- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:38:23 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
The agenda for the W3C TAG face-to-face meeting to be held at Oracle,
Redwood Shores, is now available at [1]. A text-form copy is also
provided below.
The overall meeting goals are to:
* Bring new TAG members "up to speed" on continuing work
* Make progress on high priority technical issues
* Establish TAG priorities for coming year - ensure that
the issues list reflects actual priorities
* Refine TAG administrative procedures (this will be brief)
In support of this, the first day focusses primarily on existing TAG
technical topics and issues that are already open. The goals of this
first day are to make significant technical progress on those, and also to
give new TAG members a chance to see how the TAG has been doing its f2f
work up until now. Then on the second day, we'll be starting with the
first of several sessions devoted to gathering new ideas for TAG
directions and priorities, while continuing later with sessions on
selected technical topics. On Thursday, the main focus will be to net out
the combination of ongoing vs. new actitivies we'll went to emphasize
during the coming year, and to be sure we're agreed on next steps.
Regarding reading material: with the exception of one revised draft of a
document titled "Uniform Access to Metadata" [2], there are no new TAG
finding drafts or other new large documents to review. We will be
discussing many ongoing TAG issues, so TAG members will want to refresh
their memories of some of the older documents and related emails -- these
are linked from the "preparation" subsections for each agenda item.
Noah
[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/03/03-agenda
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/uniform-access-20090205.html
--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------
[1]W3C | [2]TAG | Previous teleconference: [3]19 Feb 2009. | Next
teleconference: 12th March 2009 (tentative).
[1] http://www.w3.org/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/
[3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/02/19-minutes
TAG face-to-face meeting, 3-5 March 2009, Redwood Shores, CA, USA
Nearby: [4]issues list - [5]findings - [6]www-tag archive - [7]tag
archive - Actions: ([8]open, [9]pending review)
[4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues
[5] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings
[6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/
[7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/
[8] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/open
[9] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/pendingreview
Regrets: none (former TAG member David Orchard will join us Wed.
evening and Thursday)
Agenda Summary
Tues 3rd March
09:00-9:30 [10]Convene (30 min)
Welcome new members
Review: F2F Goals and Agenda
9:30-10:30 [11]HTTP Content negotiation (60 mins)
10:30-10:45 Break (15 mins)
10:45-12:00 [12]HTML and "Tag Soup" Integration (75 mins)
12:00-13:15 Lunch (75 mins)
13:15-14:00 [13]URNsAndRegistries-50: URIs, URNs, "location
independent" naming systems and associated registries for naming on
the Web (review - Henry)
14:00-15:00 [14]Review of ongoing TAG projects
15:00-15:30 Break (30 mins)
15:30-16:00 [15]Issue Prioritization
16:00-16:30 [16]Administration:
* TAG Operations
* Scheduling Future Meetings
16:30-17:00 ...available...
Weds 4th March
09:00-10:30 [17]TAG Priorities for Coming Year - initial discussion
10:30-11:00 Break (30 mins)
11:00-12:00 [18]webApplicationState-60: Web Application State
Management (60 mins - Raman?)
12:00-13:15 Lunch (75 mins)
13:15-14:45 [19]httpRedirections-57: Resource description discovery
and access
14:45-15:15 [20]xmlFunctions-34: XML Transformation and
composability (review - Henry)
15:15-15:45 Break (30 mins)
15:45-17:00 [21]errorHandling-20: Error handling
Thurs 5th March
09:00-10:30 [22]TAG Priorities for Coming Year - conclusion
10:30-11:00 Break (30 mins)
11:00-12:00 [23]TAG Priorities for Coming Year - conclusion
12:00-13:15 Lunch (75 mins)
13:15-15:00 ...available...
15:00 Meeting adjourns
15:00-17:00 ...those who are not traveling until Friday may wish to
stay for informal discussion...
Unscheduled topics
There are some other topics we may decide to discuss in the free
time slots. Suggested discussion goals and preparation materials are
available in the section linked below.
[24]Unscheduled topics
Note that preparation is also encouraged for some items for which
[25]fixed time slots have not been allocated. We may or may not
decide to discuss some or all of these, presumably in the sessions
not yet scheduled.
