W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2005

minutes TAG 13 Dec for review: encode-for-uri(), NamespaceState-48, URIGoodPractice-40, ...

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 09:27:48 -0600
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1134574068.21371.9.camel@dirk>

hypertext: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/12/13-tagmem-minutes

plain text:

   [1]W3C . [2]TAG

      [1] http://www.w3.org/
      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/

                              TAG Weekly

13 Dec 2005

Attendees

   Present
          NDW, DanC, NM, VQ, HT, TimBL, DOrchard

   Regrets
          RF, Ed

   Chair
          VQ

   Scribe
          DanC

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Administrative: roll call, next teleconference, agenda
            review, review of records
         2. [5]Escaping the # mark in XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0
            Functions and Operators
         3. [6]issue NamespaceState-48
         4. [7]Update on some issues
         5. [8]IRIEverywhere-27 status check
         6. [9]metadataInURI-31 status check
         7. [10]Issue RDFinXHTML-35 status check
         8. [11]Issue siteData-36 status check
         9. [12]Issue rdfURIMeaning-39 status check
        10. [13]Issue URIGoodPractice-40 and WSDL
     * [14]Summary of Action Items

   See also: [15]IRC log
     _________________________________________________________

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2005/12/13-tagmem-irc

Administrative: roll call, next teleconference, agenda review, review
of records

   at risk: Ed (hardware foo)

   <scribe> Scribe: DanC

   PROPOSED: to meet next 20 Dec

   RESOLUTION: to meet next 20 Dec; NDW to scribe

   <noah> The 20th is OK for me.

   <noah> I'm unavailable on the 27th

   PROPOSED: to cancel 27 Dec

   RESOLUTION: to cancel 27 Dec 2005

   considering... meet 3 Jan 2006?

   <noah> i think i'm OK on the 3rd.

   3 Dec looks likely (to be confirmed 20 Dec)

   3 Jan 2006 looks likely (to be confirmed 20 Dec)

   namespaceDocument-8 for next week

   DC: remind me who has the ball on self-describing docs?

   NDW: HT and I. I have started something

   DC: note speech grammar spec has something relevant

   VQ: re ftf minutes... Ed offered to edit day 1, before his laptop
   went kerflewey...
   ... NM did part of day 2?

   NM: yes; I'd particularly like review of the web service example
   stuff, as I had to reconstruct it from memory

   TBL: yes, I'd like help with the Tue AM stuff, NM, thanks

   VQ: so can we approve next week?

   HT: I think so; I'm in a position to help Ed

Escaping the # mark in XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 Functions and Operators

   VQ: see question from Ashok of XSL/XQuery and #...

   -> [16]FW: Escaping the # mark

     [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Dec/0039.html

   NDW: yes, I agree with Dan: the # should be escaped in
   encode-for-uri()
   ... I'm inclined to link dan's msg to the XQuery bug entry, which
   should move things along

   TBL: no argument the other way? no dissent?

   NDW: no, just a bug fix.

issue NamespaceState-48

   NDW: I'm a little surprised that you approved before I finished my
   actions, HT, but I have since completed them.

   HT: I was mostly approving the good practice

   NDW: recent changes are... * [missed] * things-change is the norm *
   [missed]

   <dorchard> you can never enter the same river twice...

   <Norm> "As a general rule, resources on the web can and do change.
   In the absence of an explicit statement, one cannot infer that a
   namespace is immutable."

   [[ In the absence of an explicit statement, one cannot infer that a
   namespace is immutable. ]]

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask about nsuri

   <ht> Suggest to replace "in the namespace" with "in the namespace
   named"

   <Norm> Proposed: The proposed definition of a new local name
   ā¤½idā¤ in the namespace identified identified by the namespace name
   ā¤½[17]http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespaceā¤ (the xml: namespace)
   raised a question about the identity of a namespace.

     [17] http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace

   <Norm> Umh: The proposed definition of a new local name ā¤½idā¤ in
   the namespace identified by the namespace name
   ā¤½[18]http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespaceā¤ (the xml: namespace)
   raised a question about the identity of a namespace.

     [18] http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace

   <timbl> xml:abc

   [[Another perspective was that the xml: namespace consisted of all
   possible local names and that only a finite (but flexible) number of
   them are defined at any given point in time. ]]

   (scribe missed a bunch... sorry...)

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to discuss the 'abc' example

   NM: I see 3 positions: (a) namespaces have finite numbers of name
   and are immutable (b) there are a finite number now, but tomorrow I
   as NS owner may tell you that there are more (c) all local names in
   every namespace

   <ht> HST would have preferred for the crucial sentence "Adding a
   defintiion for the local name "id" in the xml: namespace
   demonstrates . . ."

   DC: if namespace contain all the strings, then "Adding the local
   name ā¤½idā¤ to the xml: namespace" is incoherent

   <Norm> Much better, thank you ht

   <DanC> yes, "adding a definition" is better.

