W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2007

Draft minutes from TAG telcon 4th October 2008.

From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 17:12:08 +0100
Message-ID: <C4B3FB61F7970A4391A5C10BAA1C3F0DE75990@sdcexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Technical Architecture Group WG" <www-tag@w3.org>

Draft minutes of the TAG's Telcon on 4th Oct 2008 are available for
review at:

	http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes

and as plain text below.

Regard

Stuart Williams
--
Hewlett-Packard Limited
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

                               - DRAFT -

                                  TAG

4 Oct 2007

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2007/10/04-tagmem-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Stuart, Rhys, Norm, Ht, Dave_Orchard, DanC, TimBL

   Regrets
          Raman, Noah

   Chair
          Stuart

   Scribe
          Dave

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]February f2f
         2. [6]Approval of minutes.
         3. [7]Tech-Plenary panel URI-Based Extensibility: Benefits,
            Deviations, Lessons-Learned
         4. [8]Draft summary of report to AC
         5. [9]Issue binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30) re scheduling for tech
            plenary
         6. [10]Issue XMLVersioning-41 (ISSUE-41)
         7. [11]Mobile Ajax Workshop
     * [12]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <scribe> Scribe: Dave

   <scribe> ScribeNick: dorchard

   <Norm> Agenda: [13]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-agenda

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-agenda

February f2f

   <Stuart> [14]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34270/200802-F2F/results

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34270/200802-F2F/results

   <DanC> (I just updated action due dates; if
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/ shows an overdue action,
   please give a new ETA)

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/

   proposal: tag meet in vancouver for 2 1/2 to 3 days, Feb 25-28th
   2008
   ... tag meet in vancouver for 2 1/2 to 3 days, Feb 26-28th 2008

   <DanC> +1

   <DanC> so RESOLVED.

   RESOLUTION: TAG meet in vancouver for 2 1/2 to 3 days Feb 26-28th
   2008

   <DanC> (skw has an action to follow up on tim's schedule. ACTION-61
   continues.)

   TimBL: meeting starts at 9am on Feb 26?

   SKW: yes

   Discussion of possible local venues

   <DanC> yes, let's meet within an hour of YVR

   <timbl_> I woudl travel on Fri

   <Rhys> I would travel Friday too

   <ht> Last same-day flight appears to be 1330 departure, via Chicago
   on United

   <DanC> Rhys to scribe 11 Oct

   Next meeting Oct 11th

   <Stuart> [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-agenda

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-agenda

   Rhys to scribe

   <ht> So I don't think leaving Thursday departure gives us 2.5 days
   for Noah/TimBL

   proposal: meet for full 3 days

   RESOLUTION: full 3 days, Feb 26-28th

Approval of minutes.

   RESOLUTION: F2F of Sept 19th etc. approved

   [17]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-tagmem-minutes.html and
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html and
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/19-tagmem-minutes.html with
   summary [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-agenda

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-tagmem-minutes.html
     [18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/18-tagmem-minutes.html
     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/19-tagmem-minutes.html
     [20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/17-agenda

   RESOLUTION: Minutes of September 27th approved.
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/27-minutes

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/09/27-minutes

Tech-Plenary panel URI-Based Extensibility: Benefits, Deviations,
Lessons-Learned

   DO: some panelists have accepted, some thinking it over...

   [22]http://microformats.org/wiki/misconceptions

     [22] http://microformats.org/wiki/misconceptions

   [23]http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2007/09/28/microformats_and_ur
   i_based_extensibility

     [23]
http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2007/09/28/microformats_and_uri_based_
extensibility

   danc: if popular tools required @profile usage.

   timbl: how about writing a microformat validator that checks the
   @profile?
   ... it could report "you don't have a valid microformat" how about
   adding the @profile..

Draft summary of report to AC

   <Stuart> [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/Summary-Nov07

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/Summary-Nov07

   stuart: feedback?

   report has issues list management section... more on that.

   what URI is "right" for issue 14?

   <scribe> ACTION: Stuart update [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues
   to say "this is old; see [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/
   " [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action01]

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues
     [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/
     [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action01

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-62 - Update
   [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues to say \"this is old; see
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/ \" on Stuart Williams -
   due 2007-10-11].

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues
     [29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/

   TimBL: can we add links back? or both ways?

   DanC: any of us can add a note in the new system to point to the old
   entry. that suffices, for my purposes. Yes, Dom could do it
   programmatically, but it seems to me that it if it matters, one of
   us can do it ad-hoc.

Issue binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30) re scheduling for tech plenary

   timbl: it was talked about by tech plenary planning committee but it
   didn't make the cut..

   ht: michael smcq will attend exi
   ... people could say EXI begins with an xml declaration, and then
   some more that I couldn't captcha
   ... the TAG set a bar, and if the TAG won't follow up who will?

   <DanC> [30]http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/

     [30] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/

   danc: looked but couldn't find the TAG's note on setting the bar.

   <DanC>
   [31]http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/#Ax-detai
   ls-compaction

     [31]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/#Ax-details-compa
ction

   <DanC> (reviewing records...
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#binaryXML-30 )

     [32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#binaryXML-30

   <DanC> (deferred on 12 May 2004 ...)

   <DanC> (ah... # TAG opinion on XML Binary Format , 24 May 2005. ...
   [33]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005May/0044 )

     [33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005May/0044

   the 4th chart compaction: "both" application class looks to show
   that gzip is way worse than exi on the low end

   <DanC> hmm... "6. Summary and Analysis of Test Results"
   [34]http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/#results

     [34]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/#results

   I didn't find that there was enough "middle" analysis between the
   detail and the summary that "exi is great".

