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

Minutes for September 1 Telcon

From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 17:10:26 +0100
Message-Id: <2638970F-0BB7-424A-BBA6-CC68FF4CA7DC@jenitennison.com>
To: "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
Draft minutes for September 1 Telcon are at


and in text below.



                               - DRAFT -

              W3C TAG Teleconference of 1 September 2011

01 Sep 2011


      [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/01-agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-tagmem-irc


          Noah, Tim, Peter, Ashok, Yves, Jeni, Norm

          Dan, Henry, Larry

          Noah Mendelsohn

          Jeni Tennison


     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Approve minutes of prior meeting(s)
         2. [6]Administrative items
         3. [7]ISSUE-67 (HTML-XML-Divergence-67): HTML / XML
         4. [8]HTML5 Review: Microdata/RDFa
         5. [9]Planning for Sept. 2011 F2F
         6. [10]ACTION-590: Unicode normalization
         7. [11]ACTION-510: RDF URI mappings in the HTML5 microdata
     * [12]Summary of Action Items

   <JeniT> scribenick: JeniT

   <scribe> Scribe: Jeni Tennison

   Noah: We may have a brief call next week, but probably not

   <timbl> (I can't do next week anyway.)

Approve minutes of prior meeting(s)

   <noah> [13]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes

   RESOLUTION: Minutes of 11-august
   ([14]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes) are approved

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes)

Administrative items

   noah: please sign up to scribe

   <noah> Scribing:

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/F2FScribing.html

ISSUE-67 (HTML-XML-Divergence-67): HTML / XML Unification

   <noah> [16]http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/snapshot/report.html

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/snapshot/report.html

   Norm: The task force has produced a report
   ... it's been edited a few times, there's some new text from noah
   for an introduction
   ... the main stumbling block is that we want to make it more
   publically visible
   ... we would like TAG's permission to clean it up and make it public
   as a Draft XXXX

   <timbl> Draft TAG finding

   Norm: and respond to feedback

   ashok: I would like to see some conclusions in the report
   ... even if they were preliminary
   ... in Section 2.5 on XML parsing

   <timbl> I see: 3 Conclusions TBD.

   ashok: it mentions efforts to make it more forgiving, but they are
   not detailed
   ... I'd like to know what the thinking is and where we could go

   Norm: those include XML5, which should be in the references

   <noah> Could write informally, indicating which conclusions look
   pretty firm, and which are still controversial/poorly understood

   Norm: other people have done work in this space

   <timbl> Reference to Polyglot?

   Norm: about the conclusions: I can put something in, but it depends
   on what the community thinks
   ... the TF hasn't got any conclusions yet, except that these are
   ways of addressing the problems raised

   ashok: and on XML5, if you could extract some recommendations

   Norm: Anne's done a very good job, but I don't think anyone's looked
   at it with care
   ... we'd need to spin up a WG to look at requirements

   timbl: there's a polyglot document, is there a reference to polyglot

   Norm: the polyglot doc is mentioned in the text in 2.1

   <noah> NW: Ooops, need to clean up references

   timbl: one conclusion is that if you're publishing documents, then
   being conservative in what you produce involves using polyglot
   ... there's another discussion about what W3C should publish in
   ... eg using polyglot as an example for the HTML and XML communities

   Norm: I don't think there are downsides in publishing documents that
   can be polyglot, in polyglot
   ... use an HTML5 parser if you're going to be parsing HTML, is a
   good conclusion

   <Zakim> noah, you wanted to talk a bit more about xml5, scope and

   noah: it isn't clear to me how the current structure of the document
   relates to its scope
   ... the original scope was to do more than use cases
   ... it was to look at the overlap between the two stacks of HTML and
   ... to avoid unnecessary duplication between the stacks
   ... there was some attempt to do that but it was hard to get common
   ... so use cases were a starting point
   ... the problem statements include the resolution
   ... in the draft, we need to talk about the scope of the task force
   ... we need to bring out new technology directions and conclusions
   ... is this saying that all we can do is use cases?
   ... if so why? or is there something broader?