Logistics
(also separate [26]Logistics page)
[26]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/03/03-f2f-local-arrangements.html
Venue
Oracle Conference Center (OCC)
Building 350
Oracle Parkway,
Redwood Shores,
CA, 94065
The campus is located about 10 miles South of San Francisco
(SFO) airport. See [27]map for directions.
[27]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2009Jan/att-0032/hq_map.pdf
Schedule:
Tue 3 March: 09:00 - 17:00
Wed 4 March: 09:00 - 17:00
Thurs 5 March: 09:00 - 15:00
Agenda Details
1. Convene
+ Welcome new members
+ Appoint scribes
+ Review F2F Goals
o Bring new TAG members "up to speed" on continuing work
o Make progress on high priority technical issues
o Establish TAG priorities for coming year - ensure
issues list reflects actual priorities
o Refine TAG administrative procedures
+ Review F2F Agenda (this document)
+ Approve [28]Minutes of TAG Telcon of 19 February 2009
2. HTTP Content Negotiation (maybe track under [29]ISSUE-57 or
should we open a new one?)
Background:
Several recent email threads have raised questions about the
proper use of content negotiation on the Web. In particular,
these questions have included:
+ When, if ever, is it appropriate to use content negotiation
to choose between representations of a resource and
descriptions of that resource. Should redirection be used
in conjunction with content negotiation for such purposes?
+ Typical AJAX applications use Javascript and HTML to create
a presentation that is derived from one or more datasource
which themselves are identified with URIs. Sometimes the
presentation is a very direct rendering of the data, but in
other cases one may wish to have separate links for the
underlying data (e.g. an email document) and for its
presentation in some particular user agent (e.g. Google
gmail). Using separate URIs for these can be inconvenient,
since in many cases both links will need to be recorded or
transmitted. The TAG has been asked (email from Martin
Nally below) whether use of content negotiation might be an
appropriate compromise.
+ The treatment of content negotiation in HTTPbis is likely
to be revised, and there is some suggestion that content
negotiation should be deprecated.
Goals:
+ Explore technical issues relating to content negotiation
+ Decide whether TAG wants to pursue work on one or more of
the questions discussed above
+ Identify next steps
Preparation:
+ [30]Email from Michael Hausenblas asking for TAG guidance
on the proper use of content negotiation. See also the
thread following from that [31]in the email listing for
February, and the related thread starting with the message
[32]Last minute input to discussion re 'on the boundaries
of content negotiation in the context of the Web of Data'
+ Jonathan Rees points us to three emails he has sent on this
subject, with the hint that that they get "progressively
better". So, he suggests the [33]first and the [34]second
as optional reading for the F2F, and the [35]third as
required (Jonathan's suggestions along with a little
additional background are in [36]this email - member only)
+ Larry Masinter [37]email indicating that he will be
updating the HTTPbis section on content negotiation. Tim
Berners-Lee response email suggesting that [38]deprecation
of content negotiation would be a bad idea (member only).
+ [39]Email from Martin Nally describing challenges in
deciding whether to use content negotiation to choose
between the presentation and the data driving the
presentation in an Ajax application
3. HTML and "TAG Soup" Integration ([40]ISSUE-54)
Goals:
+ Review history, successes, and challenges with respect to
TAG's efforts to assist the HTML community
+ Decide what, if anything, the TAG should set as goals for
work on HTML this year. Explore ways that we can be helpful
to the HTML 5 working group and to other W3C groups that
provide HTML-based technologies.
+ Clarify relationship to TAG work in areas such as error
handling, versioning, etc.
Preparation:
+ T.V. Raman's analysis prepared for agenda of the TAG's
Sept. 2008 meeting in Kansas City. It's in the agenda
itself under the heading [41]tagSoupIntegration-54 - HTML
and The Web.
+ Update from Dan Connolly on [42]HTML/Tag Soup Progress
since TPAC (member-only)
+ HTML working group action 108 [43]requests that the TAG
consider HTML when working on versioning
4. Error handling ([44]ISSUE-20)
Goals:
+ Explore architectural principles relating to error recovery
by software receiving incorrect data from Web interactions.
