W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2011

draft minutes from 7/21

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:58:43 -0700
To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D05CB2F7A2B@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com>
(Thanks to Dan for helping with checkin logistics, my cvs setup was fragile.)

Anyway, draft minutes are:          http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/07/21-minutes.html
and plain text version below:



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

                               - DRAFT -

              Technical Architecture Group Teleconference

21 Jul 2011


      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/07/21-agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/07/21-tagmem-irc


          Masinter, JeniT, Peter_Linss, Yves_Lafon, Henry_Thompson,
          Ashok_Malhotra, Jonathan_Reese, Dan_Appelquist

          Tim_Berners-Lee, Noah_Mendelsohn

          Jeni Tennison and Dan Appelquist

          Larry Masinter


     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Approval of minutes 7/14
         2. [6]Administrative items (from Agenda)
         3. [7]4. Microdata/RDFa Relationship
         4. [8]HTML/XML Task Force
         5. [9]Proposed workshop on Future of (offline) Web
         6. [10]HTML5 Review
         7. [11]IETF Meeting
     * [12]Summary of Action Items

   <trackbot> Date: 21 July 2011

   <scribe> scribenick: Larry

   <scribe> scribe: Larry Masinter

Approval of minutes 7/14

   Larry & Jeni point out a couple of places in the minutes where it
   isn't clear who is talking -- probably scribe speaking as self

Administrative items (from Agenda)

   JeniT: reminder register for TPAC.
   ... next call August 4
   ... any other regrets?

   larry: might not make 4 august

   <JeniT> I won't make 4 August

   JeniT: Henry will put together local arrangement page for F2F

   Larry: . ACTION: Henry to put together local arrangements page ?

4. Microdata/RDFa Relationship

   JeniT: we sent a comment, they made two bugs, one on Microdata and
   one on RDFa, and the bug on microdata was just closed
   ... JeniT said in email she thought closing the bug was 'fine' and
   that it the task force would submit bugs


     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jul/0086.html

   JeniT: (recapping events in HTML and TAG)
   ... I agree that the recommendation to not do anything now but wait
   for the task force is the right decision.

   Henry: What you said didn't jive with what I read.
   ... My understanding was that if we didn't raise an issue we
   wouldn't have a chance to see any changes until the "next version".

   JeniT: *IF* we raise an issue, and then nothing happened, then it
   would be put off to the next version.

   Henry: If we do nothing we get an option at last call review?

   Yves: it is more of the role of the task force to raise issues and

   Larry: I think this is nonsense.
   ... Our comments remain whether or not there is a task force,
   whether or not the task force is sabotaged or people refuse to
   participate, the comment still remains.
   ... they're not actually responding to our comments, they give us
   some funny process with change proposals and schedules, but we've
   not gotten a response to our actual technical comment.

   JeniT: if we push back now we are in a worse position.

   Larry: we had a technical comment, we should get a technical
   response to our technical comment.

   HT: we hope that the task force is going to be the source of
   resolution to the issue.

   Larry: we're getting a "we won't respond to your comment unless the
   task force succeeds".

   Larry: I think they should respond to our technical comment, or
   promise to respond at some later day.

   <JeniT> [14]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13100#c11

     [14] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13100#c11

   Larry: for example, they could leave the bugs open pending the task
   force resolution.
   ... The bugs could actually be addressed now, without the task

   (discussion of alternatives)

   HT: highight paragraphs and say we expect to re-open these bugs.

   Larry: that isn't sufficient for me. I'd like the bugs to be visible
   during last call review as open.
   ... I would like the bugs to remain open while the task force is
   deliberating, to have them show as open rather than closed. Closing
   the bugs is misleading.

   HT: Noah could reply to HTML chairs that we'd like them to keep the
   bugs open
   ... I will draft something and post it into IRC later.

   Larry: the task force is just us trying to be helpful, but it's
   their responsibility to address the issues.

   jar: Who's responsibility is the formation of the task force?