   Norm: I can attempt to draft something around that
   ... personally, we tried to find common ground, and use cases helped
   to look at that
   ... after looking at the use cases, there didn't seem to be any
   problems to solve

   noah: so the document should say that

   Norm: ok, this is good feedback
   ... we'll address this in a new draft
   ... get the TF to agree to it
   ... then come back and see if that helps

   noah: is that practical?

   Norm: nothing new will happen before the F2F

   <noah> ACTION: Noah to ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML
   report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 [recorded in

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-tagmem-minutes.html#action01

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-591 - Ping Norm end of Sept. on revised
   HTML/XML report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 [on Noah Mendelsohn -
   due 2011-09-08].

   <noah> ACTION-591 Due 2011-09-30

   <trackbot> ACTION-591 Ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML
   report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 due date now 2011-09-30

HTML5 Review: Microdata/RDFa

   <noah> ScribeNick: noah

   Norm: Jeni is taking the lead for the TAG on the microdata/RDFa work
   ... Looking for perspectives from the TAG

   JeniT: There is disagreement as to whether the task force is going
   to be an effective way to make progress. Some sense that each 'camp'
   is moving forward mostly independenlty, leading to them being out
   there side-by-side
   ... Even if so, my personal feeling is that there is useful work for
   a group of some sort to do in helping to either identify subsets and
   guidance, change them to bring them together, give guidance to
   people doing vocabularies, etc.
   ... I would like to know what the TAG thinks about undertaking an
   effort framed in that way, and whether it's a good use of my "TAG
   time" in particular.
   ... Also curious whether we should keep pushing harder for

   TimBL: My initial hopes for the task force and looking at your blog
   post... I had the impression that you Jeni thought there was some
   overlap, and perhaps that some syntax could be shared. I thought if
   that was the case, a task force could take a real technical look.
   ... Obviously, you have to get buy in. If there was a small change,
   e.g. to RDFa, would people be willing to consider such a shift, and
   similarly for microdata?
   ... I think Manu's letter is on the pessimistic side


     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Aug/0050.html

   TimBL: If that's technically impossible, I'm willing to put away the
   task force. If it's technically feasible but politically
   problematic, then we should hold people accountable if they are
   intransigent. The future is longer than the past.

   JeniT: I always thought if we were going to get convergence it won't
   be by "banging heads". Rather, it will likely be by gradually
   evolving the languages to the point where there is defacto
   commonality, which people will come to recognize and value.
   ... I'm somewhat inclined to do this through e.g. change proposals
   and bug proposals. It's important that there also be a polictical
   context in which such proposals would get the right attention.

   Norm: F2F session

   JeniT: Probably not

   Norm: OK, we will not hold time, but I would welcome it if you ask
   for a session, even for informal brainstorming.

   <JeniT> ScribeNick: JeniT

Planning for Sept. 2011 F2F


     [19] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/09/13-agenda.html

   noah: a lot of the required reading is already available
   ... my intention is to wrap about 3pm on 3rd day
   ... the product pages have been very helpful to me
   ... the structure is to first take a look at each of those, and then
   some of the other things we have
   ... section 1 has proposed goals

   <noah> Goals:

   <noah> Make progress on our five top priority products:

   <noah> Prepare client-side state finding for publication (unless we
   decide there's too much more to do on #! and/or RDFa use of fragids

   <noah> Review status of RDFa/Microdata task force, and set up
   appropriate ACTIONs for tracking

   <noah> Make progress on our other active products

   <noah> Give guidance and feedback to Norm Walsh and the subcommittee
   working on XML/HTML Unification

