- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:17:52 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Hypertext: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes
Plain text:
TAG Weekly
25 Apr 2006
[2]Agenda
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/04/25-agenda.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-irc
Attendees
Present
Norm, DanC, Ht, Vincent, Noah_Mendelsohn, noah, DOrchard,
TimBL, Ian
Regrets
Ed
Chair
Vincent
Scribe
DanC
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Administrative
2. [6]Issue xmlFunctions-34
3. [7]issue namespaceState-48
4. [8]State Finding
5. [9]Security Workshop follow-up
* [10]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
Administrative
<scribe> Scribe: DanC
PROPOSED: to meet 2 May, NDW to scribe. at risk: DO
RESOLUTION: to meet 2 May, NDW to scribe. regrets DO
<DanC_> [11]minutes 18 Apr
[11] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/18-tagmem-minutes.html
VQ observes "DRAFT" at top and diagnostics at the bottom
RESOLUTION: to approve minutes 18 Apr
<timbl> brb
VQ: agenda adjustments?
DC: June ftf... at the end?
VQ: after Vancouver ftf discussion
<noah> Oct 4 and 5 is OK for me in Vancouver
PROPOSED: to meet in Vancouver 4-5 Oct 2006
<timbl> hi
DO: price update: opus hotel looks like 229 CAD, around USD 200.
looks like I can get a meeting room in that hotel
VQ: can you send me details? DO: yes, I've got all the hosting
details on a page that I'll send presently
RESOLUTION: to meet in Vancouver Wed/Thu 4-5 Oct 2006
TBL: so that's 2 days...? VQ: yes, 2 days.
DanC: hmm... security workshop follow-up... perhaps invite some
security experts from the BOS/MIT area?
NDW: I can accomodate a few
NM: an expert from MIT with practical experience sounds interesting
VQ: more on this later in the call, perhaps...
... the preparation for the AC meeting seems to have converged,
after some punctuated discussion
... moderator and panelists seem to be pretty much all set
... one more admin item... quarterly update... I'll draft something,
tomorrow, I hope...
... then I'll send it out after a couple days of collecting comments
from tag
Issue xmlFunctions-34
VQ: hmm... this agendum was requested by TV...
<scribe> ACTION: TVR, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: summarize history of
DTD/namespace/mimetype version practice, including XHTML, SOAP, and
XSLT [CONTINUES] [recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
[12] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01
<timbl> [13]my action 27 Feb
[13] http://www.w3.org/2006/02/27-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
<scribe> ACTION: TBL, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: write a short email
to make his point, i.e. XML extensbility: Possible only with a
framework providing some form of semantics [CONTINUES] [recorded in
[14]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02]
[14] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
point being: that extensibility with a framework such as CDF makes
sense, but extensibilXML extensbility: Possible only with a
framework providing some form of semanticsy in general does not. [?]
issue namespaceState-48
<ht> [15]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri is in an odd state
[15] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri
<ht> it says "A new version of this document is available. "
<DanC_> [16]URIs for W3C Namespaces 1.36 2006/01/20
[16] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
TBL: one comment was that "Namespace Changes over Time" doesn't make
sense
<ht> [17]namespaceState finding
[17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html
<noah> From the finding: "Colloquially, we often speak of ´adding a
nameĦ to a namespace. Here we prefer to speak of ´defining a nameĦ
or otherwise licensing the interpretation of a name."
<Norm> Precisely.
NM: section 4 could cite the finding more locally
... section 4 i.e. [18]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy
[18] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy
<noah> Suggestion (rough not exact): a) leave title of section 4 b)
In that section, say something like "The TAG finding 'The
Disposition of Names in an XML Namespace' explains how the use of a
particular namespace may evolve over time. At the W3C, it is
important for a group to state clearly its expectations for how
namespaces it controls will..."
<noah> ...and the continue with the text already in the doc, edited
if necessary.
<noah> In that section, say something like "The TAG finding 'The
Disposition of Names in an XML Namespace' explains how the use of a
particular namespace may evolve over time. At the W3C, it is
important for a group to state clearly its expectations for how use
of the namespaces it controls will..."
<noah> Dan if you commit this, you'll need to create a hyperlink for
the TAG finding.
<Vincent> Hi Ian
<Ian> I was pinged on the topic of nsuri...
<Ian> I heard:
<Vincent> Dan is updating the nsuri document to add a reference to
the TAG finding in section 4.
<Ian> 1) TAG ok with [19]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
[19] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
<Ian> 2) Add a ref
<Ian> +1 to adding ref.
<Ian> The document has already been announced as "en vigeur" to the
chairs.
<DanC_> [20]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy 1.52
[20] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri#Policy
<Ian>
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2006JanMar/0026.html
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2006JanMar/0026.html
<Ian> Bjoern had expressed some concerns.
<Ian> Would you like to see them?
<timbl> Ian, would you like to join the call for a bit?
Ian, wanna dial in? or not bother?
<Ian> Sure.
<DanC_> [22]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri v 1.63 2006/04/25
17:54:40 is obsolete
[22] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri
<noah> Responding to Dan's request that I hatch yet a bit more text:
<noah> The draft currently says:
<noah> Groups SHOULD document those expectations in [or clearly
linked from] the Namespace Document.