   ((discussion of task force))

   <scribe> chair: DKA

HTML/XML Task Force

   Larry: Some push-back on scope from one of the task force members‚¶
   Worth talking about.
   ... Here, we have 2 incompatible things. What are the workflows that
   start off with one and end with another, the real difficulties?
   ... My expectation is that the task force report would summarise
   what the issues were.
   ... And explain why things are different and explore some of the
   possibilities of changing one or the other to make things better.
   ... E.g., HTML with upper case element names might improve

   Dan: it seemed to me that the report was pretty dismissive about the
   impact of polyglot, but my interpretation of when polyglot was
   useful was in systems that would be used by orgaizations where they
   would have the need to round trip HTML.
   ... the one sentence about 'limited applicability' seemed overly
   ... it did seem like the report reinforced the idea that "you can't
   fix this problem"...... where do we take things from there?

   Larry: I conjecture we should ask the task force to be more
   explicit, expand their report significantly⦠Verify that their
   charter is broader.

   Jeni: should they produce a more detailed review of the differences
   between HTML and XML?

   <jar_> ISSUE-67?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-67 -- HTML and XML Divergence -- open

   <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/67

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/67

   Larry: there was a thread on www-tag about "Revised HTML/XML Task
   Force Report"

   <jar_> ACTION-437?

   <trackbot> ACTION-437 -- Tim Berners-Lee to create a task force on
   XML / HTML convergence -- due 2011-06-01 -- CLOSED

   <trackbot> [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/437

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/437

   Dan: I can write some text to the tag mailing list about the place
   of polyglot (as a suggested input to the document) - it should be
   grounded in what our original call to the HTML working group about
   ... How can we communicate some of these ideas? Does it make sense
   to ask Norm to participate in the next TAG call?

   JAR: I was thinking the same thing.

   <DKA> . ACTION: Dan to ask Norm to participate in next TAG call
   regarding clarifying what the TAG wants out of the task force.

   <DKA> ACTION: Dan to ask Norm to participate in next TAG call
   regarding clarifying what the TAG wants out of the task force.
   recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2011/07/21-tagmem-irc]

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2011/07/21-tagmem-irc

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-584 - Ask Norm to participate in next TAG
   call regarding clarifying what the TAG wants out of the task force.
   [on Daniel Appelquist - due 2011-07-28].

   larry: i wrote on this thread what *I* would like to see, but do
   other TAG members agree they want those, or are these just me


     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jul/0026.html

  Dan: also we will discuss on the mailing list the points Larry has
   raised and use this as a agenda for our discussion with Norm on the
   4th (assuming he can make it).

   <JeniT> +1

   Larry, quoting: "Maybe I'm asking too much, but I was hoping that
   the report from a task force set up to work through xml-html
   convergence issues might give a better idea of how serious the
   problems with various approaches might be, to help inform decisions.
   Html pages that cannot be made polyglot..... are they rare? Common?
   Only happens with pages that also have significant problems in ogher

Proposed workshop on Future of (offline) Web Applications

   Dan: scope of workshop to include "web apps" and "offline operation"
   not just local storage

   <jar_> web app = 'runs in the browser' ?

   Dan: ((list of web application approaches .... implementation
   feedback from deployment of appcache that 'this isn't exactly what
   we need'))

HTML5 Review

   <DKA> action-341?

   <trackbot> ACTION-341 -- Yves Lafon to follow up with Thomas about
   security review activities for HTML5 -- due 2011-05-10 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/341

     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/341

  Yves: scheduled for Saturday

   <DKA> action-350?

   <trackbot> ACTION-350 -- Henry Thompson to revise
   based on feedback on www-tag and the feedback from TAG f2f
   2009-12-09 discussion -- due 2011-08-10 -- OPEN

     [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Oct/0075.html

   <trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/350

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/350

   <DKA> action-404?

