- From: Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 16:28:22 +0200
- To: "tag" <www-tag@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <C822EE96.10E5E%daniel.appelquist@vodafone.com>
Draft minutes from last week are at
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/20-minutes and as text below.
Dan
--
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Technical Architecture Group Teleconference
20 May 2010
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-irc
Attendees
Present
Dan Connolly, Jonathan Rees, Larry Masinter, John Kemp, Henry
Thompson, Daniel Appelquist, Ashok Malhotra, Noah Mendelsohn
Regrets
Tim Berners-Lee, T.V. Raman
Chair
Noah Mendelsohn
Scribe
Daniel Appelquist
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Convene, review minutes and agenda
2. [5]Approve minutes 13-May
3. [6]F2F Logistics
4. [7]Overdue Actions
5. [8]tracking security issues in/near HTML 5
6. [9]Overdue actions
7. [10]Agenda Planning for F2F
8. [11]Sniffing
9. [12]Next week's agenda.
* [13]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 20 May 2010
<scribe> Scribe: Dan
<scribe> ScribeNick: DKA
<DanC> Scribe: Dan A.
<noah> zakim troubles, trying again
Convene, review minutes and agenda
<johnk> work for me
Approve minutes 13-May
+1
<DanC> RESOLVED: to approve
[14]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/13-minutes
[14] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/05/13-minutes
F2F Logistics
DanC: Yves will be attending in my stead.
Noah: I was aware - and appreciate that.
DKA: Dan Do you want to attend via video?
Noah: My view of the video - if anyone wants it we can do it. I
remain nervous about the Ash cloud. At this point we should assume
we're all going. If that happens, I can fall back to video from w3c.
Overdue Actions
Noah: We have a lot of overdue actions. I'd like to go over these
with emphasis on the ones from people who haven't been on recent
calls.
ACTION-342?
<trackbot> ACTION-342 -- Noah Mendelsohn to ask the TAG again about
more formally tracking security issues in HTML5 -- due 2010-05-18 --
OPEN
<trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/342
[15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/342
Noah: Shall we close this?
HT: Jonathan?
Larry: What do you mean when you say "in HTML5"?
Danc: I interepreted it as "in and around html5" - so e.g. Strict
transport security.
<masinter> there are things bouncing between W3C HTML WG, WEBAPPS,
IETF hard to track
Noah: This action is a bit broad - I'd like to close it or
restructure it so I can track progress.
Larry: For example, sniffing has security implications. How broad is
the scope of security? There are a lot of design questions that
might have security implications.
... e.g. Origin header, origin calculations, http extension...
... we need to scope it.
<masinter> how to track this without scoping it?
tracking security issues in/near HTML 5
Noah: Suggestions: we could appoint someone who is going to track
security issues with html5 - and put this under the banner of
"architecture of webapps"
<johnk_> notes: [16]http://www.w3.org/Security/wiki/Main_Page
[16] http://www.w3.org/Security/wiki/Main_Page
<johnk_> what is missing from that wiki?
<johnk_> (if anything)
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to perhaps rephrase the question as: "are
the existing collaboration mechanics sufficient? or should we try to
get some security review thingy set up?"
DanC: Are the existing collaboration mechanisms sufficient? Or
should we try to get some kind of security review set up.
Larry: I don't have a strong opinion.
DanC: that suggests closing the action.
+1 to closing it unless we have something specific to pin this on...
<masinter> I'm uncomfortable there are things that aren't being
tracked, but I don't have anything specific that I know needs to be
tracked.
Overdue actions
Noah: ok let's close this - and we can [pick it up in the f2f]
ACTION-347?
<trackbot> ACTION-347 -- Jonathan Rees to research 303 caching
change in HTTPbis -- due 2010-01-05 -- CLOSED
<trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/347
[17] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/347
ACTION-427?
<trackbot> ACTION-427 -- John Kemp to read 4 distributed
extensibility proposals and summarize them w.r.t. proposals TAG has
discussed to date -- due 2010-05-13 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427
[18] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427
<masinter> re "security", perhaps bringing this up in W3C Core
Mission issues?
