- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:54:56 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2r6lyozv3.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/08/20-minutes
W3C[1]
- DRAFT -
TAG
20 Aug 2007
Agenda[2]
See also: IRC log[3]
Attendees
Present
Norm, Raman, Rhys, Stuart, Henry, Dave, Dan
Regrets
TimBL, Noah
Chair
Stuart
Scribe
Norm
Contents
* Topics
1. Agenda review
2. Approve minutes of 13 Aug?
3. Next telcon
4. Re-scheduling Telcon
5. TAG Blog
6. September f2f preparation
7. Issue XML Versioning 41
8. Issue xml11Names-46
9. tagSoupIntegration-54
10. Fragment identifiers
* Summary of Action Items
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda review
<ht> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/08/20-agenda.html[4]
Stuart: Some actions will be closed without discussion if no one asks to
discuss them.
Dan: I'd like to discuss some of them (scribe missed exactly which ones)
Agenda accepted
Approve minutes of 13 Aug?
<ht> http://www.w3.org/2007/08/13-tagmem-minutes.html[5]
Proposed: Accept http://www.w3.org/2007/08/13-tagmem-minutes.html[6] as a
true record?
Accepted.
<DanC> sounds like we're approving the version of 2007/08/13 18:10:12
without "DRAFT" at the top
Next telcon
Stuart: I propose 10 Sep 2007.
... 3 Sep is US Labor Day. 27 Aug is UK public holiday.
Dave gives regrets for 10 Sep
<Rhys> Rhys does give regrets for 27 August
Stuart: Raman can you scribe 10 Sep?
Raman: Yes.
Accepted, next meeting is 10 Sep 2007.
Re-scheduling Telcon
Stuart: I put a wbs form up, several replied.
... Two slots work: this one and 12-1:30p ET Thursday
Henry: That slot isn't available for TimBL.
... I think this slot has significantly impacted our productivity.
... I'd like to look a little harder.
Raman: I'm willing to accept an 8:30PT slot, I'll just have to be a little
late
Henry: Tim would miss the team lunch, but Amy thought he would consider
it.
Norm: What are you proposing?
Henry: I'm proposing 11:30a-1:00p ET on Tuesdays
Norm: I'm afraid I have a conflict on Tuesday's now.
<DanC> ok by me
Norm: I can see about getting it moved.
Henry: The only other slot that has any obvious hope is 1:00-2:30p ET on
Thursdays.
Stuart: Rhys has a "no" on that slot.
Rhys: I could be persuaded to live with it.
Henry: I propose we try for 11:30-1:00 ET on Tuesdays pending Norm moving
his meeting his meeting and TimBL agreeing. Failing that we come back to
consider 1:00-2:30 ET on Thursdays.
Stuart: If we can shift to another day this week, I'd like to reclaim the
next two weeks. Meeting, on Tuesday next, for example.
DanC: Call both and then cancel one.
Stuart: I propose that we next meet on Tuesday, 28 Aug 2007 at 11:30 ET.
Stuart: And Thursday, 30 Aug 2007 at 1:00p ET.
... I'll cancel one or both depending on the survey outcome.
Accepted.
TAG Blog
Stuart: DanC, did you get approval for the URI?
DanC: I didn't really make any progress on either action.
Stuart: Any idea when you might make progress?
DanC: Its straightforward for me to get a response after 27 Aug.
Stuart: Ok, we'll wait until its straightforward.
September f2f preparation
Stuart: I've put up a logistics page
-> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-logistics
Stuart: I've put out a call for agenda items, we could talk about that
now.
Dave: I'd like to see XML Versioning on the agenda.
Stuart: You gave regrets.
Dave: Yes, but I'm willing to call in; so maybe we could do it late in the
day UK time.
Stuart: I believe Rhys would like to talk about httpRange-14.
... Distributed extensibility, microformats, HTML 5 looks like a
possibility
<Stuart> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2007Aug/0038[8]
Stuart: The other thing I think we said was that we'd discuss the
confluence of Web 2.0/Web Architecture, but we don't really have material
to discuss.
DanC: We have the thread on fragment identifiers.
Raman: I'm not going to try to call in, but I don't mind if you talk about
it in my absence.
