Previous meeting: 14 July 2003 teleconf
|Mon 21st July|
|Tues 22nd July|
|Weds 23rd July|
1. Administrative (30 min.)
- Roll Call, Scribe
- Accept minutes of previous call
- Agree agenda - please review ahead of the meeting and request changes on firstname.lastname@example.org
- Next Telcon: proposed 28th July 2003 (Regrets: SW)
- November F2F (check on dates and local arrangements).
2. nameSpaceDocument-8 and RDDL (90 min.)
- To affirm TAG intention to progress RDDL as a TAG sponsored W3C Note.
- To review and resolve necessary chances to the current RDDL draft.
- To resolve RDDL to RDF mapping issue.
- To resolve nameSpaceDocument-8 (it has been with us since 14th January 2002)
- Action TB 2003/04/07: Prepare RDDL Note. Include in status section that there is TAG consensus that RDDL is a suitable format for representations of an XML namespace. Clean up messy section 4 of RDDL draft and investigate and publish a canonical mapping to RDF. See TB's 1 June version.
- Action PC 2003/04/07: Prepare finding to answer this issue, pointing to the RDDL Note. See comments from Paul regarding TB theses.
- Refer to draft TAG opinion from Tim Bray on the use of URNs for namespace names.
- RF: Folks assume that because the specs say so, URNs will be persisitent. But persistence is a function of institutional commitment and frequency of use.
3. Findings in Progress (90 min. with 15 min. break)
- Develop consensus around direction and content of these findings.
- Next steps and actions toward resolution of related issues.
- Consider status wrt possible LC on webarch.
- metadataInURI-31: 8 July 2003 draft of "The use of Metadata in URIs"
- Action DO 2003/07/07: Send rationale about why WSDL WG wants to peek inside the URI.
- See also TB email on Apple Music Store and use of URI schemes instead of headers
- See issue description from David Orchard. Next steps?
- Action DO 2003/06/23: Point Jonathan Marsh at options. Ask them for their analysis.
- contentPresentation-26: Action CL 2003/06/02: Make available a draft finding on content/presentation.
4. Issues identified for resolution before Last Call (see list) (30 min)
- Discussion of errorHandling-20 (other 3 issues expected to either have been resolved or relevant draft finding discussed).
- whenToUseGet-7 (discussion/resolution likely in advance of F2F)
- errorHandling-20 (Maybe for LC; Discussion expected)
- Action CL 2003/02/06: Write a draft finding on the topic of (1) early/late detection of errors (2) late/early binding (3) robustness (4) definition of errors (5) recovery once error has been signaled. Due first week of March.
- contentTypeOverride-24 (resolution likely in advance of F2F)
- metadataInURI-31 (discussed above).
- abstractComponentRefs-37(discussed above).
5. Architecture Document
16 July 2003 Editor's Draft of Arch Doc
- To identify and action any essential changes to the Architecture Document in advance of issuing a Last Call.
- To resolve a plan for publishing an LC WD of webarch
- To discuss other process issues:
- Meaning of "normative reference" in this document?
- What does a CR period look like for this document?
- Action RF 2003/06/02: Rewrite section 5. Section 5 is expected to be short.
- Action IJ 2003/06/16: Attempt to incorporate relevant bits of "Conversations and State" into section to be produced by RF.
- Action SW 2003/07/07: Try to get TimBL to sign off on Paul's text. If SW able to reach TBL, SW/TBL send to AC as co-chairs. If not, have IJ send on behalf of TAG.
- Action TBL 2003/07/14: Suggest changes to section about extensibility related to "when to tunnel".
- Completed action TBL 2003/07/14: Send email to AC about TAG expectations re: arch doc (Deadline 14 July)
- Sections 2.3 and 3.2.1
- State of whenToUseGet-7, errorHandling-20, contentTypeOverride-24, and metadataInURI-31 (see list of LC and discussion issues for July F2F).
- Open Discussion (technical)
- Summary of changes/actions.
- LC Decision and Planning (administrative)
- Unresolved Issues.
- Reviews sought.
- Review period.
6. Architecture Document (continued)
7. Identifiers (URIEquivalence-15 , IRIEverywhere-27)
- Open discussion of issues surrounding URI/IRI comparisons and equivalences (relates to issues #15 and #27).
- SW proposal: Track RFC2396bis where Tim Bray text has been integrated. Comment within the IETF process. Move this issue to pending state.
8. Qnames, fragments, and media types (rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6, fragmentInXML-28, abstractComponentRefs-37, putMediaType-38)
[Clustering of issues #6, #28, #37 and #38 requested by DanC - Dan, can you explain the motivation to cluster? Thx.]
- Converge or refactor issues around common basis?
- Next steps and actions toward resolution.
- Action DC 2003/02/06: Propose TAG response to XML Schema desideratum (RQ-23).
- fragmentInXML-28 : Use of fragment identifiers in XML.
- Connection to content negotiation?
- Connection to opacity of URIs?
- No actions associated / no owner.
- abstractComponentRefs-37(discussed above).
9. New and other Issues requested for discussion. (mixedUIXMLNamespace-33, RDFinXHTML-35, siteData-36 plus possible new issues) (75 min)
- Initiate discussion and actions on substantially undiscussed issues.
- Identify next steps and actions.
Possible New Issues (this list will be reviewed ahead of the F2F at the 14th July telcon)
10. New and other Issues requested for discussion (continued) (60 min)
11. Wrap up and adjourn. (15 min)
12. Informal continuation.
[Some TAG members need to depart at 12:00]
Informal discussion of any matters of interest.
This is a 'dumping' ground for elements of our standing agenda that I have not propagated to the F2F agenda, along with some supporting rationale.
[Expect contentTypeOverride-24 and whenToUseGet-7 to have made significant progress ahead of F2F. xmlIDSemantics-32 has a stable and mature draft finding and XML Core WG are working toward a resolution of this issue.]