<DanC> action-347: overtaken by action-427
<trackbot> ACTION-347 Research 303 caching change in HTTPbis notes
added
ACTION-357?
<trackbot> ACTION-357 -- Henry S. Thompson to elaborate the DPD
proposal to address comments from #xmlnames and tag f2f discussion
of 2009-12-10, particularly wrt integration with XML specs and wrt
motivation -- due 2010-05-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357
[19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357
Henry: I think we should close it.
Noah: any objections?
[none noted]
Larry: back to security - I'm fine with closing the action - the
issue of how W3C deals with security issues - I'd bring that up in
the "core mission" discussion.
<ht> I will try to get myself up-to-date on the state of the various
alternative extensibility/namespace proposals that were on the HTML5
agenda before the XML/HTML call next friday
<masinter> action-357?
<trackbot> ACTION-357 -- Henry S. Thompson to elaborate the DPD
proposal to address comments from #xmlnames and tag f2f discussion
of 2009-12-10, particularly wrt integration with XML specs and wrt
motivation -- due 2010-05-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357
[20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/357
Noah: Agreement to close action-357.
<DanC> close action-357
<trackbot> ACTION-357 Elaborate the DPD proposal to address comments
from #xmlnames and tag f2f discussion of 2009-12-10, particularly
wrt integration with XML specs and wrt motivation closed
ACTION-390?
<trackbot> ACTION-390 -- Daniel Appelquist to review ISSUE-58 and
suggest next steps, due 2010-03-03 -- due 2010-05-18 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390
[21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390
<masinter> I don't understand what problem this is supposed to
address
<masinter> issue opened almost 3 years ago... is there really a
problem?
<noah> I think this was about things like W3C servers getting
overloaded with requests for popular resources
DKA: I will try to make some progress on this for next week.
ACTION-410?
<trackbot> ACTION-410 -- Larry Masinter to let the TAG know that the
IRIEverywhere plan in HTML WG went as planned -- due 2010-04-13 --
OPEN
<trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410
[22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410
Noah: should we close this?
Larry: ah . ammm ...nnnnn
<DanC> action-58: DKA intends to look at it this week w.r.t. whether
it should be on the ftf agenda
<trackbot> ACTION-58 fix .htaccess in 2007/09 so that .owl files get
the right mime type notes added
Larry: I have nothing to tell the tag at this time.
... Maybe postpone the action?
Noah: Maybe edit the title - or add a note with status?
<jar> action-390 due in 1 week
<trackbot> ACTION-390 Review ISSUE-58 and suggest next steps, due
2010-03-03 due date now in 1 week
Larry: I am not ready to report on it right now.
<DanC> action-58: due +1 week
<trackbot> ACTION-58 fix .htaccess in 2007/09 so that .owl files get
the right mime type notes added
<DanC> action-410 due 1 Nov
<trackbot> ACTION-410 Let the TAG know that the IRIEverywhere plan
in HTML WG went as planned due date now 1 Nov
ACTION-411?
<trackbot> ACTION-411 -- Larry Masinter to take the next step on
announcing IRIEverywhere -- due 2010-04-13 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/411
[23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/411
Larry: My concern is that my plan for IRI everywhere wasn't
sufficient. There are some other documents that might also need
updating.
<DanC> action-410?
<trackbot> ACTION-410 -- Larry Masinter to let the TAG know whether
and when the IRIEverywhere plan in HTML WG went as planned -- due
2010-11-01 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410
[24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/410
DanC: We resolved the issue and Larry was to announce the
resolution.
Larry: I'm not ready to do that until things are clearer.
Noah: Withdraw this action?
Danc: I'd like to put it in "pending review".
Larry: I'll come back next week.
ACTION-415?
<trackbot> ACTION-415 -- John Kemp to edit ftf minutes day 1
(Wednesday 24 March) -- due 2010-04-02 -- CLOSED
<trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/415
[25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/415
ACTION-414?