   TBL: doesn't appeal to me. People speak of adding things to
   namespaces, and let's not say otherwise

   <noah> I think I'm hearing Tim take my position (b); the members of
   the namespace are at a given time only those that have been defined,
   but the set can change over time

   TBL: let's say "N is in ns I iff the owner of I has given N a
   definition"

   <timbl> It isn

   <noah> Dan: that sounds right to me, or certainly very close

   <Zakim> dorchard, you wanted to discuss the abc example.

   <DanC> (I don't care a whole lot which terminology we pick, but
   please let's pick.)

   DO: this seems pretty abstract. If we pick the "add a definition to
   namespace" versus "add a name + definition to namespace", no
   software changes because of which option we pick.

   <timbl> A namespace is a set of terms and their definitions.

   DO: I can see either way...

   NDW: speaking of definitions seems best...

   DC: how about a gloss? ala: "people speaking of adding a name to a
   namespace; we prefer to speak of adding definitions..."

   TBL: that's pushing water up-hill. It seems to me that a namespace
   is like a python dictionary: it's a mapping of terms to
   meanings/definitions/values

   <timbl> for term in { "sdf": gfooo, "sdf": bar }

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to talk about definitions

   NDW: I think I can find a middle-ground, offline

   NM: umm... "define"... that's one thing that we do, but take the
   example of a C program...

   <timbl> Nooah is very right here ... you can define a namespace as
   an infinite set

   NM: perhaps "license certain uses" is more general than define

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to noodle about "encourage use"; yeah...

   <timbl> ... can be a function rather than a dictionary in python
   terms.

   <timbl> +1

   some examples: all the prime numbers, all the lat/longs, all the
   HTML terms with _ appended

   <timbl> the sort of namespace any self-respectig self-describing
   programmer would declare twice before breakfast.

   <noah> My C language example was: let's make sure we don't have to
   individually define the terms in a NS. e.g. I could say my NS has in
   it all possible identifiers in any C program you can write.

   <scribe> ACTION: NDW to revise namespaceState.html w.r.t. "in a
   namespace" and "define" [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2005/12/13-tagmem-irc]

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2005/12/13-tagmem-irc

   <noah> I believe Tim's functional approach is a more formal way of
   getting at the same thing.

Update on some issues

   VQ: we didn't get to this at the ftf...

IRIEverywhere-27 status check

   DC: I don't want to change its priority; I don't mind if we make
   progress on it, but I don't want it to preempt self-describing
   documents, versioning, etc.

   HT: meanwhile, Bjoern seems to have made some very detailed points.
   We'll need a "microscope" when we get to this

   postscript: ACTION HT: with Norm to report the Namespaces/URI/IRI
   discussion to XML Core from [20]21 Sep 05 was not reviewed.

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2005/09/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action02

metadataInURI-31 status check

   VQ: from Sep, action was on Roy and Noah...

     ACTION: RF and Noah to make progress on metadataInURI-31 [21]21
     Sep 05]

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2005/09/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action03

   NM: much of what I said in Sep was "most of this was before my time"
   but somehow I ended up with the action

   NM: I'm more swapped in on principle-of-least-power
   ... I'd need help from Roy... VQ: he's only around for another
   month...

   <noah> Noah feels he doesn't have the context on all the work that
   happened on this before he joined the TAG.

   <noah> Maybe or maybe not I'm the right person to carry this
   forward, by myself or with help.

   <noah> At the very least, I'd appreciate email reminding me of what
   the progress to date has been and what remains to be done.

   HT: this issue has come up in xml-dev recently, indirectly...

   HT: somebody asked: is foo/bar any different from ?x=foo;y=bar , and
   various people said yes/no/maybe...

   HT: meanwhile, we have the case of the guy who got arrested for
   typing ../../ into his browser... does the use of foo/bar imply
   something about ../../ ?
   ... seems to raise some questions about opacity
   ... and there's this stuff with checksums in URIs, which seems to be
   a counter-point to [?]

   <DanC> (Jim Gettys wrote some good stuff on this... on relative URI
   refs; I think it got stored in /DesignIssues/ )

   TBL: The existence of something with URI /a/b/c/d does not give you
   licence to conclude ANYTHING.

   HT: ppl seem to believe otherwise

   <timbl> 2. He didn't get arrested for making a valid URI, he got
   arrested for doing something like

   TBL: he didn't get arrested for just ../../ , but for using too many
   ..'s; that make an illegal URI

   <timbl> GET /a/.../.../../..

   <timbl> GET /a/.../.../../../etc/passwd

Issue RDFinXHTML-35 status check

   VQ: I don't know anything about this one at all

   DC: I have almost a finding on this...

