RE: Agenda for TAG teleconference of 12 March 2009

I would like to see us adopt a process in which a new topic does not make it onto the TAG meeting agenda until a TAG member has volunteered to be shepherd and some amount of preparation has been done in advance.

For the topic:

> CURIEs in RDFa, @rel, and the HTML profile attribute

on the agenda:
* who is the shepherd? 
* What is the issue briefly (one or two sentences)?
* Is this something that only the TAG can resolve?
* How does this issue relate, if at all, to existing issues, priority topics already on the TAG agenda, or sections of AWWW?
* Which of the identified constituencies for the TAG would be affected by TAG work in this area?

As long as there is significant old business, I don't see taking up new business merely because the chair noted some email on www-tag. Perhaps we might put onto the agenda topics that are brought to us directly by, say, W3C domain leads, coordination groups,but then I would expect them to have done this preparation. I don't want to spend TAG meeting time
on this topic until more groundwork has been done.


-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Masinter 
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:55 PM
To: ''; ''
Cc: ''
Subject: RE: Agenda for TAG teleconference of 12 March 2009

I thought it would be useful to wrap up the discussion of TAG priorities to the point where we could use the results to help with the many questions below of the form "what, if anything, the TAG should do...".

If we're *not* going to complete the TAG priority discussion, then I'd like to focus discussions on "what the TAG should do" on how the topic would fit into the categories we have yet to prioritize or the evaluation criteria for significant TAG work we have yet to agree upon.


-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:48 PM
Subject: Agenda for TAG teleconference of 12 March 2009

A proposed agenda for the TAG's teleconference of 12 March 2009 is 
available at [1,2].  A text copy is attached below.  Thank you.

Noah Mendelsohn
TAG co-chair


Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

   [1]W3C | [2]TAG | Previous: (Telcon) Prev: [3]3-5th March Next: 19
   March 2009


              Agenda of 12 March 2009 TAG teleconference

   Nearby: [4]Teleconference details - [5]issues list and [6]Issue
   Tracker ([7]handling new issues) - [8]www-tag archive - [9]tag
    1. Convene
          + Chair: Noah, Scribe: John (unconfirmed)
          + Roll call -- Regrets: Ashok, Tim.
          + Note future regrets: John (19 March), Jonathan (19 March),
            Tim (19 March), Larry (26 March)
          + Agenda Review - [10]this agenda
               o Pending Action Items: Chair proposes that TAG give him
                 permission to close this week's PENDING REVIEW issues
                 at his discretion. See [11]email from Noah.
          + Next Telcon: Propose 19th March 2009; Chair: Noah; Scribe:
          + Future scribes: Henry > Jonathan > Dan
    2. Administrative items (Brief)
          + Status check on F2F minutes
          + Chair update on group priorities and issue tracking
          + [12]WBS Survey on proposed 2-6 November 2009 W3C Technical
            Plenary (TPAC) (W3C member only) to be held in Santa Clara,
               o Recent tradition is that those TAG members who are at
                 TPAC anyway meet for a half day Monday, and a half day
                 Friday, and we also attempt to make ourselves
                 available to other working groups on a best effort
                 basis during the week. Typically we do not have a
                 quorum and thus don't make binding decisions. Do we
                 want to continue the tradition at the November 2009
                 TPAC? Would anyone prefer attempting a more formal TAG
                 meeting at TPAC?
               o Survey response is due from the chair by 18 March
                 2009. We should indicate whether we expect to attend,
                 likely number of attendees, etc.
    3. Metadata
          + Background:
               o Pursuant to [13]ACTION-227, Jonathan Rees prepared
                 [14]a survey of issues relating to metadata.
               o See email thread starting with [15]Jonathan's
                 announcement of the survey document.
          + Goals:
               o [16]ACTION-227 should be closed.
               o Review Jonathan's draft.
               o Decide what, if anything, the TAG should do in the
                 area of metadata.
    4. CURIEs in RDFa, @rel, and the HTML profile attribute
          + Background:
               o The TAG has, within the last week, been [17]asked to
                 help resolve concerns with the use of CURIEs in RDFa
                 and with the HTML profile attribute.
               o See also athe very long email thread that began with
                 an [18]email message from Mark Nottingham to www-tag
                 titled "Using XMLNS in link/@rel", which in turn led
                 to a message to the public-html list from Julian
                 Reschke titled [19]@rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to
                 ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel.
                 The long thread starts with that; early messages in
                 the thread were not cross-posted to www-tag, but later
                 ones were (starting with [20]this one).
          + Goals:
               o Review www-tag discussion of this issue
               o Decide what steps, if any, the TAG wants to take to
                 help the community resolve these concerns.
    5. contentTypeOverride-24 ([21]ISSUE-24):
          + Background:
               o Dan Connolly [22]suggests that we discuss the draft
                 [23]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.
          + Goals:
               o Decide whether TAG wants to respond to the
                 Content-Type Processing Model draft.
    6. XMLVersioning-41 ([25]ISSUE-41).
          + Background:
               o The TAG had earlier decided not to actively pursue
                 development of the finding on versioning.
               o HTML working group action 108 [26]requests that the
                 TAG consider HTML when working on versioning
               o See thread starting with [27]John Kemp email on
                 updating AWWW good practice note on versioning
               o The following actions are open under ISSUE-41, but the
                 chair proposes not to discuss them in detail on this
                    # [28]ACTION-183 (David Orchard) Incorporate
                      formalism into versioning compatibility
                      strategies. Due 3 March 2009.
                    # [29]ACTION-229 (Noah Mendelsohn) Noah to respond
                      to John Kemp proposal of Feb 17 on versioning.
                      Due 13 March 2009.
          + Goals:
               o Decide whether, given the background referenced above,
                 we want to again work actively on versioning, and if
                 so, with what specific goals.
    7. Overdue Action Items:
          + [30]Overdue actions in [31]Tracker
    8. Any other business


    Noah Mendelsohn for TAG
    $Revision: 1.297 $ of $Date: 2009/03/11 00:45:58 $

   [32]Valid XHTML 1.1


Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 14:13:28 UTC