- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:03:24 -0500
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- CC: www-tag@w3.org
Thank you Henry. I assume you have correctly scribed the discussion as it happened, but I note that the resolution you recorded on the planned date of the TAG F2F was superceded by a note from me 3 days later [1]. To help avoid confusion, I have added to the minutes a note from the chair [2] indicating that the correct dates for the TAG F2F are 18-20 March, as announced in [1]. Thank you. Noah [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Jan/0154.html [2] On 1/28/2013 11:42 AM, Henry S. Thompson wrote: > at > > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html > > and in text form below. > > ht > -------------- > - DRAFT - > > TAG > > 24 Jan 2013 > > [2]Agenda > > See also: [3]IRC log > > Attendees > > Present > Marcos Caceres, Yehuda Katz, Yves Lafon, Peter Linss, Ashok > Malhotra, Noah Mendelsohn, Alex Russell, Jeni Tennison, Henry S. > Thompson, Anne van Kesteren (in part) > > Regrets > Tim Berners-Lee, Larry Masinter > > Chair > Noah Mendelsohn > > Scribe > Henry S. Thompson > > Contents > > * [4]Topics > 1. [5]Admin > 2. [6]March F2F location > 3. [7]Polyglot / DOM 4 issue: XML Declaration in the DOM > 4. [8]Progress on FragID finding > 5. [9]Back to DOM XML Declarations > 6. [10]Next steps for Publishing and Linking > 7. [11]Future of Privacy by design note and related privacy > issues > 8. [12]ISSUE-57 > 9. [13]XML/HTML Unification > * [14]Summary of Action Items > __________________________________________________________________ > > Admin > > RESOLUTION: [15]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/12/20-minutes agreed as > a correct record > > NM: Two goals for the near term: > ... 1) Focus for the TAG, as membership changes > ... Suggestions welcome, by email, I'll schedule discussion when it > looks likely to be productive > ... I need help moving beyond good top-level visions, which need > filling in > ... 2) Ongoing work, some nearing completion, others less concrete > ... Need to either complete, or drop > > March F2F location > > NM: 17-19 March no longer possible for TimBL > ... And earlier hope that we might try London the preceding weekend is > fading > > <noah> Two options: London Fri-Sun 15-17 & Cambridge 19-21 USA > > <Marcos> MC: Any WFM > > <slightlyoff> can make london, although the friday is iffy thanks to > TC39 flight back > > <JeniT> either ok > > <slightlyoff> unlikely to make cambridge > > <plinss> either works > > <wycats> I am with slightlyoff vis a vis TC39 > > <Yves> can make cambridge but will miss one day, can't for london (I > can make 1 day) > > <Ashok> London No, Cambridge Yes > > <HST> I can only do 16-17 in London, but I have always been at risk for > this meeting > > <wycats> can we push it forward? > > <noah> How far forward > > <wycats> these weeks seem pretty contended > > <noah> ? > > <noah> No, Tim's calendar is incredibly booked. We typically have to > get on it 3 months in advance > > <slightlyoff> thanks for the clarification > > <wycats> It looks like slightlyoff and my preference is both London > > <wycats> I am reviewing my calendar > > <slightlyoff> I won't be in Cambridge, no > > <slightlyoff> but i'm not more important than tim...break the tie on > his calendar > > <HST> I can't do Cambridge > > <wycats> I have an existing obligation during the Cambridge time period > but I could cancel > > <slightlyoff> no objection, but regrets > > <slightlyoff> no, my regrets for not being able to make it...not > anyone's fault > > RESOLUTION: Next TAG f2f will be Cambridge, MA on 19--21 March > > <slightlyoff> agree with Henry > > Polyglot / DOM 4 issue: XML Declaration in the DOM > > HST: XML Core group is discussing this > ... There's a concern that the XML Declaration is in the XML Infoset > > HST: Noah's agenda includes a contested assertion > ... There's email reporting that a number of current browsers continue > to support it. > > NM: Should TAG do anything right now? > > HST: Tempted to recuse myself. I'm active in the XML Core group. Not > clear on TAG-level issue. Dropping it does seem inappropriate, or > confusing at best. > > HST: I will certainly come back to the TAG on this if I think there's a > genuine architectural issue here > > NM: Not clear we're ready to address this -- we would need to have some > reason to suppose that we could get community engagement on the TAG's > involvement > > Progress on FragID finding > > NM: We have a project ongoing at the moment: > [16]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/fragids.html > > NM: That page describes goals, deliverables, success criteria > > <noah> > > NM: And we have a public WD: Best Practices for Fragment Identifiers > and Media Type Definitions at > [17]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025/ > > <noah> ACTION-772? > > <trackbot> ACTION-772 -- Larry Masinter to with help from Jeni to > propose CR exit criteria for fragids finding Due 2013-01-08 -- due > 2013-01-18 -- OPEN > > <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/772 > > NM: And the current leading edge is recorded in this ACTION: > ... We are heading for CR, and we were going to discuss exit criteria > at the (cancelled) F2F > > JT: I don't know where we are on exit criteria, I don't think I've > heard from LM, who