Explore tradeoffs involving silent recovery from errors,
robustness of Web communications, risk of incorrect
processing, proliferation of incorrect content, vs.
convenience for others and recipients of documents.
+ Decide what, if anything, the TAG should set as goals for
work on error handling this year
+ Clarify relationship to TAG work in areas such as HTML/Tag
soup, versioning, etc.
Action:
+ [45]ACTION-199 on Henry S. Thompson to Follow up on error
handling thread (8 Oct) - due 2009-02-17, pending review
Preparation:
+ [46]Error handling discussion in minutes of TAG Telcon of
19 February 2009
+ Email thread on [47]HTML and XML
5. XML Functions ([48]ISSUE-34)
Goals:
+ Bring new (and returning) members up to date on prior work
on XML Functions.
+ Brief discussion of technical issues, if time permits.
+ Clarify goals and next steps.
Action:
+ [49]ACTION-113 on Henry S. Thompson to HT to a) revise
[50]composition.pdf[sic] to take account of suggestions
from Tim & Jonathan and feedback from email and b) produce
a new version of the Elaborated Infoset finding, possibly
incorporating some of the PDF - due 2009-03-27, open
Preparation:
+ [51]The elaborated infoset: A proposal by Henry Thompson
+ [52]Compositionality, elaboration and XML document
semantics by Henry Thompson (28 November 2007)
6. URNsandRegistries-50: URIs, URNs, "location independent" naming
systems and associated registries for naming on the Web
([53]ISSUE-50)
Goals:
+ Bring new (and returning) members up to date on prior work
on issue URNsAndRegistries-50.
+ Brief discussion of technical issues, if time permits.
+ Clarify goals and next steps.
Action:
+ [54]ACTION-33 on Henry S. Thompson to revise naming
challenges story in response to Dec 2008 F2F discussion -
due 2009-03-27, open
+ [55]ACTION-121 on Henry S. Thompson to HT to draft TAG
input to review of draft ARK RFC - due 2009-03-27, open
Preparation:
+ [56]URNs, Namespaces and Registries by Henry Thompson and
David Orchard (yes, sadly, the latest revision on this
draft is from August, 2006)
7. webApplicationState-60Web Application State Management
([57]ISSUE-60)
Goals:
+ Bring new (and returning) members up to date on prior work
on issue webApplicationState-60
+ Discuss technical issues
+ Clarify goals and next steps
Actions:
+ [58]ACTION-143 on Stuart Williams to Review Raman's draft
of webApplicationState-60 - due 2009-03-03, open
+ [59]ACTION-144 on Noah Mendelsohn to Attempt to articulate
some of the higher level questions for inclusion in the
draft. - due 2009-03-03, open
Preparation:
+ [60]Usage Patterns For Client-Side URL parameters by T.V.
Raman - 11 February 2008
+ [61]Email from Martin Nally describing challenges in
deciding whether to use content negotiation to choose
between the presentation and the data driving the
presentation in an Ajax application. This email also
relates to application state management and use of URIs to
track application state.
8. httpRedirections-57: Resource description discovery and access
([62]ISSUE-57)
Goals:
+ Review history and status of work in ISSUE-57 and resource
description access in general
+ Decide what, if anything, the TAG wants to do in this area
starting now
+ Clarify relationship to TAG work in areas such as metadata,
content negotiation, site description metadata, etc.
Preparation:
+ [63]Stuart Williams' email summarizing the history and
status of ISSUE-57
+ [64]Uniform Access to Metadata (5 Feb 2009 draft by Phil
Archer and Jonathan Rees) and assocated [65]email thread
+ Internet draft [66]HTTP-based Resource Descriptor Discovery
(draft-hammer-discovery-01) by E. Hammer-Lahav
+ (optional) Internet draft [67]Link Relations and HTTP
Header Linking (draft-nottingham-http-link-header-03) by
Mark Nottingham
+ (optional) Internet draft [68]Host Metadata for the Web
(draft-nottingham-site-meta-01) by M. Nottingham and E.
