so we're still collecting input.
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0097.html
2. Technical (70min)
See also [21]open actions by owner and [22]open issues.
[21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/actions_owner.html
[22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1
2.1 Update on findings
* [23]qnameAsId-18
+ 14 Jan 2004 draft finding "[24]Using Qualified Names (QNames)
as Identifiers in Content"
+ Action CL, TB, TBL 2004/01/26: Read finding.
CL, TBL: No progress.
* [25]contentTypeOverride-24:
+ 27 Jan 2004 draft finding "[26]Client handling of MIME
headers"
+ See [27]comments from SW
+ See [28]comments from RF (arrived after meeting).
+ PC: I'm working on IJ's request for specific wording.
Discussion of whether choice of browser is relevant to giving
assent
* [29]siteData-36
+ "[30]There is no such thing as a Web site"
[23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#qnameAsId-18
[24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/qnameids-2004-01-14
[25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentTypeOverride-24
[26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect-20040127.html
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Feb/0007.html
[28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Feb/0008.html
[29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#siteData-36
[30] http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2004/01/08/WebSite36
2.2 New issue: xmlChunk-44
* Action TBL 2004/01/05: Propose a new issue regarding
canonicalization to www-tag ([31]Done). PC to respond with
pointers to relevant specifications ([32]Done).
[31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html
[32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0015.html
[DanC_desk]
SW: I wonder if this is something we should perhaps encourage
XML Core to take this up
TBL: yes, that is the question...
TBL reviews [33]0013...]
[33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html
[DanC_desk]
timbl: [... coordination... which group needs what? etc. ...]
[Norm]
Can I suggest that someone setup a meeting with SemWeb CG,
I18N, and me?
[DanC_desk]
TBL and PC discuss canonicalization, equivalence ...
PC: ... fn:deep-equal in XQuery ... one man's equal is another
man's unequal...
... more discussion ...
... schema-aware canonicalization, wisdom thereof...
DC parenthetically: I'm tempted to summarize input from PC and
TBL as: yes, pls make this a TAG issue. clearly they're happy
to talk about it in the presence of other TAG members.
[timbl]
Yes, defining a more acceptable canonicalization which picks
up, for example, the language, base, and namespaces and puts if
necessary a wrapper is a possible solution to this problem.
[Zakim]
DanC_desk, you wanted to offer to think out loud
[timbl]
Straw poll: New issue?
Defn of issue:
[34]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.ht
ml
[34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html
[timbl]
Need for a canonicaliztion at the XML + NS syntax level.
[Chris]
yes, that is clear enough (the discussion on the telcon was not
clear enough to poll on)
[DanC_desk]
CL: based on 113, looks worth a TAG issue
[Ian_]
(next available # is 44)
[Chris]
its an issue. 'how long is a piece of string' is an issue, but
that doesn't mean there is a single answer.
Is the answer to "is x=y" is "why do you need to know"
[Ian]
Description? Short name?
[DanC_desk]
PROPOSED: xmlChunk-44
[timbl]
Support for XMLChunk-44: NW, RF, PC, DC, TBL, SW, MJ, CL
[DanC_desk]
RESOLVED. there is a new issue: xmlChunk-44
[timbl]
A new issue is born, and takes its place in the crowd of
issues.
Title: "Chunk of XML" - Canonicalization and equality
[Chris]
+1 to meeting with xml core
[DanC_desk]
PC: reconsider our disinclination to meet with XML Core in
Cannes?
[timbl]
Metadata for issues list: iss:xmlChunk_44 dc:title "Chunk of
XML - Canonicalization and equality"; mtg:raised
<[35]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.h
tml>; mtg:discussed <>.
[35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html
[Norm]
ACTION NW: Coordinate joint meeting with XML Core, notably around
xmlChunk-44.
2.3 Follow-up on Internationalization Issues
* [36]charmodReview-17
1. [37]actions
2. TAG finding related to adoption of Charmod? See [38]mail from
TBL
* [39]URIEquivalence-15
* [40]IRIEverywhere-27
[36] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#charmodReview-17
[37] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/actions.html#charmodReview-17
[38] http://www.w3.org/mid/361483C6-96E6-11D7-9C47-000393914268@w3.org
[39] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1#URIEquivalence-15
[40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#IRIEverwhere-27
[Chris]
[41]http://www.w3.org/2002/06/charmod-lastcall2/
[41] http://www.w3.org/2002/06/charmod-lastcall2/
[Stuart]
[42]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Feb/0008.html
[42] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Feb/0008.html
[DanC_desk]
CL: reviews 0008, proposes we accept C128
[Norm]
That was from long ago, Stuart. It sounded reasonable to me.
[DanC_desk]
ACTION CL: respond as proposed
DC: If we made a decision, Connolly abstained.
_________________________________________________________________
The TAG did not discuss topics below this line at this meeting.
2.4 Follow-up on namespaceDocument-8
* [43]namespaceDocument-8
1. [44]RDDL2 Background from Tim Bray.
2. [45]grokRDDL.xsl mapping to RDF from Dan Connolly.
[43] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#namespaceDocument-8
[44] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0045.html
[45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0026.html
3. Issues
Issues that are open and that we expect to close by the end of last
call:
* [46]rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
* [47]whenToUseGet-7
* [48]contentTypeOverride-24
[46] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
[47] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1#whenToUseGet-7
[48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1#contentTypeOverride-24
4. Status report on these findings
See also [49]TAG findings
* [50]abstractComponentRefs-37:
+ 30 Oct 2003 draft finding "[51]Abstract Component References"
* [52]contentPresentation-26:
+ 30 June 2003 draft finding "[53]Separation of semantic and
presentational markup, to the extent possible, is
architecturally sound"
* [54]metadataInURI-31
[49] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings
[50] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#abstractComponentRefs-37
[51] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/abstractComponentRefs-20031030
[52] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#contentPresentation-26
[53] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/contentPresentation-26-20030630.html
[54] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/open-summary.html#metadataInURI-31
5 Other action items
* Action RF 2003/10/08: Explain "identifies" in RFC 2396.
* Action DC 2003/11/15: Follow up on KeepPOSTRecords with Janet Daly
on how to raise awareness of this point (which is in CUAP).
* Action CL 2003/10/27: Draft XML mime type thingy with Murata-san
_________________________________________________________________
Ian Jacobs for Stuart Williams and TimBL
Last modified: $Date: 2004/02/03 04:11:33 $
--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Monday, 2 February 2004 23:26:15 UTC