has that action > > JT: I have made a new editors' draft (undated: > [19]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mimeTypesAndFragids, dated: > [20]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mimeTypesAndFragids-2013-01-05.html) > , which incorporates comments from Richard Cyganiak > > JT: I think we can still go direct to CR at this point > ... I'll take over the CR exit criteria action > > NM: Thanks > > <noah> ACTION-772? > > <trackbot> ACTION-772 -- Jeni Tennison to with help from Larry to > propose CR exit criteria for fragids finding -- due 2013-02-12 -- OPEN > > <trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/772 > > <slightlyoff> +1 > > Back to DOM XML Declarations > > <noah> NM: Notes that Yehuda and Alex favor discussing the DOM at the > F2F > > NM: Happy to have any topic raised by member on our telcon agenda > ... Often good to prepare stuff on telcons before we take them up at a > f2f > > Next steps for Publishing and Linking > > <noah> ACTION-773? > > <trackbot> ACTION-773 -- Ashok Malhotra to line up reviewers for > Publishing and Linking and invite to participate in F2F -- due > 2012-12-20 -- CLOSED > > <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/773 > > AM: We need a fair amount of work on this still > ... The two editors, AM and LM, are both on their way off the TAG > ... It would be great if a new member would take this up > ... Or perhaps JT could pick it up > > NM: Points taken > ... What do people think -- should we continue to pursue this one? If > so, then we'll look at how > > <wycats> I'm not personally interested in pursuing it with my time > > HST: I'm conficted. I think it's potentially very important. I get > profoundly frustrated when, knowledgeable journalists seem not to > distinguish linking and embedding when reporting on serious cases > involving extradition or other serious matters. > > HST: Yes, different jurisdictions are different. I wish we could do the > service of helping. We gave it a good shot. The comments from people > who understand better what's needed have not been supportive. So, I'd > love to see it move forward, but I can't do it. We may have to drop it. > > YL: The legal side gave us feedback that suggests working, as we have, > only on the technical side, we won't get there -- to take this forward > we need to recruit help on the legal side > > NM: This feels that something we should have been able to make work, if > we had managed to stay focussed > > <slightlyoff> it may be the case that the legal community is > improvising too in a vacuum of settled case law > > NM: but the feedback we got from the legal side was not all consistent, > and in attempting to follow it we lost focus > ... When we tried to focus on the technology, I think we made some > progress, but we couldn't quite close it > ... I do hate to close something after so much effort > > JT: Yes, but that is a sunk cost, and it probably is time to move on > ... So maybe a finding or a REC is not the right vehicle for achieving > our limited goal > ... So maybe realising that blog posts or articles in the press are > legitimate TAG outputs > ... is the right thing to do for this > > NM: So keep it as a work item, or not? > > JT: Keep it on the list of things to include in strategic priorties at > the F2F > > AR: What was the driver in the first place, for taking this on? > > NM: There has been a steady trickle of legal cases [in US and UK] which > involved sites with links and/or embedding, where public discussion was > just muddled. And we did get, I think, requests from [the W3C's legal > guy] Rigo Wenning, to help with this. > ... We thought that a TAG finding on this would have more value than an > individual's blog post > > AR: So there was a specific request from lawyers for an explicit > technical guidance? > > <JeniT> Jonathan brought Thinh along > > <JeniT> Thinh from Creative Commons > > HST: I am not sure we had an explicit request to start us off -- > certainly some positive feedback once we got started > > <Ashok> Yes. we had a chat with Thinh > > AR: I think it would be a possible way forward to publish something > pithy that says "Here's the relevant bits, in the TAG's opinion" > > <noah> Hmm. Did I not hear Alex suggest pointing to existing > explanations? > > <slightlyoff> I'm not trying to > > NM: I think the problem is that the RFCs and related material are not > at the right level for public consumption > > HST: I think JT's suggestion is the best we've got > > <noah> . ACTION: Noah to schedule F2F discussion of whether and how to > pursue Publishing and Linking > > <HST:> +1 > > <slightlyoff> and don't think we should try to in an absence of > compelling demand from a userbase with authority > > PL: Couldn't we simply put this on an official TAG blog > > NM: We do indeed have such a blog > ... But we've used it for personal posting, rather than corporate > > <HST:> [23]http://www.w3.org/blog/tag/ [link was broken, now fixed, see > action on YL below] > > <noah> ACTION: Yves to figure out where our old TAG blog stuff is. > [recorded in > [24]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action01] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-778 - Figure out where our old TAG blog stuff > is. [on Yves Lafon - due 2013-01-31]. > > NM: The entire finding? > > AM: It's long for a blog post, isn't