Stuart: I'd like to see some email discussion to help shape the agenda.
Some discussion of HTTP Redirection, etc.; Rhys is working on related
materials.
DanC: I'll try to prepare for the distributed versioning discussion.
... Where's Semantic Web Architecture?
Norm: Stalled with TimBL and I. Probably not productive unless Tim and I
can get together and write more words.
Stuart: Does that look pretty good? Are there other things people would
like to see?
DanC: How far are we from our f2f?
We're three calendar weeks away
DanC: The agenda should be announced at T-minus two weeks.
(Per W3C process)
Dave: So can we talk more about the meeting?
... I brought up a topic, versioning, and we picked a time slot, but the
obvious next thing is, what will we do about versioning?
... Seems to me that we should take another pass at the documents. That
means reviewers.
Stuart: I'm on the hook to review the terminology document.
... Do we have reviewers for any of the other documents.
Norm: I'll review the XML part again if you point me to the most recent
version.
Stuart: So we still need a reviewer for the strategies document.
Dave: Yes, 2.2.2 is where we kind of finished at the last f2f. I did a
bunch of work on that, that would be one logical place to pick up from
again.
Issue XML Versioning 41
<Stuart> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0041[9]
Stuart: This is on the agenda to discuss Norm's action.
<dorchard> The latest versions of versioning finding are listed in the
email at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0004.html[10]
Norm reviews his action, suggests that Dave plonk it in somewhere.
Stuart: Is it likely that you can do that before the f2f, Dave?
Dave: No.
Norm: Doesn't worry me if we don't add that before September.
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note @role module last call coming, and pick
back up on modularity in CDF, XHTML modularization
Dave: I plan no changes to the documents between now and the f2f.
DanC: There's a @role spec coming
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-role-20061113/[11]
DanC: Why DTDs?
Raman: What's missing is an XML Schema that conforms to XHTML
modularization.
Henry: If we think that we should say somthing that would encourage them
to not use DTDs; my candidate would be to use the modularization framework
and an XHTML 1.1 XML Schema.
Some discussion of the status of modularization; apparently it's back at
WD.
<DanC> last call
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/[12]
Stuart: Is this one we should be reviewing?
DanC: Yes, in particular there's a form of extensibility that's sort of
decentralized in a way that appeals to me.
... There are claims that the subsitution group model they use doesn't
work, but I've never been able to get to the bottom of it.
Dave: I wrote something on this too, we should really try to get to the
bottom of it.
<DanC> XHTML modularization and substitution groups (tag issue
XMLVersioning-41, TagSoupIntegration-54, RDFinXHTML-35)[13]
<ht> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/[14]
<scribe> ACTION: ht to review XHTML Modularization
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/)[15]
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action02[16]]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-15 - Review XHTML Modularization
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/)[17] [on
Henry S Thompson - due 2007-08-27].
Stuart: DanC, did you want to say more about the role document?
DanC: Sort of. One of the ways that role winds up on my plate is due to
accessible web applications.
... JavaScript is turing complete, so there are accessibility problems. So
W3C did some work in this area.
... One outcome is this role attribute with things like checkbox that help
screen readers do better.
... It's been proposed that this role module be stuck in HTML 5. And HTML
5 has completely sworn off DTDs.
... If you're not going to do a DTD for it, what are you going to do?
Raman: One issue is, does this go in a new attribute? Why not stick it in
class.
... The other issue is whether or not it should be namespaced as it is in
XHTML 1.1. But firefox doesn't care because it's been hardwired.
... Saying that role has to be in a namespace is bogus.
... I started some of the role work; it's been carefully done as a module
so that the WAI folks could decide what the right-hand-sides should be.
... They actually created two attributes in two namespaces, the state
values go in one and the role values go in the other.
... That's a three line summary of all the HTML 5 mail.
DanC: One of the design patterns for HTML 5 is "no no no, not namespaces,
let's figure out what the authors need and give them a list"
Raman: The problem with role is that it's cross-cutting so that doesn't
really work.
... HTML 5 also talks about following existing practice, so they're trying
to go in two different directions.
Stuart: We're talking about this under versioning-41. Is this really
versioning, or is ti an HTML 5 topic?