<Ian>
[23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Feb/0000.htm
l
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Feb/0000.html
<noah> How about putting after that: "Draft TAG Finding Associating
Resources with Namespaces provides additional guidance on the
creation of such namespace documents."
<DanC_> [24]Comments on URIs for W3C Namespaces Bjoern Hoehrmann 01
Feb 2006
[24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Feb/0000.html
<DanC_> bumper sticker from finding: "Specifications that define
namespaces SHOULD explicitly state their policy with respect to
changes in the names defined in that namespace."
HT: not sure about "this specification" indexical in the examples..
<ht> "The definitions of names in this namespace will not change
from those given in the June 13 2007 version of the Foonly spec
[ref. dated URI]"
<DanC_> yes, that's an improvement to example 1, HT
<ht> ... "Subsequent versions of thte Foonly spec which make any
substantive changes will do so in a new namespace"
<timbl> For example, the namespace document could contain text along
the following lines.
<DanC_> 1.53 $ of $Date: 2006/04/25 18:05:59
[25]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
[25] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
<DanC_> 1.54 $ of $Date: 2006/04/25 18:08:34
<DanC_> Ian, 1.54 is it. pls let Bjoern know.
<Ian> yay!
<Ian> Merci
<Ian> Would you think that your changes will satisfy him?
<Ian> (He'll let us know, certainly)
<DanC_> I do hope these changes address his comment
<Ian> Ok, thank you.
<scribe> ACTION: TBL to accepted on 8 Mar 2005, provide a draft of
new namespace policy doc ([26]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri). in
progress. tbl would like to confirm with Ian that there's nothing
pending on Ian's side [DONE] [recorded in
[27]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]
[26] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri).
[27] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03
RESOLUTION: that
[28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html and
[29]http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri 1.54 address
namespaceState-48
[28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState.html
[29] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
<scribe> ACTION: NDW to announce that the TAG has resolved
namespaceState-48 [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
[30] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04
VQ: I'll update our report to the AC to show we've closed another
one
<Ian> ciao...
State Finding
<DanC_> [31]draft state finding
[31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/state-20060419.html
DO: Ed did a thorough review; I think I addressed his comments...
... I reorganized some stuff, moving some stuff before examples so
that I could refer to it in discussion of pros/cons
(is this changelog in email somehwere? or do I need to record it?)
<DanC_> [32]Updated State Finding 19 Apr 2006
[32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2006Apr/0026.html
DO: I compared/constrasted approaches to getStockQuote a bit...
... I have considerable comments from Baker and Nottingham; haven't
started addressing those yet
... I'd like to talk about this 9 May; I'm not avaiable 16 nor 23
May
NM: I see an opportunity to reduce the text in the early sections
quite a bit
DO: yes, I can imagine a shorter "letter" given longer time
<timbl>
[33]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Apr/att-0014
/State.html
[33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Apr/att-0014/State.html
TBL: I like abstracts that make the relevant points in one paragraph
<DanC_> (I think that's a high bar; I raraly meet it myself.)
<noah> +1 to Tim's comment.
TBL: is this a summary? There are several types of app ... state...
client... server... stateful... stateles...
... cookies is an example of the 1st; @@ is an example of the 2nd;
$ZZZ is always bad
<DanC_> (I'm not asking for less text, btw. I haven't read it
closely enough to judge whether there's a lot of redundancy. I'm
asking for the thesis statement(s) to be highlighted)
<scribe> ACTION: NDW to review draft state finding for 9 May
[recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05]
[34] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05
<timbl> (Dave, a two-level essay:
[35]http://www.w3.org/2002/04/Japan/Lecture.html )
[35] http://www.w3.org/2002/04/Japan/Lecture.html
VQ: and I suppose Ed is another reviewer
Security Workshop follow-up
DanC: (a) community service work on passwords in the clear...
... (b) specific investigation of decentralized auth ala OpenID/SXIP
... anybody interested to spend time on this in the June ftf
meeting? a few: yes.
ADJOURN.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: NDW to announce that the TAG has resolved
namespaceState-48 [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: NDW to review draft state finding for 9 May [recorded
in [37]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05]
[36] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action04
[37] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action05
[PENDING] ACTION: TBL, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: write a short email
to make his point, i.e. XML extensbility: Possible only with a
framework providing some form of semantics [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02]
[PENDING] ACTION: TVR, accepted on 27 Feb 2006: summarize history of
DTD/namespace/mimetype version practice, including XHTML, SOAP, and
XSLT [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
[38] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
[39] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action01
[DONE] ACTION: TBL to accepted on 8 Mar 2005, provide a draft of new
namespace policy doc ([40]http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri). in
progress. tbl would like to confirm with Ian that there's nothing
pending on Ian's side [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]
[40] http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri
[41] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/25-tagmem-minutes.html#action03
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [42]scribe.perl version 1.127
([43]CVS log)
$Date: 2006/04/25 21:14:35 $
[42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2006 21:18:05 UTC