it? > ... Maybe take one part of it -- extract highlights? > > <JeniT> +1 for a series > > PL: Break it up into a series of articles would be fine > > AM: One on copyright, one on linking vs. embedding > > NM: I'm concerned about the archival status of blog posts, compared to, > say, W3C notes > ... Putting smaller pieces where they could be useful, yes, but not > sure about doing it via a blog > ... So what about notes? > ... So some dimensions: how formal; what mechanism; how much TAG > consensus required > ... And beyond the TAG, e.g. LM had been interested in the fact that > REC-track gives some community buy-in > > PL: CSS has its own blog. . . > > NM: Sure, just there is a history which we need to hook up with > > [Anne van Kesteren joins the call] > > PL: OK, let's try moving that forward again > ... tweet about it, and improve its visibility > > <noah> . ACTION: Noah to schedule F2F discussion of whether and how to > pursue Publishing and Linking > > AM: Yes > > <noah> ACTION: Noah to schedule F2F discussion of whether and how to > pursue Publishing and Linking - Due 2013-03-01 [recorded in > [25]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action02] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-779 - schedule F2F discussion of whether and > how to pursue Publishing and Linking [on Noah Mendelsohn - due > 2013-03-01]. > > Future of Privacy by design note and related privacy issues > > <noah> ACTION-774? > > <trackbot> ACTION-774 -- Peter Linss to frame F2F discussion of Privacy > by design note, and possible followup up with privacy group. Due: > 2013-01-08 -- due 2012-12-20 -- OPEN > > <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/774 > > NM: This started with work by Dan Appelquist wrt Javascript APIs for > minimal disclosure > > <slightlyoff> "object capabilities" > > AM: Minimization > > NM: Then Robin Berjon shifted the focus, as Dan A. left the TAG > ... And then Robin left > ... And PL was given the action to take the existing content, slightly > cleaned up, and publish it as a Note > > AM: And we also agreed to ask the Privacy Interest Group (PING) to take > this over > ... Also, Nick Doty is writing a document about fingerprinting, which > makes up about half the content of our draft > > NM: So? > > AM: Abandon it > > AM: I have had no answer from PING > > NM: Draft me an email and I'll send it > > PL: The idea was that by publishing it as a Note we could hand it over > to PING > > <noah> ACTION: Ashok to draft note to PING asking them to pick up our > incomplete work on privacy by design by APIs [recorded in > [27]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action03] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-780 - Draft note to PING asking them to pick > up our incomplete work on privacy by design by APIs [on Ashok Malhotra > - due 2013-01-31]. > > NM: I'll wait a few days for comments from TAG members and then send it > -- use tag@w3.org for that, please > > <Ashok> PING: public-privacy@w3.org > > <Ashok> Here is a link to the Privacy by Design document: > [28]http://darobin.github.com/api-design-privacy/api-design-privacy.htm > l > > ISSUE-57 > > HST: JAR and I made some progress at MIT in December, JT has improved > her draft, and is awaiting comments. I hope we will make some progress > before the f2f, but not much in the next few weeks > > <noah> Try this link > [29]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/defininguris.html > > <noah> It's really more than ISSUE-57, we sort of use that as a > shorthand name. > > NM: How about a briefing at the F2F? > > HST: Maybe -- ask me in a month > > <noah> ACTION: Jeni to prepare reading and discussion on Defining URIS > (ISSUE-57) for March F2F - Due 2013-03-01 [recorded in > [30]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action04] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-781 - prepare reading and discussion on > Defining URIS (ISSUE-57) for March F2F [on Jeni Tennison - due > 2013-03-01]. > > JT: Yes -- I think it's appropriate to aim for feedback on the Primer > and discussion about next steps > > noah: this is also known as httpRange14 > ... this issue is about how to get information about things that aren't > documents using HTTP > ... why don't we have a session on F2F topics on next week's telcon > ... please send emails with suggestions to the public mailing list > > <wycats> noah: can you put a "layering" item on the F2F agenda. I could > write up a sentence or paragraph if that would be helpful > > XML/HTML Unification > > noah: is there anything useful we can do about this today? > ... I have an action to announce that it's done > > noah: I took an action to schedule discussion of the DOM stuff at the > F2F > ... there's a raging discussion on polyglot on both the HTML and TAG > mailing lists > ... in part in reaction to the TAG's reply to Henri > > <wycats> I am happy to wait until the F2F to discuss so that the new > members can get a high-bandwidth dump of existing perspectives > > <slightlyoff> sorry > ... I'll wait to see what else people ask for me to schedule around > this topic > > <slightlyoff> my fault > > <wycats> 1+ > > Alex: I'd like to understand what's driving our interest here? > ... what's the architectural principle, or is it because there's a > disagreement? > > noah: can we defer that to when Tim and/or Henry are with us? > ... while