DanC: The versioning topic is about substitution groups in modular design.
Dave: If substitution groups don't work in 1.0, do they also not work in
1.1?
DanC: XML Schemas is about to go to last call.
Henry: There is one change in 1.1, allowing multiple substitution heads.
That's been alleged to be problem. I'll be taking a look.
Stuart: Do we agree that Norm's action is closed?
Yes.
<scribe> ACTION: dorchard to incorporate the NVDL text into the findings.
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action04[18]]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-16 - Incorporate the NVDL text into the
findings. [on David Orchard - due 2007-08-27].
<Stuart> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/[19]
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/users[20]
<raman> For the record the collection of properties refered to as state is
a collection of attributes -- not a single one.
<DanC> ah, right, raman
Issue xml11Names-46
<Stuart> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0040[21]
Norm: I completed the action I was given ages ago.
DanC: I think it needs to be in a test suite somewhere.
Norm: An XML 1.1 parser should accept the document, an XML 1.0 one would
fail.
Henry: There are already tests in the XML test suite for 1.1 features.
<DanC> (yup, norm's action is done to my satisfaction)
<ht> http://www.w3.org/XML/Test/[22]
DanC: We could just turn this whole ball of wax over to the XML CG.
<DanC> (I'd like ht to take an action)
Stuart: We'll mark that action as done and leave the issue pending.
<scribe> ACTION: ht to check that the XML test suite contains an
equivalent test [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action05[23]]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-17 - Check that the XML test suite contains
an equivalent test [on Henry S Thompson - due 2007-08-27].
tagSoupIntegration-54
Stuart: Any discussion?
<dorchard> which article?
DanC: What's novel about Sam's message is that he proposes using
namespaces in content that isn't well-formed XML.
Raman: I think he's articulated something important: it's more than the
browser vendors who have a right to decide what goes into HTML 5. User
communities should be able to add new elements too.
... The browser vendors are going to document what they do, but I think it
would be a serious loss to the web if that's all we expected to happen.
... I think the important thing is that extensibility is the purview of
more than the browser vendors. Henry saw something else when he looked at
it.
dorchard: If this is something that would help the HTML 5 WG get closer to
what the TAG thinks is the right way to deal with distributed
extensibility, then we should support it.
Stuart: Is there a proposal here?
dorchard: We could ask someone to write up a message of support that we
could publish as the TAG
<scribe> ACTION: dorchard to review the article and make a proposal.
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action06[24]]
Stuart: Any other discussion?
DanC: The agenda suggests continuing Ramans action without comment. I'm
content that he finished that action.
Stuart: I can't point to that document off the top of my head. It goes
back to our Google meeting.
<raman> http://www.w3.org/t2001/tag/doc/tag-soup-integration.html[25]
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/tag-soup-integration.html[26]
Stuart: OK, with that pointer we'll call the action closed.
DanC: Are we going to maintain this?
Raman: If you send that document to the HTML 5 WG mailing list, I don't
think we'll get anything productive back.
dorchard: We need to do our job anyway
Stuart: Do you think it's ready to be sent?
Raman: Yes, if we agree that those are the things we want to say. I just
don't think there's value in doing a lot more work in a vacuum.
Some discussion of what actions we could take
Raman: What we've prepared is an outline of items we believe should be
covered
Stuart: We should formulate our opinion regardless of what the outcome
might be
Raman: I think we should flesh this out at the f2f and then send it.
<scribe> ACTION: Raman to update the document with the latest discussion
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action07[27]]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-19 - Update the document with the latest
discussion [on T.V. Raman - due 2007-08-27].
<scribe> ACTION: Stuart to discuss with DanC what might be most useful and
productive wrt providing input to the HTML WG [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action08[28]]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-20 - Discuss with DanC what might be most
useful and productive wrt providing input to the HTML WG [on Stuart
Williams - due 2007-08-27].
Henry: We should separate our technical discussions from strategically how
to communicate this with the WG
Fragment identifiers
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0148
Raman: The more general TAG discussion I think is that there's an
asymmetry between URLs on the server and URLs on the client.
... On the server, everything after the question mark is sent to the
resource as a bunch of arguments.
... Similarly, in the URL you have the # which passes everything after the
hash to the client to handle it.