   <noah> Rebalance TAG member assignments (noting, e.g., Jeni's new
   responsibilities for RDFa/Microdata)

   noah: in client-side state area, we are close to publishing a TAG
   ... ashok has a draft for review; vote at the meeting to publish
   ... next goal will change (reviewing status of RDFa/microdata TF)
   ... that's now a maybe
   ... we also need to rebalance from people who are overburdened
   ... HTML5 Last Call -- Overview
   ... this closed on August 3rd
   ... the only thing we wanted to take forward was microdata/RDFa
   ... we will review and hopefully declare success
   ... track microdata/RDFa as its own item
   ... this will be a short session, to make sure we haven't lost loose
   ... might look briefly at microdata/RDFa
   ... ISSUE-60 (webApplicationState-60): Web Applications: Client-side

   <noah> TAG Finding: Identifying Application State Due date: 1 Nov

   <noah> 25 June 2011: Draft for TAG review based on June 2011 F2F

   <noah> 1 Sept 2011: Last-call quality draft

   <noah> W3C Note with FPWD (Raman's version) indicating this work no
   longer on Rec. track (to be done after reference to finding

   noah: goal is detailed review and a vote on the draft
   ... also, when Raman did a 1st version it was put on the Rec track
   ... we agreed for Raman's draft to be published as a Note
   ... at the F2F in June

   ashok: this is Raman's old write-up from 2009?

   noah: yes, but it's the version that was published as a FPWD, so the
   W3C process means we have to do this
   ... we can indicate that the TAG finding is the follow-on to that

   <Yves> that's indeed right, final note with s SoTD explaining where
   the work is now

   noah: ISSUE-66 (mimeAndWeb-66-27): IETF Draft on MIME and the Web

   <noah> Product page:

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/mimeweb.html

   <noah> Larry emails:

     [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Aug/0099.html

   noah: Larry has said in the last few weeks saying that doing a
   separate draft from the TAG is no longer the right goal
   ... lots of efforts at the IETF that cover the space
   ... recommends refocussing on reviewing those
   ... discussion on whether to do that or not, and what to say to W3C

   <jar> +1

   noah: ISSUE-60 (webApplicationState-60): Web Applications: Fragment
   ID Semantics and MIME Types
   ... ISSUE-57 (HttpRedirections-57), ISSUE-63
   (metadataArchitecture-63) and ISSUE-14 (HttpRange-14) : URI
   Definition Discovery; Metadata Architecture

   jar: ISSUE-57 and Persistence are carry over from June

   noah: ISSUE-60 (webApplicationState-60): Web Applications:
   Client-side Storage
   ... ashok and I have an action to propose an activity here

   ashok: I've been trying to find apps that use client-side storage,
   and I've not been very successful
   ... one wonderful app and a bunch of toys

   noah: I'd have thought Google mobile apps would have been poster

   ashok: sure, we can argue that you can do these things offline
   ... I was trying to find things where you can write different styles
   of apps
   ... so if there are more examples, that would be wonderful

   noah: if you leave off the Google apps, you're leaving off the main
   interesting things
   ... if you have a choice between local and cloud storage, there's a
   tendency to do it in the cloud
   ... so it's natural to see the main uses as tackling network
   connectivity issues

   ashok: different parts of the elephant

   noah: ISSUE-50 (URNsAndRegistries-50): Persistent references
   ... I think we're invested in this work

   jar: it's in a continuing brainstorming stage
   ... F2Fs are the best opportunity to talk about this

   <jar> we're ready to do a product page

   <jar> or will be at end of session

   noah: ISSUE-25 (deepLinking-25): Can publication of hyperlinks
   constitute copyright infringment?
   ... draft was reviewed at last F2F
   ... were supposed to get some legal advice
   ... Dan says he hasn't had much luck yet

   jar: I can get thinh to review it

   noah: might we find a time for him to dial in?

   jar: I'll mention it

   noah: ISSUE-67 (HTML-XML-Divergence-67): HTML / XML Unification
   ... we just covered that
   ... there are also optional items
   ... carried over bodies from June F2F
   ... Web Applications: Design of APIs for Web Applications

   <noah> [22]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/apiminimization.html

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/apiminimization.html

   <noah> Key deliverables with dates:

   <noah> By 15 October 2011: an approved TAG finding on API

   <noah> Schedules:

   <noah> Initial draft finding for community review 2011-07-31

   noah: my inclination is to have a session to straighten out a
   realistic schedule
   ... Product: Coordination with IAB/IETF on architecture of web
   applications: Joint session with Internet Architecture Board
   ... we had the joint phone session with the IAB
   ... we talked about trying to find other times to meet jointly

   Yves: I think F2F time would be a waste

   <noah> ACTION-565?