Hammer-Lahav
Actions:
+ [69]ACTION-116 on Tim Berners-Lee to Align the tabulator
internal vocabulary with the vocabulary in the rules
http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswDboothsRules, getting changes
to either as needed. - due 2009-02-24, open
+ [70]ACTION-178 on Jonathan Rees to update draft of finding
on uniform access to metadata. - due 2009-02-13, open
+ [71]ACTION-200 on Jonathan Rees to Revise "Uniform Access
to Metadata" (needs title change) to add XRD use case - due
2009-02-24, pending review
+ [72]ACTION-201 on Jonathan Rees to Report on status of
AWWSW discussions - due 2009-03-30, open
+ [73]ACTION-217 on Jonathan Rees to Raise moving the
registry to w3.org with Mark Nottingham - due 2009-02-24,
pending review
9. [74]Review of ongoing TAG projects & Issue Prioritization
Goals:
The TAG goes into this meeting with 28 open issues. The overall
goal of this session to identify a few key issues from our
previous work that we will designate as possible major focus
items for the coming year, to identify other issues that should
remain active with lesser emphasis, and as appropriate to close
(or open) others. In [75]other F2F sessions, we will consider
suggestions for new focus areas and priorities, so the final TAG
agenda for the coming year will likely be a combination of
ongoing work continued or refocused, along with new
undertakings. This particular F2F session is aimed at ensuring
that we understand and are properly tracking the status of work
already underway. When we are done, the issues list should
reflect in the description field the goals, deliverables,
checkpoints, and success criteria for issues that remain active.
Specific goals for this F2F session are:
+ Review open issues and close or change status as necessary.
This is an opportunity for returning TAG members to remind
themselves of the status of our long list of issues, and
especially for new members to come up to speed. We will do
this by splitting into small groups, each of which will do
the following for a handful of issues:
o Ensure that goals, deliverables, checkpoints and
success criteria are understood, at least for high
priority issues and preferably for all active issues.
o Recommend whether the issue should remain open or be
closed. If open, then whether the issue should be one
of the few key focus areas of the TAG, or should have
lesser emphasis.
+ After the breakout reviews are done, we will discuss
recommendations, especially for high priority focus areas.
If time permits, we will agree on revised status for all
issues. If that proves a bad use of F2F time, then we will
plan to finish the job via email and/or telcons as
appropriate. The essential goal here is to learn enough
that we can appropriately balance proposals for new TAG
work with following through on our existing activities.
+ Also, the chair would like to propose more direct ongoing
(I.e. post F2F) involvement of the rest of the TAG in
tracking the status of particular TAG issues. We will
discuss details at the F2F.
Preparation:
+ Review [76]open TAG issues table below. Think in advance
about which ones we should be our main priorities, which
ones should be closed, and which should continue as
background activities.
10. TAG Priorities for Coming Year
Goals:
+ Discuss specific proposals for new TAG directions and focus
areas
+ Determine specific TAG goals and priorities for coming
year.
+ For each such goal or direction, briefly identify success
criteria, timeframes, the intended audience for any
materials we produce, and next steps.
Preparation:
+ Review [77]Larry Masinter's suggestions for new TAG work
areas
+ Review [78]open TAG issues table (below)
+ Consider whether the [79]Architecture of the World Wide Web
and the [80]findings that the TAG publishes are effective
in getting the attention of and educating their intended
audience(s).
We will discuss this topic at least twice. The first session
will focus on briefly reviewing proposals for new directions for
TAG work, as well as proposals for which ongoing activites
should be emphasized. We will also discuss which aspects of the
TAG's work have been most effective, and which have not been
effective. Note that we will in a separate session do a detailed
review of all ongoing TAG activity (I.e. open issues), closing
and reprioritizing as appropriate. The results of that analysis
will be used as input to the second round discussion, which will
attempt to set our overall priorities for the coming year.
11. Administration
Goals:
+ Discuss (minor) changes in TAG administrative procedures
+ Get concurrence on contents of [81]Guide to TAG
Participation (W3C member-only), making revisions as
necessary
+ Make plan to ensure everyone has access to CVS & other
tools needed to assist with TAG operations, scribing, and
document publication
+ Schedule upcoming F2F meeting(s) ([82]email from Steve
Bratt - member only)
Preparation:
+ Read draft of [83]Guide to TAG Participation (W3C
member-only). Either be prepared to endorse it as is, or to
suggest specific changes.