HTML&JSON are increasingly being used, XML is still an > important technology > ... some people feel that publishing polyglot could help meet the > requirements of those that want to publish HTML with an XML flavour > ... we asked for the publication of the polyglot document > > Anne: I was on the TF, and maybe the TAG asked for polyglot, but the TF > didn't > > noah: the TF surveyed the field, yes > ... the TAG went further than the TF > > Yehuda: I think this is related to some of the issues that the new TAG > members are interested in > ... and we should have a discussion about this in a F2F > > noah: we sometimes get requests that we have to respond to more quickly > > Yehuda: we should respond to those, but a F2F discussion would be > useful > > <noah> ACTION: Noah to schedule F2F discussion of polyglot, the TAG's > request to HTML WG on polygot, and HTML/XML Unification - Due > 2013-03-01 [recorded in > [31]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action05] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-782 - schedule F2F discussion of polyglot, > the TAG's request to HTML WG on polygot, and HTML/XML Unification [on > Noah Mendelsohn - due 2013-03-01]. > > noah: please could existing TAG members go through your actions and > either close them or send me email about what you want to do with them > ... if there are other things that you want to discuss next week, > please email them to me > > <slightlyoff> I won't be able to attend next week's call (on vacation). > Regrets. > > <JT:> I will scribe next week > > Summary of Action Items > > [NEW] ACTION: Ashok to draft note to PING asking them to pick up our > incomplete work on privacy by design by APIs [recorded in > [32]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action03] > [NEW] ACTION: Jeni to prepare reading and discussion on Defining URIS > (ISSUE-57) for March F2F - Due 2013-03-01 [recorded in > [33]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action04] > [NEW] ACTION: Noah to schedule F2F discussion of polyglot, the TAG's > request to HTML WG on polygot, and HTML/XML Unification - Due > 2013-03-01 [recorded in > [34]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action05] > [NEW] ACTION: Noah to schedule F2F discussion of whether and how to > pursue Publishing and Linking - Due 2013-03-01 [recorded in > [35]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action02] > [NEW] ACTION: Yves to figure out where our old TAG blog stuff is. > [recorded in > [36]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action01] > __________________________________________________________________ > > > Minutes formatted by David Booth's [37]scribe.perl version 1.135 > ([38]CVS log) > $Date: 2013-01-28 16:39:48 $ > > References > > 1. http://www.w3.org/ > 2. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-agenda.html > 3. http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-tagmem-irc > 4. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#agenda > 5. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item01 > 6. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item02 > 7. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item03 > 8. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item05 > 9. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item06 > 10. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item07 > 11. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item08 > 12. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item09 > 13. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#item10 > 14. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#ActionSummary > 15. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/12/20-minutes > 16. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/fragids.html > 17. http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-fragid-best-practices-20121025/ > 18. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/772 > 19. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mimeTypesAndFragids > 20. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mimeTypesAndFragids-2013-01-05.html > 21. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/772 > 22. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/773 > 23. http://www.w3.org/blog/tag/ > 24. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action01 > 25. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action02 > 26. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/774 > 27. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action03 > 28. http://darobin.github.com/api-design-privacy/api-design-privacy.html > 29. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/defininguris.html > 30. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action04 > 31. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action05 > 32. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action03 > 33. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action04 > 34. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action05 > 35. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action02 > 36. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2013/01/24-minutes.html#action01 > 37. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm > 38. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/ >
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 03:04:03 UTC