- From: John Bradley <john.bradley@wingaa.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:28:34 -0700
- To: "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <A21F20F7-4DD0-4A5A-8DDA-1339048C4F0C@wingaa.com>
I just want to clarify that when David boot and I refer to URI prefix we are defiantly not talking about the DNS sub-domain as indicated in the minutes. A URI prefix must follow the chain of authority. http://xri.*/* is not following the DNS chain of authority and though used as an example in the current XRI spec, it is not part of the proposal. The booth+bradley proposal requires URI prefixes in the form: http://*.xri/* (if registering a new TLD) http://*.xri.net/* (if using the existing proxy domain) http://thing-described-by.org (if using David's thing described by sub-scheme) I agree that the examples > [14] http://xri.*/* > [15] http://*/ark:* Are not ideal and at least on the the XRI side we have moved beyond that. Some discussion we have had regarding a way of doing "Dynamic booth +bradley" may work well with the existing ARK syntax. That however is a separate topic. Regards John Bradley On 16-Sep-08, at 8:34 AM, Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote: > > Draft minutes from our meeting of 11th September 2008 are available > in plain text below and at: > > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/11-minutes > > My thanks to our scribe. > > Best regards > > Stuart Williams > -- > Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, > Berks RG12 1HN > Registered No: 690597 England > = > = > = > = > = > = > = > = > = > ====================================================================== > > > [1]W3C > > [1] http://www.w3.org/ > > - DRAFT - > > TAG Weekly Telcon > > 11 Sep 2008 > > [2]Agenda > > [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/11-agenda > > See also: [3]IRC log > > [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-tagmem-irc > > Attendees > > Present > Stuart_Williams, Jonathan_Rees, T.V._Raman, Henry_Thompson, > Ashok_Malhotra, Dan_Connolly, Dave_Orchard, Noah_Mendelsohn > > Regrets > Noah, Norm, DaveO(partial) > > Chair > Stuart Williams > > Scribe > Ashok Malhotra > > Contents > > * [4]Topics > 1. [5]Convene > 2. [6]binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30) > 3. [7]UrnsAndRegistries-50 (ISSUE-50) > 4. [8]Self-Describing Web > 5. [9]F2F Agenda > 6. [10]abbreviatedURI-56 (ISSUE-56) > * [11]Summary of Action Items > _________________________________________________________ > > > > <skw> Scribe: Ashok Malhotra > > Convene > > <scribe> scribenick: Ashok > > No comments on agenda > > Resolution: Minutes from Sep 4 approved > [12]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-tagmem-minutes > > [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/04-tagmem-minutes > > Next week call a risk. Regets from Tim. Stuart may not be able to > make it > > HT: Use the time to read our documents > > Cancel next week's meeting > > <jar> +1 use the time to read > > Next meeting f2f > > Raman: If we are serious abt this, all TAG members should read the > HTML spec > > DanC: Please let's finish reading list and Agenda for f2f > > binaryXML-30 (ISSUE-30) > > <Zakim> ht, you wanted to acknowledge my EXI actions > > HT: I will read these on the 'plane and make a recommendation on > what we should do > > DanC: Last, we said tell us how you are better than gzip > > HT: That's where we are, the ball is bak in our court. > > SKW: We will discuss this again at our FTF. > > UrnsAndRegistries-50 (ISSUE-50) > > <DanC> (though Dec sounds wierd... I thought our request was since > Dec) > > HT: I'm working on a new document. Shd have it ready middle on next > week > > <DanC> close action-167 > > <trackbot> ACTION-167 S to start a thread on non-DNS authority > resolution on www-tag closed > > DanC: What's happening with XRIs? > > SKW: Summarizes situation > > We have not had a formal proposal saying would you be happy with ... > > SKW: We had a discussion on how the discussion was going > > <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to check whether skw meant it when he said > "prefix", since DNS names go least-significant-first > > <DanC> does either booth or bradly advocate an actual prefix? > > <Zakim> ht, you wanted to say there's one thing we will need to > chase no matter what > > <ht> Abstract Identifier document: > [13]http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture > > [13] http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture > > SKW: That's not the proposal > > <jar> (Out of order) saying "[14]http://xri.*/*" are XRIS is same as > saying "[15]http://*/ark:*" are ARKs ... > > [14] http://xri.