<trackbot> ACTION-414 -- Henry S. Thompson to prepare a draft
agenda, including goals and means, for a proposed afternoon session
with invited guests, and circulate for discussion prior to a
decision, on the subject of addressing the persistence of domain
names -- due 2010-05-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/414
[26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/414
<DanC> action-411: LMM says this isn't going quite as expected...
we'll discuss soonish; mail from Larry would help
<trackbot> ACTION-411 Take the next step on announcing IRIEverywhere
notes added
Noah: Will we want an afternoon free at the f2f?
<DanC> action-414 due monday
<trackbot> ACTION-414 Prepare a draft agenda, including goals and
means, for a proposed afternoon session with invited guests, and
circulate for discussion prior to a decision, on the subject of
addressing the persistence of domain names due date now monday
Henry: [Yes at maximum.]
ACTION-427?
<trackbot> ACTION-427 -- John Kemp to read 4 distributed
extensibility proposals and summarize them w.r.t. proposals TAG has
discussed to date -- due 2010-05-13 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427
[27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/427
<DanC> . action-427 due 6 June
John: Haven't completed. Hope to have written something by the time
the f2f comes around.
Noah: let's block space for ACTION-427 at the f2f .
<DanC> action-427 due 6 June
<trackbot> ACTION-427 Read 4 distributed extensibility proposals and
summarize them w.r.t. proposals TAG has discussed to date due date
now 6 June
John: Yes.
ACTION-340?
<trackbot> ACTION-340 -- John Kemp to summarize recent discussion
around XHR and UMP -- due 2010-05-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340
[28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340
<johnk_> ACTION-340?
<trackbot> ACTION-340 -- John Kemp to summarize recent discussion
around XHR and UMP -- due 2010-05-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340
[29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340
Noah: My assumption was to schedule it for next week.
Agenda Planning for F2F
Noah: I want input from you on the f2f agenda.
<DanC>
[30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/06/f2factionplan_nomarkup.html
[30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/06/f2factionplan_nomarkup.html
<johnk_> yes
Noah: First 2 items both critically important: getting writing done
on "architecture of web applications"
... We need to do more substantive reviews of more substantive
pieces of writing.
... Raman has proposed an initiative - regarding XML-HTML
architectural issues..... The TAG may wish to get involved...
... We could try to get Raman on the phone at some point - though
time zones are bad.
... good overall goals?
+1
<johnk_> +1 to high-level goals
Noah: We have a large number of actions - many of which are open and
promising some progress for (or after) the f2f. Have sorted the
actions to relate them to the priorities...
<DanC> (same actions are in the Web Applications section of
[31]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-
09?bygroup )
[31]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-09?bygroup
Ashok: [on ACTION-355] I will have something. I'm writing something
for ACTION-430. I'd like to speak to John about ACTION-416.
<DanC> action-430: AM is doing some writing; expects something short
for the ftf
<trackbot> ACTION-430 Propose a plan for his contributions to
section 5: Client-side state notes added
Noah: ACTION-355?
... Larry - you have ACTION-382, ACTION-424, ACTION-425...
<DanC> ACTION-355: JK is trying to get some work done between
day-job obligations; won't be clear which stuff he can manage for
the ftf until ~28May
<trackbot> ACTION-355 Explore the degree to which AWWW and
associated findings tell the interaction story for Web Applications
notes added
Larry: First should be pending review - ACTION-424.
<DanC> (note
[32]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-
09?bygroup is always current ;-)
[32]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?duebefore=2010-06-09?bygroup
ACTION-425?
<trackbot> ACTION-425 -- Larry Masinter to draft updated MIME
finding(s), with help from DanA, based on www-tag discussion -- due
2010-05-31 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [33]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/425
[33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/425
<DanC> (hmm... rather
[34]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?bygroup&duebefore=
2010-06-09 )
[34]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/agenda?bygroup&duebefore=2010-06-09
Noah: If you're going to do some writing - should I schedule it for
the f2f?
Larry: yes.
ACTION-382?
