Draft minutes of TAG teleconference of 23 April 2009

I just noticed that draft minutes of the TAG teleconference of 23 April 
were announced [1] on the TAG's member-only list, but not here.  They are 
available at [2], and in text form below.  I expect we will consider 
approval of these on our teleconference this Thursday.  Thank you.


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2009Apr/0062.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/04/23-minutes

Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142


      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                      TAG Telcon, April 23, 2009

23 Apr 2009

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/23-tagmem-irc


          Dan Connolly, Larry Masinter, Noah Mendelsohn, Ashok
          Malhotra, Henry Thompson, Jonathan Rees

          Tim, Raman

          John Kemp

          Noah Mendelsohn



     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Convene
         2. [5]Minutes of April 16
         3. [6]Comments on POWDER - DanC
         4. [7]HTML
         5. [8]XMLVersioning-41 (ISSUE-41).
         6. [9]New Unschedled Item --- Geolocation, privacy policies
         7. [10]Next Week's Call
     * [11]Summary of Action Items

   <masinter> I muted

   <scribe> scribenick: Ashok

   <scribe> scribe: Ashok


   <masinter> I'm not available next week

   Noah: I will not be available next Thu. Can someone else chair?

   Regrets from Noah, Larry for April 30

   Tentatively, there will be a telcon April 30 with DanC in chair, but
   see below.

Minutes of April 16

   Larry: They are fine.

   RESOLUTION: Minutes of April 16 approved

Comments on POWDER - DanC

   <DanC> my comment on POWDER test materials:


   DanC: I ran into 404s trying to use their tests
   ... They are thinking about PR so their test material shd be shiny.

   <DanC> . [13]http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-test/#grddl
   .HT: I get a page

     [13] http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-test/#grddl



   <noah> Yes, I get an XML tree

   ht: Browser says cannot open

   Noah: My browser opens it

   <DanC> .

     [15] http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-test/tests/grddl_tests/powder002.xml

   Noah: It get something ....

   <DanC> now see grddl service: [16]http://www.w3.org/2007/08/grddl/

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2007/08/grddl/

   Dan, HT, Noah Going thru the POWDER tests

   <jar> view source gives you

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder

   DanC: Basically, there is nothing ... either the GRDDL service is
   not working or their tests are busted
   ... I cannot see that their tests work
   ... Some options:

   <DanC> (1) TAG endorses Dan's comment, based on self-describing web

   <DanC> (2) nothing formal, but thanks for walking us thru it


   <Zakim> masinter, you wanted to suggest new topic on GeoLocation /
   GeoPriv privacy issues

   <jar> (3) TAG endorses Dan's comment [not based on finding, but
   based on general principle that GRDDL should work]

   <noah> I'm curious what's the precedent here? It's either "this is a
   particular SDW issue"

   <noah> or are we going to chase every 404 or broken GRDDL link

   ht: I'm with jar

   Ashok: I'm with jar

   Noah: Closer to concur

   Larry: Concur

   <masinter> to be *really* honest, I don't really understand why
   GRDDL tests are important

   <DanC> PROPOSED: to endorse Dan's comment that we can't get the
   POWER GRDDL tests ( [18]http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-test/#grddl ) to
   work, and to ask the POWDER WG to fix what's braken or explain how
   we're doing it wrong.

     [18] http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-test/#grddl

   HT Seconds

   No discussion. Larry abstains

   <DanC> ACTION: DanC to notify the POWDER WG [recorded in

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/04/23-minutes#action01

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-262 - Notify the POWDER WG [on Dan
   Connolly - due 2009-04-30].

   <noah> Larry, I think something resembling an answer to your
   question is in
   ection and especially seciton 5.2


   <masinter> groups shouldn't do broken things, of course, but why
   this one is important for the TAG to comment on, isn't clear.

   RESOLUTION: Endorse Dan's comment that we can't get the POWER GRDDL
   tests ( [21]http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-test/#grddl ) to work, and
   to ask the POWDER WG to fix what's borken or explain how we're doing
   it wrong.

     [21] http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-test/#grddl




   Web Addresses in HTML5

   <DanC> more recent draft:
   [23]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/href/draft-ietf.html <-

     [23] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/href/draft-ietf.html

   Noah: DanC formatted for IETF

   DanC: From the San Francisco mtg

   <DanC> "This specification defines the term Web address, "

   <noah> DC: San Francisco meeting suggests Web Address -> Hypertext

   <DanC> [[ Still outstanding is the suggestion to change from "Web

   <DanC> to "Hypertext References".

   <DanC> ]]

   This uses web address -- the earlier usage was Hypertext Refererence

   LM: Hoping this will replace IRI spec
   ... I understand why we have 2 specs ... I'm unhappy if there would
   be 3

   <DanC> "good interim stage" , yes, that's where I feel we are

   <noah> I think we need to note that Larry is suggesting that having
   this spec and IRI is one too many.