*/* > [15] http://*/ark:* > > <ht> And I think there is _some_ room to argue that both of these > are OK, if not ideal > > Self-Describing Web > > Noah has incorporated feedback from Norm and SKW: > > SKW: Norm and I would be supportive of publication > > <Zakim> ht, you wanted to ask a question > > ht: In a discussion with a student I realized ... > > <ht> I believe the following: "FYN works iff every party to the > story is a) publically accountable > > <ht> and b) aware of the dependency of the FYN story on their part > of it. > > <ht> " > > <DanC> I think you can follow-your-nose into policies and such that > aren't world-readable > > DanC: I would not say 'publically accounatable" > > HT: The parties have to be publically accountable > > SKW: The draft does not say this > > HT: I would like to discuss this > > SKW: Pl. send comment > > DanC: I disagree for 3 reasons > > <DanC> (I ran out after 2) > > <DanC> (1) need not be world-readable > > <DanC> (2) the URI for text/plain isn't actually critical path > > <DanC> ... currently > > <DanC> (though it's nice that the text/plain full URI is in an RFC) > > HT: I will send mail on this > > <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to think about whether RDFa is critical > path: if we leave it aside, what's the audience/purpose? and to > > DanC: How can we finish without RDFa story? > ... I'm not sure story holds up > > SKW: can we document missing link and encourage them to put it in > place. > > <skw> [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda > > [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda > > F2F Agenda > > SKW: Talks about the f2f agenda. Thanks Raman for his help > > DanC: I would like to negotiate the reading list now > > <DanC> I hear from skw: urnsregs, binaryxml, html*, > > <DanC> digest of ? > > SKW: Should read binary XML specs, HTML spec, collected digest of > refernces from Raman's thread > > <DanC> self-describing web draft > > <DanC> passwords in the clear > > Self-describing Web, Password in Clear, Versioning > > <DanC> versioning revision from david > > Need two readers for Binary XML, HT is one. > > URNsAndRegistries-50 ... HT writing paper. Due Tuesday. Shd be read > by f2f > > <DanC> * tim's bit > > HT: We should all have read Tim's paper > > <skw> also had an explicit request from David for Jar's formal > treatment... > > <ht> s/alll/all/ > > <DanC> "the document"... one document on versioning? > > <DanC> DO nominates JAR's formalism > > DaveO: What is new is Jonathan's formalism. Recommend people read > this by f2f > > <DanC> DO: key chapter is ch5 > > DaveO: Please review Chapter 5. That is new and is key > > <DanC> HT nominates SVG and HTML thread from public-html... a dozen > messages > > HT: Read SVG and HTML thread. Read 10 msgs and get a feeling of the > context > > <DanC> TVR 2nds... long thread... read for motivations > > <DanC> (looks like TVR's agenda input subsumes HT's suggestion to > read a thread) > > TVR: Read HTML spec with a view thru the structuring lens I proposed > > JR: Is there a document that tells why W3C got involved in html5 > > <noah> Are you discussing reading list? > > <jar> > [17]http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture > > [17] http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/AbstractIdentifierArchitecture > > <jar> ? > > DanC: I can point to formal mataerial but that's not what you want > > <DanC> on mime types... a section of the html spec > > <DanC> pwinc fri > > <noah> Friday's OK if short, I think. > > <DanC> (thanks; I was just gonna ask for irc convirmation) > > Noah: Are we all supposed to read whole HTML spec? > > <DanC> nm nominates thread on meeting goals > > Noah: Please read thread on Tag Soup > > HT: Norm is not coming to Kansas City > > <skw> I think that the thread Noah referred to is based at: > [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2008Aug/0019.html > > [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2008Aug/0019.html > > DanC: I will send mail before EOD after editing agenda page > > Possible topic GenricResources-53 > > Content negotiation and Abstract Documents > > Not on agenda currently. You can lobby me. > > TVR: Steve said he was pulling in my TPAC proposal > > abbreviatedURI-56 (ISSUE-56) > > SKW: Asks abt status of CURIE comments > > <DanC> (anybody have a summary of the comment? the subject line was > a generic "comments on X") > > Noah: That's for responder to say > > SKW: Summarizez comments > > Editorial: Qnames never inted as attribute values. Some discussion > on this > > <DanC> (pls promote that "main substantive comment" to the subject > line) > > SKW: Definition of XML Schema datatype > > <ht> Please remember that we have already fed back on this point, > see > [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0 > 014.html > > [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0014.html > > <skw> ? > > AM: Noah you had a comment on lack of clarity between CURIE and URI > where there is ambiguity > > Noah: I sent this as a personal comment. If no objection, I can add > to my note > > <jar> the whole point of safecurie was so that they can be put in > uri contexts > > <DanC> yes, now that I understand the comment, it seems to miss the > point of safecuries > > <noah> Well, it hijacks the use of [ in everyone's languages. > > Raman: I'm uncomfotable with this. We need to allow new syntax in > old contexts > > jar: If there was no intention of extensing URI content there would > be no SafeCURIEs > > <jar> RDFa already would violate a prohibition on safecuries. It's > too late to prohibit safecuries > > HT: We should be careful abt distinguishing between CURIE's and > SafeCURIES > > <DanC> <ht> Please remember that we have already fed back on this > point, see > [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0 > 014.html > > [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0014.html > > HT: We should not go back on that advice > > TVR: The way Noah phrased it it sets a very high bar for new syntax > > <jar> Two questions here! (1) CURIEs in URI contexts? (No.) (2) > SafeCURIEs in URI contexts? (RDFa requires.) > > <Zakim> noah, you wanted to say implying safecuries can be used in > existing languages where URIs are expected hijacks the use of [ in > those languages. > > Noah: Explains his POV ... I should open my spec to other syntax > > <jar> relative URIs can start with [, yes? > > They should make clear that these things are not URis > > DaveO: Supports Noah. CURIEs cannot be wedged into existing > specifiactions > > <jar> I repeat: There are two questions here! (1) CURIEs in URI > contexts? (No.) (2) SafeCURIEs in URI contexts? (RDFa requires.) > > <DanC> jar, does RDFa use <a href="[safecuri]">? I see deployment > problems there. > > <skw> [21]http://www.w3.org/mid/48B810F4.60807@aptest.com > > [21] http://www.w3.org/mid/48B810F4.60807@aptest.com > > DaveO: Must specify how CURIEs and URI are disambiguated > > <jar> no, but it allows safecuries in other uri contexts, I believe. > will check. > > <DanC> ok. deployment considerations for a/@href are somewhat > special > > TVR: XSLT uses { } is attribute value templates. Use of a special > character > > <jar> ok, URIorSafeCURIE only occurs in attributes that are newly > added by RDFa > > <noah> I did propose text to Shane on 8/29: > > <noah> <proposed> > > <noah> CURIEs and safe-CURIEs map to IRIs, but neither a CURIE nor a > safe-CURIE > > <noah> <italic>is</italic> an IRI or URI. Accordingly, CURIEs and > safe-CURIEs > > <noah> MUST NOT be used as values for attributes that are specified > to contain > > <noah> only URIs, IRIs, URI-references, IRI-references, etc. > Specifications for > > <noah> particular attribute values or other content MAY be written > to allow > > <noah> either CURIEs or IRIs (or URIs, etc.). The specifications for > such > > <noah> languages MUST provide rules for disambiguition in situations > where the > > <noah> same string could be interpreted as either a CURIE or an IRI. > One way to > > <noah> do this is to require that all CURIEs be expressed as > safe-CURIEs, > > <noah> implying that all unbracketed strings are to be interpreted > as IRIs. > > <noah> </proposed> > > TVR: I'm mostly OK with this. > > <DanC> x:y > > JAR: I'm bothered by saying "CURIES are not IRIs". There are > bstrings that are both. > > <DanC> noodling... "neither every CURIE nor every safe-CURIE > <italic>is</italic> an IRI or URI" > > Noah: I will put this in a note to the TAG list and people can > comment > > <noah> So, Stuart, what's the next step on the response. > > SKW: Let's conclude on email. > > <noah> SKW: Noah to redraft considering Stuart's proposal on intent > of qnames and add 8/29 draft text on using CURIEs where URIs > expected > > SKW: DanC, any progress on 171 > > Dan: No. > > <DanC> p.s. any hosting issues? > > <DanC> hmm... decisions decisions... > > <DanC> collect all preparation materials in one place in the > agenda... > > <DanC> or tuck them under the relevant items? > > <DanC> I lean toward tucking, so far > > <DanC> hmm... how to do a crawl-and-zip...? > > Summary of Action Items > > [End of minutes] > _________________________________________________________ > > > Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version 1.128 > ([23]CVS log) > $Date: 2008/09/15 15:05:41 $ > > [22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm > [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/ > >
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2008 16:29:16 UTC