<trackbot> ACTION-382 -- Larry Masinter to review Web Arch web
material and make proposals for changes or TAG action -- due
2010-05-31 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [35]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/382
[35] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/382
Larry: I need an hour on the phone with Ian...
<DanC> action-382: LMM spent some time with Ian Jacobs but hasn't
finished what he was thinking about
<trackbot> ACTION-382 Review Web Arch web material and make
proposals for changes or TAG action notes added
ACTION-412?
<trackbot> ACTION-412 -- Dan Connolly to try the clarification
question, blog item, or wiki approach to metadata-in-uris vs CSRF --
due 2010-05-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [36]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/412
[36] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/412
DanC: Yes.
Noah: [going over structure of remaining f2f actions...]
John: I think ACTION-340 is related to webapps arch...
Noah: I'll move that up to category 1.
<DanC> action-340: JK/NM agree this should be moved up to the "yes,
for ftf discussion" list
<trackbot> ACTION-340 summarize recent discussion around XHR and UMP
notes added
DKA: Should we put on the schedule a brainstorm or something
regarding the structure of the WebApps Arch?
... E.e. the structure?
Noah: Would you like to do something in advance on this?
Larry: I like the idea - if there's something you think is important
- to prepare a structured discussion. This is an area where getting
someone to lead the discussion is a good way to raise it.
<DanC> . ACTION DKA: prepare discussion of structure of what we want
to say[?] about web apps
<DanC> . ACTION DKA: prepare discussion of structure of what we want
to say[?] about web apps; perhaps sketch a table of contents
DKA: I'm happy to take an action.
Noah: We have a couple of ToCs...
... The TAG has not reached consensus that what we are trying to
produce is a "document."
<masinter> I'd welcome a concrete proposal, good way to get
discussion
Noah: Reach out to people by email and get feedback.
<scribe> ACTION: DKA to prepare discussion of structure of what we
want to do about web apps architecture... [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
[37] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01
<trackbot> Created ACTION-434 - Prepare discussion of structure of
what we want to do about web apps architecture... [on Daniel
Appelquist - due 2010-05-27].
Sniffing
ACTION-386?
<trackbot> ACTION-386 -- Larry Masinter to review draft-barth-sniff
and send comments, cc TAG -- due 2010-04-08 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [38]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386
[38] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386
Larry: Things have moved on... I've tried to get others to review. I
did a review of version 3. I don't think version 4-5 took most of my
review comments into account. I want other parties (other than
browser vendors - e.g. firewall vendors) to take a look.
... so far they haven't post their comments back.
Noah: What should we do with the action?
Larry: open for suggestions...
ACTION-387?
<trackbot> ACTION-387 -- Henry S. Thompson to review JK/NM's stuff
on sniffing, authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
[39]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html --
due 2010-05-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW
[39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
<trackbot> [40]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387
[40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387
Henry: Not likely to take this much further before the f2f. We could
revisit it with Yves in the room.
Larry: We could ask Yves to prepare to discuss this issue
specifically. It's part of the W3C-IETF liaison.
... I disagree with decoupling [the barth mime types document] from
this.
DanC: Another way to look at this: We'd like the HTML and HTTP specs
to be specific. The HTML spec cites the Barth draft normatively. The
HTTP spec doesn't acknowledge. The HTML spec says "sniff", the HTTP
spec says "don't."
John: Not any more - the HTTP spec is vague on it now. I come back
to the f2f - we came to the conclusion that sniffing is bad and you
shouldn't do it - however in practice people do do it. We should see
if we can acknowledge the reality of sniffing without condoning it.
... At that meeting we agreed that the Barth draft represented a
[good?] single algorithm for sniffing.
... Larry didn't like referencing that draft.
... But what's our general position?
Larry: I have a position but I'm not sure anyone else does.
John: I have a position: i believe the work on "authoritative
metadata" and "Self-describing web" is good.
... think the sniffing draft is a step forward.
... I'd like to understand how [Larry thinks] it's not a step
forward.
Larry: it's one step forward 3 steps backward.