   <DanC> [35]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005May/0044

     [35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005May/0044

   <DanC> For example, a target might be that "in

   <DanC> typical web services scenarios, median speed gains on the
   order of 3x in

   <DanC> combined parsing and deserialization are deemed sufficient to
   justify a

   <DanC> new format."

   DanC: the combination of a use case and hard numbers in one sentence
   would be particularly handy
   ... some mobile folks have indicated there is a bar, say 7 times
   smaller, that means it could ship in a handset
   ... I'd like to get the real numbers from the mobile community

   stuart: have exi met the bar the tag set?

   they may have met it but I can't tell.

   <DanC> (we might be reading too quickly, but the typical W3C tech
   report reader is likely to have even less attention span than the
   average tag member)

   <timbl_> I would like a scatter-plot of gzip vs efx

   rhys: we could ask them whether they have met the bar?

   in general, the tag doesn't seem sure.

   <timbl_> They decided not to put an initial 4 cvhaarectyers on e
   file format for eg the unix 'file' command as it would add 4 bytes

   <timbl_> So they are not likely to add am encoding stirng

   ht: in constrained environment, start with exi and fail over to xml
   rather than start with xml and fail over to exi

   timbl: you could vector on the "2 bytes" they start with
   ... first byte is between 80 and DS then they know it's binary
   ... can vector between with a single instruction

   ht: when the 2 parties are well synched, that raw binary xml is
   perfectly acceptable.
   ... binary xml should start with an xml declaration that says the
   exi encoding
   ... and then xml spec says that xml declaration can be omitted if
   both parties "know" what the encoding is

   timbl: everybody needs to change their processors to accept binary
   xml without any external labelling?

   ht: if they specify it the way i suggested, then the door is open

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note that the SVG case is interesting,
   in that .svgz is widely deployed

   ht: if lots of people started wanting shift-JIS, then people would
   add that encoding with no change to xml

   danc: note that the SVG case is interesting, in that .svgz is widely
   deployed
   ... I wonder why svg thinks about exi?

   stuart: our own next step?

   dorchard: i can look at the end of October.

   <Rhys> Rhys just notes that mobile networks sometimes silently
   compress materials on the way to the device

   <scribe> ACTION: dorchard to review EXI measurements against the TAG
   bar, due Oct 31st [recorded in
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action02]

     [36] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action02

   <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-63 - Review EXI measurements against
   the TAG bar, due Oct 31st [on David Orchard - due 2007-10-11].

   <DanC> i.e. review
   [37]http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/ vs
   [38]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005May/0044

     [37] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-exi-measurements-20070725/
     [38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005May/0044

Issue XMLVersioning-41 (ISSUE-41)

   ht change action 48 to Oct 11th

   <DanC> ACTION-38 now due 18 Oct
   [39]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Oct/0021.html

     [39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Oct/0021.html

   <DanC> on story...
   [40]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Oct/0021.html

     [40] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Oct/0021.html

   my phone just gave low battery warning

   <ht> At its best, this is the TAG equivalent of " 'Snow is white' is
   true just in case 'snow' is 'white' "

   <ht> That is, it's a statement that what the world understands as
   extensibility is a good thing, using our careful definition of
   extensibility

   Discussion of first bullet, specify that the language is extensible.

   <Stuart> "...provide clear extensibility points in the design of
   your language." ?

   danc: one way of thinking about this is "if you are designing a
   language for a distributed environement provide extensibility"

   <DanC> If you're desigining a language for use between parties in a
   distributed system, think about extensibility

   <DanC> ok, I'd like the bullet points to stand alone... so...

   <DanC> * to enable forwards compability, start with an extensible
   syntax

   json isn't worried about compatible versioning so they don't need
   extensibility

   <Stuart> "If you anticipate future variation in your language,
   provide clear extensibility points in the design of your language."?

   I had worried about defining distributed

   we've gradually stripped out the motivation material to do just the
   "what you need to do"

   <timbl_> FYI, on magic numbers: less /usr/share/file/magic

   DanC: Re: ACTION-38, I declare victory on my action item.

   stuart: Will keep as "pending review" in order to schedule future
   discussion.

   ht: Re: ACTION-48, aiming to have a new draft of xhtml
   modularization using subst groups ready for next week

   <DanC> not for discussion next week

Mobile Ajax Workshop

   <DanC>
   [41]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Oct/0022.html

     [41] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Oct/0022.html

   <DanC> [42]http://www.w3.org/2007/09/28-mobile-ajax-minutes.html

     [42] http://www.w3.org/2007/09/28-mobile-ajax-minutes.html

   rhys: goes through the minutes
   ... w3c and openajax may have lists of things to work on..
   ... ibm had a solution in the client space, some level of secure
   interaction. Dave Raggett may be looking at a workshop on security
   aspects
   ... the IBM solution has to deal with secure communication between
   parts of the app

   relationship between frames, script

   rhys: it's a sandboxing solution.

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note Ian Hickson on 21 Sep "proposal for
   offline web app API "
   [43]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Sep/0445.htm
   l

     [43]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Sep/0445.html

   ht: there are 3 or 4 different offline web app APIs

   danc: exactly. He's trying to standardize

   meeting adjourned

   how about that for timing of my phone battery dying!

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: dorchard to review EXI measurements against the TAG
   bar, due Oct 31st [recorded in
   [44]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Stuart update [45]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues to
   say "this is old; see [46]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/ "
   [recorded in
   [47]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action01]

     [44] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action02
     [45] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues
     [46] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/
     [47] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/10/04-minutes#action01

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2007 16:12:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:54 UTC