   HT: If authors of this specs agree w/you we have 2 groups planning
   to replace 3987... not good

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask whether this is just too many specs,
   or whether there are really 3 sets of rules according to context

   Noah: Larry implies there are 2 sets of usecases and 3 specs ... not
   a good situation
   ... URI not suitable for Chinese etc. IRI to replace some usages of

   <DanC> (ht, I'm sympathetic to LMM's suggestion to expand the scope
   of my draft to obsolete RFC2987, but I boggle/tremble at the size of
   the task.)

   Noah: HTML folks looking at removing leading and trailing spaces

   HT: IRI spec was meant to be what people type

   <DanC> noah, to whom was your question directed?

   <noah> Anyone who knows the answer (he says perhaps unhelpfully)

   <DanC> unhelpfully indeed.

   <noah> Sorry

   <noah> I was just curious if I was either missing something obvious,
   or perhaps pointing out a clear distinction in the goals of the
   spec. I suggest you ignore my question and go back to the q

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask which IETF area director, if any, is
   supervising the RFC3987bis effort

   Larry: URI/IRI change was a way of managing versioning situation

   HT: Is there an area director working with 3987bis

   <ht> DanC, sorry -- yes, of necessity there is an area Director, but
   I don' t know who it is

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to ask DanC what he sees the relationship of
   this draft RFC to 3987 and 3987-bis is

   Larry: W3C shd not publish docs that are conflict with how
   international domain names are beiing defined

   <masinter> ((sorry))

   <masinter> has anyone asked Martin / Michel ?

   <Zakim> ht2, you wanted to explain about the LEIRI note

   HT: Already been a parallel effort within W3C ... A number of XML
   specs have spaces in BNF for "web addresses"
   ... e.g. system identifiers, namespace names,
   ... most of them copy from Xlink how to turn string to URI

   <noah> Ah, now I know what LEIRI is. Knew about the effort, just
   didn't recognize the latest initialism

   HT: There were several copies of these bullet points that were
   almost identical
   ... so we (Core) thought we wd publish a 1 page spec ... after
   discussion thought this wd be better in IRIbis

   <DanC> (noah, who's the shepherd for this IRIEverywhere issue?
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27 )

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27

   HT: what this did was define Legacy Extended IRI
   ... saying there were addreses that did not match IRI production
   (contained spaces, etc.)

   <DanC> (I think it's expecting too much for the scribe and the
   meeting to get this story orally; I'd appreciate if HT would accept
   an action to tell the story in email to www-tag)

   HT: Major difference between thais draft and LEIRI note was char

   <DanC> ACTION: HT summarize LEIRIs and "4 specs" in mail to www-tag
   [recorded in

     [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/04/23-minutes#action02

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-263 - Summarize LEIRIs and "4 specs" in
   mail to www-tag [on Henry S. Thompson - due 2009-04-30].

   <DanC> [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27

   DanC: I consider my action done.

   HT: What happens next?

   <DanC> [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/27

   <DanC> close ACTION-253

   <trackbot> ACTION-253 Brief the TAG on progress on \"web addresses
   in HTML\" draft closed

   <noah> The chair wishes to remind himself that issue 27 is indeed a
   much better header for future discussion of this than the current

   Larry: How to coordinate these efforts?
   ... don't know how to help

   Noah: Would TAG intervention help with LEIRI spec

   Larry: Bemoans situation! Says it's impt for TAG to work on this

   Noah: Has someone compared specs and figured out what they provide
   ... That would be a god service from the TAG

   DanC: Let's see what HT writes
   ... would like to keep this on the front burner

   Noah: We will schedule discussion next week ... or soon after HT's

   <DanC> +1 not do more on IRIEverwhere-27 next week

   Noah: Let's not discuss next week as Larry will not be there

   <DanC> ht, like this?

     [29] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/href/draft-ietf.html

   <jar> action-259

XMLVersioning-41 (ISSUE-41).

   <DanC> action-259?

   <trackbot> ACTION-259 -- Larry Masinter to kick off discussion of
   versioning principles to apply to HTML, engage jonathan and henry.
   -- due 2009-04-23 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/259

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/259

   Noah: Can we talk abt Action 260?

   makes 260 pending review

     [31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Apr/0042.html

   jar: I sent mail and Larry responded

   <DanC> (all this process gunk just gets in the way; wouldn't it be
   more straightforward to say "versioning, jonathan, you were going to
   do X; how is that going?" )

   <jar> note to minutes editor: make sure my 'makes pending review'
   comment refers to 260, not 259. thanks.

   Larry: Please respond to issue

   <DanC> From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>

   <DanC> To: www-tag@w3.org WG <www-tag@w3.org>

   <DanC> Subject: Versioning and HTML

   <DanC> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:14:46 -0700 (13:14 CDT)

   DanC: What shd we reply to?