<DanC> (how is the HTTP spec vague? "Such recipients SHOULD NOT
override the specified type it there are known security risks and
they SHOULD provide for users to disable such heuristic Content-Type
detection.")
<noah>
[41]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
[41] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
Noah: Not comfortable with John's paraphrase.
<noah> Such incorrect labeling of content is contrary to Web
architecture, and it
<noah> undermines many of the valuable Web characteristics described
by this
<noah> finding.
<noah> Nonetheless, in part because such mislabeled content is
common, certain
<noah> browsers and other user agents have been coded to guess or
"sniff" the
<noah> intended content type, particularly for responses that are
explicitly
<noah> typed as text/plain.
<noah> Such sniffing breaks the chain of accountability
<noah> described in this finding, making it more difficult for a
user to hold the
<noah> publisher responsible for a document's contents.
<noah> Other negative consequences of sniffing are described in the
<noah> [AuthoritativeMetadata].
<noah> For example, "sniffing" can also expose the user
<noah> agent to security vulnerabilities; these can to some degree
be minimized
<noah> by using more secure algorithms, such as the ones described
in
<noah> [BarthSniff].
Noah: [It doesn't] endorse BarthSniff.
<DanC> (I still struggle with " many servers ... serve incorrect
Content-types". what the server spits out is correct by definition,
from the architectural point of view.)
Larry: this is part of the discussion on mime types. What I don't
like is that the mime type labeling is incorrect.
<DanC> (perhaps "serve misconfigured mime types")
Noah: I understand that once it's on the wire it's by definition
correct. I'm saying - back before it's served, if I tell my server
to serve a jpeg as tex/plain that that is incorrect.
... people are negligent are setting the switches... [configuration
of mime types].
... or people are unable to set the switches.
+1 to Noah -
Larry: I doubt that.
Noah: [chronology of mime type pain on the web]
... USer agent guys are committed to sniffing because [of a
perception] that the servers are [often] misconfigured.
Larry: I'm not sure I believe the story.
<Zakim> ht_home, you wanted to address the "do we have a position"
question
<ht_home>
[42]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.htm
l
[42] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.html
Henry: i am in the same general space that john is - our existing
findings are good, they can be improved, and Barth is a step
forward.
<Zakim> noah, you wanted to talk about what proposed text says
<masinter> some steps forward and some steps backward
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to sympathize with larry in a couple ways
(1) the future is longer than the past, and (2) what suggests the 1
algo...
DanC: Today I sympathize with Larry - First of all, the future is
longer than the past. We should try to get things to be better. On
converging on one algorithm...
<noah> I'm just a little frustrated: we had an action to review some
text. Henry decided he'd prefer not, which is ok, but I think the
first question is: does anyone else want to review the proposed
text?
<masinter> i just checked again, and sniffing PDF is really causing
a lot of bugs, the browsers should stop doing it
DanC: [whenever a new content type comes along the same forces will
head toward a new algorithm]
Larry: Sniffing PDF is a bug. There are no reasonable use cases
where PDF files are mislabeled that should be sniffed. The proposal
in the document should be removed.
Noah: there was an action on Henry to look at particular text that
has been drafted. Should we kill off ACTION-387?
DanC: I'm interested to see fixes [but none to propose].
Noah: if the incorrect bit could be replaced would you view the rest
as a step forward?
DanC: This week I don't think we should endorse the barth draft.
Noah: I don't view it as an endorsement.
DanC: It "endorses" it as "accepted and securre"
Larry: there's nothing in [barth
... ] that is is secure.
Noah: John - we're now hearing substantive concerns with the text...
should we leave that as it is?
Henry: No! [suggests putting it on the back burner]
... You think it's good, John thinks it's good, DanC thinks it good
except for one word, I [think it's good].
John: We don't have to approve it or endorse it...
<DanC> (I can live with endorsing the barth draft; I don't prefer
it, though)
Larry: I don't think there's an algorithm that's generally accepted
as approved.
<masinter> yet
John: they made a change in http bis that loosened the language
there. They relaxed the text and made it more vague (than 1.1). If
we loosen things up - then we are making sniffing a little more
endorsed. That changes the dynamics.
