W3C

TAG telcon

8 nov 2004

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Stuart, TimBL, DanC, Chris, Paul, Roy
Regrets
Noah
Chair
Stuart
Scribe
Chris

Contents


 

 

<scribe> Scribe: Chris



Stuart: WebArch PR is out! Woohoo!
... Focus this week is media types

DanC moves to adjourn on lack of quorum

<DanC> I didn't actually so move

sorry, I thought you did

Meetings

<DanC> I'm at risk for the 15th due to family foo

Stuart: Who can make next week

Paul: Checking

Chris: Can't make it, f2f

Paul: Can make it

Stuart: should we have the meeting

Paul: offer to chair

Stuart: can you do the agenda

Paul: Yes, may need a little help

Stuart: Chair for f2f meeting

DanC: Offers to do floor control but not to do an Agenda

Paul: Suggests Norm and Paul, will discuss in next 24 hours

Stuart: Can attend remotely, phone or video

Paul: Do we have detailed arrangements for f2f?

DanC: not completely

PaulC: Should we switch to MIT video conf if available?

Stuart: Can attend overlap in working day plus a little early evening

<DanC> " 29 November, Stata Center, D507; 30 November, Stata Center, 346" -- an internal page

TimBL: We have voip and isdn set up, in Stata center, one particular room set up

<scribe> ACTION: Paul look into Stata center video facilities

<scribe> ACTION: Stuart to determine video facilities at his end

Stuart: Scribe for next week?

DanC: at risk for next week

Roy: At Apachecon, may be able to attend, not scribe

Stuart: leave scribe for now

<scribe> ACTION: Norm and Paul, do meeting page and consider split chairing

Meeting records

Stuart: accept http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Oct/0163.html as true record?

DanC: did Norm have an action there?

No, it turns out

No objections, so resolved

Issues List maintenance

Paul: While doing monthly report, issues were not up to date, Chris reminded me of a finding we had issued. public uses that list, had to track through minutes
... Important to make a conscious decision how to track ongoing work
... Ian used to do this, what do we do now.

DanC: Ian suggested taking the HTML and edit it, to include decisions

Paul? Pointer to the most recent finding?

DanC: not sure

Stuart: There is a separate findings page

<DanC> (the findings page was created against my advice. hmm.)

http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings

DanC: (scribe missed)

Paul: Dan and Chris are splitting some of the things Ian did?

Chris: Offers to update findings page if needed

Stuart: No one is familiar with the exit system Ian was using

DanC: We could just create HTML

Stuart: Someone needs to look after it

DanC: willing to split task with Chris

Chris: OK

Monthly report

Stuart: Thanks for most recent monthly report, Paul

Paul: Slides for AC meeting, what did we decide to do slides or to give up the slot and do a brief report

DanC: I recall we did, yes

Paul: So if no slot, don't need slides

Stuart: Yes, I recall now

<DanC> "There was little support for doing a TAG panel at the AC." -- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html#tagac

Paul: We want time on TP but AC is all up to date on WebArch review

<scribe> ACTION: Stuart: respond to Ians request for slides clarifying we don't expect a panel slot

TP liaisons

Stuart: no progress this week

DanC: Double booked, Data Access and TAG

Stuart; for TP we were flexible about when on Mon/Tue but not on moving to Thu/Fri; only want half a day

Paul: Does it still make sense?

Chris: Yes, starting work on AWWW 2.0

Stuart: And introducing new TAG members

TAG charter

Stuart: Now out for AC review
... Need to track review comments

Paul: Thanks the Team for the review comments before AC review

<paulc> Thanks to team for their feedback on TAG charter comments.

<Noah> Noah thanks Ian and others for, prior to the AC review, attending to some of the concerns that I and IBM had raised.

WebArch Publication

Paul: what about editorial comments ?

DanC: Transition meeting was 90minutes plus, lots of discussion
... Deadline is closing a couple days earlier, apart from that same as the plan of record
... Comm Team decided not to extend after AC meeting
... comments , will deal with in due course

Dan: sent mail, please look at it

Stuart: leave for next week

DanC: Agenda request, specific comments on PR

<scribe> ACTION: Paul put discussion of PR comments on the agenda next week

Chris: where does call for testimonials go?

DanC: Its in the WBS form, already done

Chris: OK, my concern that we ask in time

Paul: Testimonials from non W3C Members, eg Roy?

DanC: Roy would be an easily arguable exception to this

Roy: Okay

DanC: Although from Day, that might relate to whether/when they join W3C

Dan: Translations of AWWW

<DanC> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/

Chris: (explains Ivan Hermans translation RDF swoopers thingy)

Stuart: How do they happen?