12. Unscheduled items
No specific discussion time is allocated to the following, but
we may choose to discuss these in some of the free time slots.
+ contentTypeOverride-24 ([84]ISSUE-24): Dan Connolly
[85]suggests that we discuss the draft [86]Content-Type
Processing Model, by Ian Hickson and Adam Barth; the draft
proposes interoperable rules for Content-type "sniffing" in
browsers. Note that the draft acknowledges at one point
that it is in "... willful violation of the HTTP
specification. [87]RFC2616]
+ XMLVersioning-41 ([88]ISSUE-41).
Background:
o HTML working group action 108 [89]requests that the
TAG consider HTML when working on versioning
o Thread starting with [90]John Kemp email on updating
AWWW good practice note on versioning
o [91]ACTION-183 (David Orchard) Incorporate formalism
into versioning compatibility strategies. Due 3 March
2009.
o [92]ACTION-221 (Jonathan Rees) Work with Dave Orchard
to close up the formalism facet of the versioning
document, due in two weeks. Due 24 February 2009
(OVERDUE).
o [93]ACTION-229 (Noah Mendelsohn) Noah to respond to
John Kemp proposal of Feb 17 on versioning. Due 13
March 2009.
+ webApplicationState-60 ([94]ISSUE-60):
Background:
o [95]Email from Martin Nally describing challenges in
deciding whether to use content negotiation to choose
between the presentation and the data driving the
presentation in an Ajax application. (this email
relates not only to conneg, but also to things like
managing state of RESTful applications using the
browser address bar and navigation stack)
+ Should TAG focus more on the mobile Web and the growing use
of smartphones with the Web? (Noah is interested in this.)
+ Review of Open Action Items
o Review [96]open action items: reassign owned by those
who are leaving the TAG.
o Review and, if possible, close [97]pending review
action items
o Update on the [98]Architecture of the World Wide
Semantic Web AWWSW work.
[28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/02/19-minutes
[29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/57
[30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0074.html
[31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/subject.html
[32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0183.html
[33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0080.html
[34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0170.html
[35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0172.html
[36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2009Feb/0102.html
[37] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0211.html
[38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2009Feb/0105.html
[39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0198.html
[40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/54
[41]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda#htmlAndWebBigPicture
[42] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2009Feb/0080.html
[43] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/108
[44] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/20
[45] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/199
[46] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/02/19-minutes#item03
[47] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0040.html
[48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/34
[49] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/113
[50] http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/compositional.pdf
[51]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/elabInfoset-20071127/elabInfoset.html
[52] http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/compositional.pdf
[53] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/50
[54] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/33
[55] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/121
[56] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/URNsAndRegistries-50-2006-08-17
[57] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/60
[58] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/143
[59] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/144
[60] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/hash-in-url-20080211.html
[61] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0198.html
[62] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/57
[63] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0235.html
[64] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/uniform-access-20090205.html
[65] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0034.html
[66] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-discovery-01
[67] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-03
[68] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-site-meta-01
[69] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/116
[70] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/178
[71] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/200
[72] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/201
[73] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/217
[74] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/open
[77]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Feb/0105.html
[79] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/
[80] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings
[81] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/coordination/TAGGuide.html
[82]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2009JanMar/0058.html
[83] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/coordination/TAGGuide.html
[84] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/24
[85] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/03/03-agenda.html
[86] http://ietfreport.isoc.org/idref/draft-abarth-mime-sniff/
[87] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt
[88] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/41
[89] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/108
[90] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0147.html
[91] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/183
[92] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/221
[93] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/229
[94] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/60
[95] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Feb/0198.html
[96] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/open
[97] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/pendingreview
[98] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/
Open W3C TAG Issues as of 24 February 2009
The following list was extracted from Tracker's list of [99]open
issues. The "F2F" column indicates issues that appear as explicit
agenda items for this F2F. We will discuss the "Proposed Priority"
column at the meeting.
