See also: IRC log
<DanC_> minutes 14 May
RESOLUTION: to approve minutes 14 May
RESOLUTION: our Next Telcon is 11th June -- scribe: Raman.
re Check on Rhys' write access to TAG space - has that been resolved? ... SKW and DC did a bit about that.
TVR gives some logistics advice...
TBL: I'll be joining the rest of you a bit later on the 1st morning
<DanC_> agenda of Mountain View meeting
HT: re 5 to 6pm, I doubt it.
DC: as scribing over breakfast is challenging, pls move administrative stuff elsewhere
SKW: purpose and direction might include our web presence
HT: purpose and direction seems like a good use of time, but better later in the meeting
<Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask about putting all of versioning together
NM: re versioning... how about moving some of it to day 1, to let it percolate
<DanC_> (mild preference for moving some versioning as NM suggests)
SKW: DanC, you asked for "HTML Design Principles and Web Architecture", what's the/a goal? do you want to lead it?
DanC: I'm not sure whether those design principles are increasing or decreasing in importance
HT: if there's no other place to ask whether /TR/webarch/ is too strong in its position on version identification, then we need this
NM, TVR added some that the scribe missed; the chair seemed content to move on... scribe hopes this record has what everybody needs.
NM: there's enough diversity of opinion that it might be worth having a level-setting session
DC: I'm inclined to have the level-setting happen as an executive decision rather than discussing it as a group
SKW: I'm inclined to discuss tactics as a group
SKW collects further advice on the ftf agenda; updates to appear
SKW: we published a /TR/ over a
... there's some interaction with patent policy mechanics
<timbl> which doc?
DanC: I suggest end-of-life-ing it as a WG Note
SKW: how does one do that?
DanC: just write a new status-of-this-document and ask the webmaster
<scribe> ACTION: SKW to discuss with NDW moving /TR/namespaceState/ to WG Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
SKW: so we have an update from DO, in 3 parts
<scribe> ACTION: DanC Review definitions of partial understanding, backward compatible, and forward compatible. [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action02]
DanC: I'm disappointed that the document is going in the opposite of the direction I advised, which was to integrate the definitions into the material so that they're motivated
NM: I sent some comments on previous drafts [a pointer would be nifty]. Some of my comments have been addressed, some not. I'm interested in views from others.
SKW: I plan to [missed]
<scribe> ACTION: HT to extend his paper (around Vancouver) to a definition of monotonicity and its relevance to our versioning finding. [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action03]
HT: I don't expect to make progress before this coming ftf meeting
SKW: re "ACTION NDW: Produce some information about NVDL for the finding." ... what's NVDL?
HT: NVDL is a standard in progress in ISO... multiple namespace ...
<scribe> (in progress?)
<scribe> ACTION: NDW to Produce some information about NVDL for the finding. [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action04]
<scribe> ACTION: HT to unearth thread in which he and Robin Berjon discussed XML versioning [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action05]
<scribe> ACTION: DO to produce revised Versioning-part1 and Versioning-XML for May 18th [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/21-tagmem-minutes.html#action06]
SKW: just HT from the TAG went to this conference?
HT: yes. XTech has some history
in SGML Europe, XML Europe. Edd Dumbill (sp?) has moved the
"center of gravity" to web 2.0/browsers/etc.
... ~200 attendees
... tracks were: core technologies (least attended), browsers, open data (most attended), and one other
... Dave Beckett gave a very good talk on non-XML text formats.
... he had some very trenchant [?] criticisms of them
... YAML spec, which was aimed at being simpler than XML, is now 3x as long
... I went to Henri S.'s talk on conformance checking HTML 5...
... follow-up discussion... "you've written this cool checker based on grammars and such; how about getting the WG to adapt these grammars?"
... to which the response was [something like] "but then there would be a risk of conflicting definitions of the language" and such
... I had a good discussion with Anne, who's doing a thesis on an HTML5 processor... I just had a "making HTML tag soup declarative" paper accepted; so we agreed to exchange notes
NM: a colleague of mine is working on Operator, a firefox extension that handled calendar/contact microformats. EliasT announced, at XTech, support in Operator for RDFa too.
<timbl> What about a RDF/XML , or an GRDDL plugin for Operator?
SKW sorta adjourned the meeting, or at least excused those who wish to go... so scribing here is light
<Stuart> well I sorta suggested that we might, but I didn't actually call "adjourned" and folks seemed to stay.
NDW: so picking up from previous ftf...
NDW: Dan, did you follow?
DanC: well, sorta... but the direction is different from what I was interested to see; I'm interested to start from extant RDDL documents and see what they're trying to do. e.g. how does someone exploit "... rddl:nature HTML4"?
NDW: that's a different approach
<Stuart> N3 and RDF/XML content negotiated?
SKW: I'm a little lost... I picked up on a tangent about resources and representations
TBL: can we look at this as generic resources? is there the case of RNG and XSD schemas that convey the same information? they have different natures?
NDW: yes, e.g. docbook.rng vs docbook.xsd
TBL: these are resources that typically have just one representation.