... The community knows how HTML browsers use fragment identifiers; and we
know how RDF does it; but there's very little else been said.
... The problem with saying "the client" is the question of which client.
... At this point, I think there are more details that need to be written
down if we expect to get interoperability.
Stuart: One of the things that interested me is that no where in that
discussion did we talk about the media type.
Raman: I danced around that carefully. That only really comes up with
respect to HTML. It came up years ago when I was at Adobe with respect to
opening up PDF.
... I don't remember the status of that for the media type application for
PDF
... If you write .../?a=1, you'll never expect that to work if you send it
to a different server. On the other hand, if it's # then you would expect
different clients to act in the same way.
<Zakim> ht, you wanted to ask for clarification
Henry: When you said "which client" you didn't mean that in any given
interaction there is more than one client, right?
Raman: Right. Clearly the CNN URL works in a JavaScript enabled browser,
but not in one that isn't.
... You could say that text/html includes all of the processing
expectations of JavaScript. That's one reasonable answer.
Henry: It's certainly the case that there are other media types that
specify the interpretation of fragment identifiers.
... They are careful and they get real value out of them.
Raman: I think Adobe did that, but I don't clearly recall at this time.
Henry: It would be perfectly coherent for someone to define a media type
that said what you do with fragids that begin with slash is that you issue
an XMLHTTPRequest of the following form...
... But that's not what either text/html or any of the other HTML mime
types say. So CNN is flat out in violation of the spec.
... JavaScript that does that is breaking the rules.
... I don't think that anyone has to do anything to make that clear. It's
perfectly clear. Someone has written JavaScript code that's doing an end
run around the browser.
Raman: I'm comfortable with that view too, but then you run into the
counter-argument that "it works dummy".
Henry: Breaking the rules is bad? I don't want to write a TAG finding that
says that.
Raman: It seems to be all about breaking the rules and making a hack that
works these days and I"m a little worried about that.
... There are two reasonable positions: the MIME type says what the answer
is.
... The other position is that the MIME type is for static documents and
in this dynamic world, the JavaScript gets to say what the answer is.
... We can either say you broke the rules or we can change the rules. It
actually took me a while to figure how it works.
... This is a lot like the "CSS sprite" hack.
Stuart: We're about out of time. I think we'll come back to this.
Henry: If there's a TAG issue here, it's something about what proper
script author responsibilities are in the context of the standards that
they're operating with.
... It isn't obvious where you would go to find a basis for saying "gee,
this doesn't constitute good citizenship"
Stuart: Adjourned.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: dorchard to incorporate the NVDL text into the findings.
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action04[30]]
[NEW] ACTION: dorchard to review the article and make a proposal.
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action06[31]]
[NEW] ACTION: ht to check that the XML test suite contains an equivalent
test [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action05[32]]
[NEW] ACTION: ht to review XHTML Modularization
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/[33])
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action02[34]]
[NEW] ACTION: Raman to update the document with the latest discussion
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action07[35]]
[NEW] ACTION: Stuart to discuss with DanC what might be most useful and
productive wrt providing input to the HTML WG [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action08[36]]
[End of minutes]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] http://www.w3.org/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/tag-weekly
[3] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-irc
[4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/08/20-agenda.html
[5] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/13-tagmem-minutes.html
[6] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/13-tagmem-minutes.html
[8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2007Aug/0038
[9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0041
[10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0004.html
[11] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-role-20061113/
[12] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/
[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-versioning/2007Feb/0000.html
[14] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/
[15] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/)
[16] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
[17] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/)
[18] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action04
[19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/
[20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/users
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jul/0040
[22] http://www.w3.org/XML/Test/
[23] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action05
[24] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action06
[25] http://www.w3.org/t2001/tag/doc/tag-soup-integration.html
[26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/tag-soup-integration.html
[27] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action07
[28] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action08
[30] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action04
[31] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action06
[32] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action05
[33] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-modularization-20060705/
[34] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action02
[35] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action07
[36] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action08
[37] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[38] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl[37] version 1.128 (CVS
log[38])
$Date: 2007/08/20 17:51:19 $
Received on Monday, 20 August 2007 17:53:48 UTC