   -> [22]Storing Data in Documents: The Design History and Rationale
   for GRDDL

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/specbg.html

   <ht> [23]http://www.cdlib.org/inside/diglib/ark/arkcdl.pdf is an
   interesting and well-thought-out design for a class of URIs which
   include checksums in the URI. . .

     [23] http://www.cdlib.org/inside/diglib/ark/arkcdl.pdf

   <ht> ref. metadataInURI-31

   DC: remains in my someday pile

Issue siteData-36 status check

   -> [24]google sitemaps and some history of sitemaps [siteData-36]
   Jun 2005

     [24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Jun/0011

   <timbl> ls-LR

   <noah> Dan says: "wonder whether Google considered using RDF for
   site maps". Now that we have GRDDL, might it be better to make the
   goal be: whatever format you choose should yield truly useful RDF
   when GRDDL'd.

   <timbl> You can submit a Sitemap to Google in a number of formats:

   TimBL: remember ls-LR? you put it at the top of your ftp site if you
   didn't want archie to crawl it, and it made things faster

   <timbl> Sitemap protocol, OAI-PMH, RSS, text

   VQ: so it remains in the someday pile...

   <timbl> Link rel=icon in Mozilla

   <timbl> Possibel design Link rel=meta foo.rdf

   <timbl> Link rel=sitedata /data.rdf

   TBL seems to lament that nobody's working on siteData; DC suggest
   TBL wish into a blog

Issue rdfURIMeaning-39 status check

   VQ: anything new since Sep/EDI?

   DC: seems nearby to self-describing documents, and to
   abstractcompnentrefs; where is component designators, these days?

   HT: component designators is not a top priority in the WG these days

   "Last Call Ends 26 April 2005"

   -- [25]http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xmlschema-ref-20050329/

     [25] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xmlschema-ref-20050329/

   HT: yes, DC's comments are still outstanding

Issue URIGoodPractice-40 and WSDL

     RF to draft something on URIGoodPractice-40 [26]21 Sep 05]

     [26] http://www.w3.org/2005/09/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action08

   VQ: any news since Feb?

   NM: RF was going to contact DO a while ago... did that happen?

   DO: no

   DC: this came up in WSDL recently; I dissented to the WSDL design
   that implies that the SPARQL interface URI ends in )

   TBL: yes, the WSDL WG saw the desire to use foo#bar as just an RDF
   thing...
   ... and without, e.g. a TAG decision, there isn't anything that says
   flat namespaces and foo#bar is a good thing
   ... I get the impression that the WSDL WG didn't mind the long URIs
   because they don't really use the URIs; they identify things in
   context using other syntaxes
   ... maybe we should say "give things URIs, and use it!"

   DO: we were asked to make URIs for all these things, and we follothe
   WSDL WGd all the constraints that are established

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to say that you can't always expect people
   to use URI's internally

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to draw the XML Schema ||

   DO: the flat namespace option was one of the options brought to the
   TAG ages ago, and the TAG said the () design is fine

   TBL: really? I guess we blew it

   HT: in RDF, there's one big domain, so it's natural to have one flat
   namespace. In other domains, there's no basis for saying "you must
   use a flat namespace" because their space isn't flat

   <noah> Henry repeats my example of elements and attributes in XML,
   which in turn leads to symbol spaces in schema.

   <noah> I think that many programming languages have parallels: for
   example, in Java, we do not insist that class names and member names
   be distinct

   TBL: the RDF space isn't flat either; there's all sorts of structure
   to the classes in RDF, but RDF accepts the flat namespace constraint

   <DanC>(XML and python are both in the web. and URIs have all sorts
   of hierarchy like python's package systems)

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to say Noah and I said XML, not XML Schema!

   TBL: the multiple-symbols-space aspect of the XML Schema design is
   really sub-optimal

   <DanC>yes, that was a bug.

   <ht> The _only_ think we ever discussed was saying you couldn't name
   a type with the same name as an element

   <ht> We _never_ considered not allowing you to name elements and
   attributes with the same local name

   right, but we discussed schema languages that just had one flat
   namespace per schema; if you wanted a element and attribute with the
   same name, only one of them would get a #foo name

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to agree with Tim about the origin of all
   this

   HT: yes, it's the contextualized names/references that is the root
   of this stuff

   VQ: lacking near-term actions...

   HT: I'm very interested in this design space, and I intend to write,
   in some context, something on the value of multiple symbol spaces

   <DanC>(tim, I think the issues are only connected if you take the
   "flat namespaces are good" position. Which I do)

   ADJOURN.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: NDW to revise namespaceState.html w.r.t. "in a
   namespace" and "define" [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2005/12/13-tagmem-irc]

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2005/12/13-tagmem-irc

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    DanC, scribe, for VQ, chair
    $Revision: 1.1 $ of $Date: 2005/12/14 15:25:41 $
    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [28]scribe.perl version 1.127

     [28] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2005 16:02:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:10 UTC