   <trackbot> ACTION-404 -- Yves Lafon to track HTML WG ISSUE-27
   rel-ownership -- due 2011-04-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/404

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/404

   larry: rel-ownership is related to IETF and IANA issues

   <Zakim> ht, you wanted to show a draft of email to Noah for Paul

   HT: will post proposed draft:

   <ht> "Thanks for clarifying the process options.

   <ht> ...The TAG is not quite clear how to proceed. Your final

   <ht> ...("Since the TAG's plan appears to be to create a task

   <ht> ...comes close to what we would like, in that it makes clear
   that as

   <ht> ... and when the task force reports one or more Issues can be

   <ht> ... against bugs 13100 and 13101 [$1\47], [$1\47]. But from our
   perspective we

   <ht> ... would be happier if the Status of these bugs were such that

   <ht> ... showed up in searches of Open bugs during the life of the

   <ht> ... task force.

   <ht> In particular, it appears that if we don't want 13100 to be

   <ht> ... officially on 1 August, we have to either escalate (not

   <ht> ... at this point) or reopen (not appropriate at this point).
   Could you

   <ht> ... please arrange for the bugs to just remain unclosed until,
   based on

   <ht> ...the task force outcome, the TAG either reopens it,
   escalates, or

   <ht> ... accepts the _status quo_ and closes it? Fullscale closure

   <ht> misleading as long as a task force is actively pursuing the

   <ht> matter. . .

   <ht> [$1\47] [23]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13100

     [23] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13100

   <ht> [$1\47] [24]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13101

     [24] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13101

   <DKA> .RESOLVED send the above to Noah to send to Paul from the TAG.

   Larry: yes

   <DKA> RESOLUTION Send the above to Noah to send to Paul from the


IETF Meeting

   Larry: we have a product on MIME...
   ... if we want changes to MIME itself then we need to work with IETF
   - a tag finding isn't enough.

   <jar_> [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/


     [26] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-freed-media-type-regs-00

   we need to review the Freed document.

   My document has expired; we could update it but by itself it doesn't
   do anything.

   the Freed document updates the entire MIME registration document

   <JeniT> There's very little on fragment identifiers.

   Larry: My document was a requirements document to point out what was
   wrong. While the above (draft-freed-media-type-regs-00) updates the
   entire mime type reg process.

   Dan: Should we review draft-freed-media-type-regs-00 against your

   <Yves> yes fragment identifiers, issue of compound documents, clash
   between generic things (foo/* and +bar)

   <JeniT> yes

   larry: if we want to be effective, getting updates to the freed
   document seems to be the path.
   ... I'm interested - I would like to work with someone.

   <JeniT> I can look from a fragid lens, will try to write something
   up while I'm on holiday (1st 2 weeks of August)

   <DKA> .ACTION: Larry to meet with Yves prior to the IETF document to
   review this document.

   <DKA> ACTION: Larry to meet with Yves prior to the IETF document to
   review this draft-freed-media-type-regs-00. [recorded in

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2011/07/21-tagmem-irc

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-585 - Meet with Yves prior to the IETF
   document to review this draft-freed-media-type-regs-00. [on Larry
   Masinter - due 2011-07-28].

   Larry: IRI working group is meeting - they are making good progress.
   ... [summarizes] they are having a meeting next week. It's open. You
   can call in.

   ⦠we can carry TAG sentiment to it.


     [28] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/81/agenda.html


Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Dan to ask Norm to participate in next TAG call
   regarding clarifying what the TAG wants out of the task force.
   recorded in [29]http://www.w3.org/2011/07/21-tagmem-irc]
   [NEW] ACTION: Larry to meet with Yves prior to the IETF document to
   review this draft-freed-media-type-regs-00. [recorded in

     [29] http://www.w3.org/2011/07/21-tagmem-irc
     [30] http://www.w3.org/2011/07/21-tagmem-irc

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [31]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([32]CVS log)
    $Date: 2011/07/22 15:12:39 $

     [31] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [32] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Friday, 22 July 2011 15:59:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:39 UTC