     [32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Apr/0045.html

   Larry: email did not ask specific questions. I will send out new
   email with questions.

   <DanC> ACTION-259 due next week

   <trackbot> ACTION-259 Kick off discussion of versioning principles
   to apply to HTML, engage jonathan and henry. due date now next week

   Noah: Versioning touches so many things ... started with XML
   versioning .... now talking abt HTML versioning
   ... can we close jar's action?

   <masinter> "Flame on language verisoning and multiplexing"

   <masinter> wasn't really a flame


     [33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Apr/0042.html

   DanC: I think action is done

   <DanC> "Flame on language versioning and multiplexing"

     [34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Apr/0042.html

   Noah: Encourage TAG to read note and then schedule discussion

   <masinter> when there are action items to "send email to start a
   discussion", do other TAG members need a reminder to discuss

   <noah> I'm trying to figure out whether enough TAG members have
   already read to allow discussion now, or whether I need to schedule
   later. Still a bit confused.

   <ht> [35]http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200904/msg00033.html

     [35] http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200904/msg00033.html

   <masinter> <Doctype HTML> for example is a question

   <masinter> "if HTML5 becomes a Rec and we realize we did something
   poorly we will cause rampant compatibility problems if we change
   implementations. "

   <masinter> what should HTML working group do to keep bad things from

   jar: I keep hoping someone will apply these ideas .... you could use
   this framework to analyze latest proposal from Google.

   <masinter> "There are a whole bunch of versioning mechanism that
   will address that but also cause their own problems.

   Noah: We need a shepherd for this issue

   <masinter> I'm willing to shepherd but can't do it for the next week

   <jar> Example phenomena to which to apply the framework: RDFa in
   HTML4/5; "canonical" link type. Identify game, players, payoffs

   Larry: I can shepherd this issue
   ... we can rename issue

   <DanC> (renaming and splitting has happened before. I'd like a TAG
   decision to rename, and of course it takes a TAG decision to split,
   since that involves making a new issue.)

   Noah: Let's close Action 260
   ... Action 259

   <DanC> close action-260

   <trackbot> ACTION-260 Review and post the email exchange he had with
   Larry on versioning about 1-2 months ago closed

   Larry: I will refine my questions

   <DanC> action-259: update tracker description while you're at it

   <trackbot> ACTION-259 Kick off discussion of versioning principles
   to apply to HTML, engage jonathan and henry. notes added

New Unschedled Item --- Geolocation, privacy policies

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to talk about shepherding

   Ashok: PLING has been tracking this with low effort

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to say yes, I'm aware... I was briefed by
   W3C team contact and then spoke briefly with IETF WG chair and to
   suggest John K. is likely to be watching

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask what exactly TAG would do, and why

   DanC: Talks abt interaction with folks on this issue

   Noah: Why aren't the WG s capable of handing this?

   Larry: Nor sure this is a TAG issue

   Noah: Is there a particular issue?

   <noah> Larry, are you wanting an action to track followup on this?

   <masinter> sure, that's fine

   <noah> AM: Thomas Roessler offered to make suggestions on how TAG
   could help

   <masinter> I wonder if this is a 'use case' for TAG work on
   security. I'm not interested in the TAG weighing in on the
   particular issue so much as how security and privacy fit into web

   <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note one particular IETF draft and to
   note [36]http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-geopriv-lo-sec-05

     [36] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-geopriv-lo-sec-05

   <noah> Ah, so there's a proposal that the W3C geolocation API should
   be changed.

   Ashok: TLR was supposed to send mail to DanC re how TAG may help
   with priivacy/sercurity etc.

   <DanC> "

   <DanC> An Architecture for Location and Location Privacy in Internet

   <DanC> Applications

   <DanC> draft-barnes-geopriv-lo-sec-05

   <DanC> "

   <DanC> (ashok, send mail to tlr and me, cc www-tag, perhaps?)

   <noah> ACTION: Ashok to draft agenda item for upcoming telcon
   discussion of geolocation and privacy [recorded in

     [37] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/04/23-minutes#action03

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-264 - Draft agenda item for upcoming
   telcon discussion of geolocation and privacy [on Ashok Malhotra -
   due 2009-04-30].

Next Week's Call



   <DanC> 7 May

   <masinter> and follow up

   RESOLUTION: Next week's call cancelled

   Next call May 7, 2009

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Ashok to draft agenda item for upcoming telcon
   discussion of geolocation and privacy [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: DanC to notify the POWDER WG [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: HT summarize LEIRIs and "4 specs" in mail to www-tag
   [recorded in

     [39] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/04/23-minutes#action03
     [40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/04/23-minutes#action01
     [41] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/04/23-minutes#action02

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [42]scribe.perl version 1.133
    ([43]CVS log)
    $Date: 2009/04/30 17:17:31 $

     [42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 18:47:17 UTC