See also: IRC log
<scribe> Scribe: Jonathan Rees
<scribe> ScribeNick: jar
Date: 14 May 2009
we're missing HT
next telecon next week
4/2: No objections
RESOLUTION: draft minutes of 4/2 approved (JAR to fix broken link)
ACTION on jar: fix bad link in 4/2 minutes
<trackbot> Noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - on
<scribe> ACTION: JAR to fix bad link in 4/2 minutes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/05/14-tagmem-irc]
<trackbot> noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
<trackbot> Created ACTION-267 - Fix bad link in 4/2 minutes [on Jonathan Rees - due 2009-05-21].
tabled: approve minutes of 5/7
noah: Specific request to all tag members to review your open issues and actions. Otherwise they come up every week and agenda preparation is difficult.
raman: When will we finalize F2F agenda?
noah: I want for the agenda to come from all of you. Process should start right now.
raman: There should be some particular deliverables to talk about
... e.g. At the end of the meeting we expect to decide "we will publish X"
<Zakim> raman, you wanted to ask, when do we finalize the F2F agenda?
noah: This is the perfect time to ensure a good agenda
noah: Rick Jeliffe has longstanding concerns
... Frustrated with overall design direction, went and built Schematron language, interested in Relax NG
... Schema 1.1 went to review, Rick sees this as a lost opportunity
... Felt the TAG should look into this
... TAG charter says issues can be raised in this way, but TAG must vote to accept the issue
... if we don't pick it up, it will go to AC and director, who might ask us to look into it
... Please consider over coming week whether this is something we should take up
ashok: What would the issue be, exactly?
noah: As TAG chair, I say it can be anything... what I think Rick would want is for the TAG to help W3C to come to its senses
... Speaking as Schema chair now, I don't think this is the right time to make this decision. This question came up at the time. I think the W3C language is sort of ugly and redundant, but it is extremely widely used.
... Relax NG is sort of like Lisp (if Schema is like C++). "You shouldn't do that [revise Schema] because you should have designed Lisp instead"
... Personal opinion is that W3C is doing the right thing by doing 1.1. The WG is extremely small [and tired], and it's not clear W3C could take up the problem of a new design
raman: Given overlap of TAG and Schema WG, not clear TAG would be very effective
timbl: There are different communities; not clear XSD dominates in all of them
raman: XML Schema hasn't worked out very well. I'm skeptical that it really dominates
ashok: Would a possible outcome be the creation of a new WG?
noah: [Hypothetically] the TAG could express an opinion
<Ashok> ... to profile XML Schema
timbl: Skeptical about preponderance of XSD usage, would like to see some figures
noah: Any volunteers?
masinter: Don't think the TAG can make progress on this issue. Important, but.
noah: OK, I've alerted everyone, we'll revisit next week, more info desirable.
noah: Change description of issue to change 'xml' to 'language'? Does this cause any problems?
ashok: Implication that it includes programming languages would be unfortunate
<masinter> and CSS, which is a language but not an XML language
noah: OK, assent to issue name change
"Versioning and HTML -- recap"
masinter: In previous TAG discussion I find discussion of 'modes'
... not much about ownership of MIME types, doctypes
... TAG has been talking about versioning for seven years
... I was hoping to collect pointers to places where these issues were discussed
... I thought my email might give an outline of what would be a useful finding
[April 25 email: general reasons why languages change]
masinter: add, restrict, clarify, restrict meaning, incompatible
... criteria for when you do/don't want to use a language indicator
[the scribe urges you to look at these email messages.]
masinter: Is this reasonable?
noah: Many technical details that could be reviewed, but don't want to back into another year of effort on versioning.
... options: 1. Larry has an outline, possibly a big and time consuming project. 2. No, we've beaten our heads, doesn't feel right. 3. Continue to noodle, no commitment yet, monitor our comfort level
masinter: I'd like another option. Intense, time-limited, focused effort that actually attempts to give HTML WG guidance before October.
raman: Problem with previous effort was starting abstract
noah: We have a F2F in about 5 weeks. The is an opportunity to make progress.
... Then there's summer, which is historically spotty. Then Sept F2F. Let's make sure we're not fooling ourselves?
... What can we do by June F2F?
masinter: I would like to hear from others.
... June 2-17 not available
noah: I don't completely understand the particular HTML issues. It would be interesting to analyze them
... Worried that nothing will happen for June due to LM unavailable, and then nothing for October due to summer
... Will schedule telecon discussion as there is activity
noah: Versioning discussion seems wrapped up for now...
Noah should schedule action-204 for next week. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/204 [JAR to talk with MSM about web app security]
noah: interested in hearing about action-204
... Homework: Look at list of open actions. Figure out disposition of each one. Maybe agenda items will result. Please.
raman: The same tool (tracker) is being used for two things: trivial reminders, and substantial projects. This is a problem.
... Suggestion: In IRC, tag each trivial action with 'trivial'
noah: Chair will transition trivial pending-review actions to closed at discretion.
ARGH!!! rrsagent not invited!!
will deal. and you can be sure I won't forget next time...