Chris: mailing list for this

<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2003/03/Translations/byTechnology?technology=27-pubrules-html

<Stuart> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html#plan234

Chris: Does WBS ask for multilingual testimonials? We do not ever translate testimonials
... Useful to clarify this

ACTION; Chris to edit WBS form to clarify we invite multilingual testimonials

<scribe> ACTION: Chris to edit WBS form to clarify we invite multilingual testimonials

Stuart: Anything else to do?

DanC: Scare up testimonials and reviews is always a good idea
... hope that comments can be justified in terms of decisions already made

<DanC> (ftf BRS where timbl attended remotely is where we figured out "namespace document" text, says PC. thx)

(discussion of canada/us curency wrt Paul and Dan's bet)

Media Types related issues

<DanC> (webarch call for review WBS form is http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/webarch200411/ , member-only, fyi)

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Nov/0027.html

Chris: I sent a mail shortly before the telcon

<DanC> wow! what a collection of code-words! "3023 update (was Re: Agenda TAG Telcon: 8th Nov 2004)"

Chris: (reads mail)

DanC: "xml encoding declaration and

the charset (if supplied) should match" needs to be a MUST

Chris: (talks to fast to minute, but most is in the email)

<scribe> ACTION: Roy, point to a constraint on registering media types not to duplicate information easily discoverable from content

Roy: Security checkers have to understand both and enforce both

TimBL: At root, is XML a sequence of characters or a sequence of self describing bytes
... Very nice that XML is self describing in that way, defines as a sequence of bytes, self describing character encoding

Chris: Much easier on authoring tools to deal with a single in band mechanism rather than an undocumented, per server, out of band mechanism

Paul: WebArch 1 and Finding both say the charset param is authoritative so rewriting is needed when saving to disk

Start AWWW says its an error if they disagree

<DanC> (I heard Stuart refer to "our finding", not AWWW)

Chris: concerned with DSig and UTF-8 as required by canonical XML ; proxies should not break signed content

<Roy> http://www.docbook.org/specs/cd-docbook-docbook-4.3.html#media-type-registration

<Roy> oops

Instructions to subscribe

http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/index.html

putMediaType-38

So this is the issue that impacts WebDAV

<Stuart> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#putMediaType-38

TimBL: WebDAV works on bits, including a filename, no metadata is transferred

Roy: distinguishes between save and sending properties

DanC; Can we get QA to look at this and see what implementations do

<DanC> CL: there seem to be 2 ways to update the web:

<DanC> ... W3C seems to advocate updating with PUT, while the rest of the world seems to use ftp/scp to update the bits, and the metadata gets done some other way

<DanC> ... WEBDAV seems to be a protocol for automating the latter model

<DanC> ... [missed some]... [something] lets you transfer a MIME type and then throws it away.

WebDAV throws it away

<DanC> ... Jigsaw handles this better: makes an exception [missed some]

<DanC> RF: the WebDAV protocol doesn't say to throw away the media type. it's unfortunate that some servers to that.

Jigsaw lets you send metadata, and makes a per-resource override if needed so that the requested media type is in fact used

Chris: gets the impression some email discussion on this would help

DanC: who cares? Is this architecture or software engineering

Stuart: so is it implemented consistently?

DanC: we need more implementation experience to discuss this

Stuart: Straw poll on asking qawg

<DanC> a few in favor

<DanC> no-one spoke actively against (the poll faded out a bit)

Roy: might be moot or overtaken by metadata and URIs. Generalized to ref to metadata in messages, not just requests or one type of request. Already covered?

Stuart: Or content-type override

<scribe> ACTION: Chris explain in more detail in email about ftf model vs put model wrt metadata and what is being modelled; one resource or the start and end of a workflow

Meeting adjourned at t+79

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Chris explain in more detail in email about ftf model
... vs put model wrt metadata and what is being modelled; one
... resource or the start and end of a workflow
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to edit WBS form to clarify we invite
... multilingual testimonials
[NEW] ACTION: Norm and Paul, do meeting page and consider split
... chairing
[NEW] ACTION: Paul look into Stata center video facilities
[NEW] ACTION: Paul put discussion of PR comments on the agenda next
... week
[NEW] ACTION: Roy, point to a constraint on registering media types
... not to duplicate information easily discoverable from content
[NEW] ACTION: Stuart to determine video facilities at his end
[NEW] ACTION: Stuart: respond to Ians request for slides clarifying
... we don't expect a panel slot
 

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl 1.94 (CVS log)
$Date: 2004/10/22 18:32:00 $