re: Agenda of 2 May 2006 TAG teleconference

Hmm.  For some reason the agenda never got to my email, which is why I'm 
responding late.  Anyway, I see two items that relate to me, and there's 
bad news on both:

> # Issue metadataInURI-31
> Last discussion 21 March. Next step wasexpected end of April.
> Pending action:
>     * DO, accepted on 21 Jul 2003: Send rationale about why 
> WSDL WG wants to peek inside the URI.

Right. I was hoping to have a rewritten draft by now, and I apologize for 
the fact that I am just getting started.  Looks like it's going to be 
another couple of weeks.

I do note that in a thread that starts at [1] we've had responses from Roy 
[2], Mark Nottingham [3], and perhaps others to our minuted proposal [4] 
to discuss the benefits as well as the drawbacks of metadata in URIs. 

I'm inclined to suggest that we'll have a more focussed TAG discussion if 
we now wait for me to draft concrete text that we can debate, but I have 
no objection if the WG would prefer to have some interim discussion today 
of the feedback we've received. 

> # Issue schemeProtocols-49
> Last discussion 5 Dec 2005.
> Pending action:
>     * NM, accepted on 5 Dec 2005: produce a new version of URI 
> Schemes and Web Protocols

Um, we agreed to defer schemeProtocols indefinitely, giving preference to 
my work on Least Power and metadataInURI-31.  That latter one is looking 
like a particularly lame excuse given my lack of progress on metadata, but 
you should assume that I'm doing little or no work on schemeProtocols for 
the forseeable future, I.e. at least until metadataInURI settles down. So, 
no progress to report on that one.



Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2006 15:16:17 UTC