[99] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/open
ISSUE # F2F Old Issue Name Proposed
Priority Description Raised on Number of
Open Actions
[100]7 whenToUseGet-7 Close (1) GET should be encouraged, not
deprecated, in XForms(2) How to handle safe queries (New POST-like
method?GET plus a body?) 23-Jan-02 0
[101]16 HTTPSubstrate-16 Close Should HTTP be used as a substrate
protocol? Does W3Cagree with RFC 3205? 24-Mar-02 0
[102]20 X errorHandling-20 High What should specifications say about
error handling? 22-May-02 0
[103]24 contentTypeOverride-24 Background Can a specification
include rules for overriding HTTPcontent type parameters? 14-Jun-02
0
[104]27 IRIEverywhere-27 Background Should W3C specifications start
promoting IRIs? 9-Oct-02 2
[105]28 fragmentInXML-28 Background Use of fragment identifiers in
XML 31-Oct-02 0
[106]30 binaryXML-30 Background Standardize a "binary XML" format?
9-Oct-02 1
[107]33 mixedUIXMLNamespace-33 ?? Composability for user
interface-oriented XML namespaces 6-Feb-03 0
[108]34 X xmlFunctions-34 Medium XML Transformation and
composability (e.g., XSLT,XInclude, Encryption) 6-Feb-03 1
[109]36 siteData-36 Medium Web site metadata improving on
robots.txt, w3c/p3p and favicon etc. 10-Feb-03 0
[110]37 abstractComponentRefs-37 ?? Definition of abstract
components with namespace names and frag ids 3-Feb-03 0
[111]39 rdfURIMeaning-39 ?? Meaning of URIs in RDF documents
13-Jul-03 0
[112]40 URIGoodPractice-40 Background What are good practices for
URI construction? 16-Oct-03 0
[113]41 XMLVersioning-41 Background What are good practices for
designing extensible XMLlanguages and for handling versioning?
27-Jun-03 3
[114]42 ultimateQuestion-42 What is the answer to life, the
universe, and everything. 15-Nov-03 3
[115]43 DerivedResources-43 ?? How are secondary resources derived?
15-Nov-03 0
[116]45 mediaTypeManagement-45 Background What is the appropriate
level of granularity of the media type mechanism? 14-May-04 0
[117]46 xml11Names-46 Close Impact of changes to XML 1.1 on other
XML Specifications 19-May-04 0
[118]47 endPointRefs-47 Close WS-Addressing SOAP binding & app
protocols 3-Jan-05 0
[119]49 schemeProtocols-49 Background Relationship of URI schemes to
protocols and operations 7-Feb-05 0
[120]50 X URNsAndRegistries-50 High URIs, URNs, "location
independent" naming systems and associated registries for naming on
the Web 15-Mar-05 2
[121]54 X TagSoupIntegration-54 High Tag soup integration 17-Oct-06
1
[122]55 utf7Encoding-55 Background Security issues with incorrect
metadata 14-Dec-06 0
[123]56 abbreviatedURIs-56 Background Abbreviating URIs in Web
Languages 30-Mar-07 0
[124]57 X HttpRedirections-57 High The use of HTTP Redirection
22-Aug-07 3
[125]58 scalabilityOfURIAccess-58 ?? Scalability of URI Access to
Resources 22-Aug-07 1
[126]60 X webApplicationState-60 High Web Application State
Management 14-Dec-07 3
[127]61 uriBasedPackageAccess-61 High or Background? URI Based
Access to Packaged Items 8-Jul-08 0
[100] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/7
[101] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/16
[102] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/20
[103] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/24
[104] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27
[105] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/28
[106] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/30
[107] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/33
[108] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/34
[109] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/36
[110] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/37
[111] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/39
[112] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/40
[113] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/41
[114] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/42
[115] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/43
[116] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/45
[117] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/46
[118] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/47
[119] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/49
[120] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/50
[121] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/54
[122] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/55
[123] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/56
[124] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/57
[125] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/58
[126] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/60
[127] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/61
Noah Mendelsohn for TAG
$Revision: 1.15 $ of $Date: 2009/02/25 17:15:28 $
[128]Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional [129]Valid CSS!
[128] http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer
[129] http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 17:37:34 UTC