... If there is an algorithm that is secure and accepted then we
should endorse it
Henry: I agree that the current http draft went too far. We've
agreed that they need to add something that says "sniffing is bad" -
I don't agree that we have to get them to do anything at all with
respect to barth. What could be achievable could be to get the
http-bis dra
... aft to say "sniffing is bad."
<DanC> action-370>
<DanC> action-370?
<trackbot> ACTION-370 -- Henry S. Thompson to hST to send a
revised-as-amended version of
[43]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.html to
the HTTP bis list on behalf of the TAG -- due 2010-05-17 --
PENDINGREVIEW
[43] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.html
<trackbot> [44]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/370
[44] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/370
<ht_home>
[45]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.htm
l is my attempt to do 370
[45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0493.html
<masinter> i like
[46]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0659.htm
l
[46] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0659.html
<masinter> Yves proposed text for HTTPBIS
Noah: We could leave a note in the action and put if off...
<ht_home> That's what I would like to discuss at the f2f, with Yves
ACTION-387?
<trackbot> ACTION-387 -- Henry S. Thompson to review JK/NM's stuff
on sniffing, authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
[47]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html --
due 2010-05-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW
[47] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
<trackbot> [48]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387
[48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/387
<DanC> (in sum, I suggest: close action-386 as lmm did it. leave
action-370 as pending review and take it up with yves in London, and
leave 387 pending review for London discussion too.)
Henry: let's talk about ACTION-370 [with Yves] in the f2f.
<DanC> action-387: LMM, DC expressed concerns about "incorrect"
<trackbot> ACTION-387 Review JK/NM's stuff on sniffing,
authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
[49]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
notes added
[49] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note Yves's latest offering and to and
to
Noah: Proposal on ACTION-387: we will update it to have a due date a
few months and add notes that it is being put off to await progreess
on action-370 and when that happens we will address concerns about
the word "incorrect" and also the issue of security.
Larry: I'd like to include in the discussion - combine the
discussion of ACTION-424 and ACTION-425 with this.
Noah: We need to get at the more fundamental "What do mime types
mean?"
Henry: I think it's entirely reasonable to discuss this [at the f2f]
<DanC> action-424: LMM prefers to discuss this before 387, 370 at
the London ftf
<trackbot> ACTION-424 Start discussion on www-tag about additional
finding/web architecture around MIME types in web architecture,
updating existing findings notes added
Noah: I'm going to make a note on ACTION-387 to discuss it [at the
f2f] along with ACTION-370.
<noah> Note that Larry would like 370 to be discussed after 424/425
<DanC> action-387 due 7 Jun
<trackbot> ACTION-387 Review JK/NM's stuff on sniffing,
authoritative metadata, self-describing web, incl.
[50]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
due date now 7 Jun
[50] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0025.html
ACTION-386?
<trackbot> ACTION-386 -- Larry Masinter to review draft-barth-sniff
and send comments, cc TAG -- due 2010-04-08 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [51]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386
[51] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386
DanC: Done to my satisfaction.
Noah: My sense is let's close.
close ACTIOn-386
<trackbot> ACTION-386 Review draft-barth-sniff and send comments, cc
TAG closed
Next week's agenda.
Noah: HTML language reference and media types; ACTION-340; XML-HTTP
request and UMP - CORS security
<masinter> i'll be here on 27th
<masinter> send me email reminding me
<DanC> sending, larry
Ajourned.
<DanC> lmm, confirm you can scribe next week, pls?
<masinter> yes
<noah> Larry, can you scribe next week please?
<noah> thank you!
trackbot, make minutes
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: DKA to prepare discussion of structure of what we want
to do about web apps architecture... [recorded in
[52]http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
[52] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-tagmem-minutes.html#action01
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [53]scribe.perl version 1.135
([54]CVS log)
$Date: 2010/05/26 14:21:42 $
[53] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[54] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Wednesday, 26 May 2010 14:30:29 UTC