   <trackbot> ACTION-565 -- Noah Mendelsohn to talk to Bernard about
   possible IAB/TAG co-location -- due 2011-08-16 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/565

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/565

   <noah> Noah to schedule ACTION-565 for telcon, not F2F

   <noah> ACTION-565?

   <trackbot> ACTION-565 -- Noah Mendelsohn to talk to Bernard about
   possible IAB/TAG co-location -- due 2011-08-16 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/565

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/565

   noah: ACTION-545: Privacy
   ... Web Applications: Security

   <noah> [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes#item04

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes#item04

   noah: working on guidance from 11 August to have at most 1/2 hour
   ... on security, we have John Kemp's work
   ... but we haven't identified who in the TAG should be doing
   anything, or what it should be

   ashok: one thought is to start a security wiki to spell out the
   state of the art on the web
   ... probably worthwhile to also have a wiki about privacy
   ... as a spot where people can write about what's going on

   noah: if other things crowd these out, they probably won't happen

   ashok: I think it's worth speaking briefly about whether we ought to
   start a wiki

   noah: the only reason I'm hesitant is because that might be hard to
   do briefly

   ashok: I think it's important because privacy and security are
   ... I think we should have something

   noah: RFC 3023bis and IRI
   ... is there anything that I missed for the agenda?
   ... if there are any corrections on relative priorities

   plinss: Unicode normalisation?

   <jar> hmm.... we do need to talk about 3023 even if briefly...

ACTION-590: Unicode normalization

   <noah> Email from Addison Phillips

     [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html

   plinss: This gets interesting in how it impacts HTML5, APIs and so
   ... I think it's something that TAG should be working on

   noah: some others were saying that other people have it as their day

   timbl: does the 2nd paragraph mean that current guidelines can't be
   technically implemented?

   plinss: they're not being implemented because they're hard to
   implement for performance reasons
   ... the TAG needs to say that this is important, across specs
   ... or to say too little too late and forget it

   noah: would it make sense for you (plinss) to write something that
   the TAG might say (to the private address)
   ... it sounds like something that we would write email to address
   rather than a finding
   ... we can then discuss that email

   plinss: I can do that

   ashok: I wonder if we should have Addison come on a TAG telcon to
   tell us what's going on

   noah: yes, but it would have to be after the F2F
   ... we could send an email to Addison
   ... saying we're working on a position
   ... is this worth F2F time

   plinss: I think it's worth a little bit of time

   <noah> ACTION Plinss to draft possible TAG position statement on
   Unicode, and alert Addison Phillips of our intention to attempt to
   get agreement starting in October after the F2F

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-592 - Draft possible TAG position
   statement on Unicode, and alert Addison Phillips of our intention to
   attempt to get agreement starting in October after the F2F [on Peter
   Linss - due 2011-09-08].

ACTION-510: RDF URI mappings in the HTML5 microdata

   noah: does Hixie dropping the section resolve your concern, timbl?

   timbl: yes, that resolves one concern, raising the concern about no
   standard mapping from microdata to RDF

   noah: ok, we need more discussion of it

   timbl: it comes under the TF discussion

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Noah to ping Norm end of Sept. on revised HTML/XML
   report per discussion on 1 Sept 2011 [recorded in

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-tagmem-minutes.html#action01

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [28]scribe.perl version 1.136
    ([29]CVS log)
    $Date: 2011/09/04 16:06:50 $

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

Jeni Tennison
Received on Sunday, 4 September 2011 16:11:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:40 UTC