See also: IRC log
<DanC> scribenick: DanC
NM: reminder next week is cancelled; next telcon is 6 May
<ht> HST: Regrets for 6 May
NM: DanC, can you scribe 6 May?
DanC: I think so... will check in detail
<ht> NM: Minutes from 15 April. . .
<DKA> My belated regrets for last week.
<DKA> I am playing the volcano card.
DanC: +1 approve http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/04/15-minutes.html
<scribe> scribenick: ht
NM: Minutes for 15 April approved
RESOLUTION: Minutes for 15 April approved
<johnk__> not sure I can attend even the meeting yet (Note: JK subsequently sent regrets)
DKA: I sent email to tag mailing list with local arrangements details
<noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/overdue
NM: Having the due dates so out of sync with reality makes life hard for the chair in planning, please fix this.
<noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/overdue?sort=owner
<DanC> action-390?
<trackbot> ACTION-390 -- Daniel Appelquist to review ISSUE-58 and suggest next steps, due 2010-03-03 -- due 2010-03-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/390
DKA: I need to review this, keep it open, likewise for my others.
<DanC> action-390 due next week
<trackbot> ACTION-390 Review ISSUE-58 and suggest next steps, due 2010-03-03 due date now next week
action-408?
<trackbot> ACTION-408 -- Daniel Appelquist to look into next steps on a workshop around device APIs, privacy etc. with tlr -- due 2010-03-31 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/408
DKA: This is done, I've been working on a workshop, draft call for participation
... link coming
<DanC> sounds done-done to me.
NM: Thanks DKA, that's done
close action-408
<trackbot> ACTION-408 Look into next steps on a workshop around device APIs, privacy etc. with tlr closed
scribe: vodafone will host in same week as DAP f2f -- 12/13 July
NM: Any other TAG members to attend?
<DanC> ACTION-420 due next week
<trackbot> ACTION-420 What is different about xhtml basic 1.1 (in particular re: namespaces) due date now next week
<DanC> (I interpret "keep this open" as "due next week" by default)
<DanC> ACTION-116 due + 8 weeks
<trackbot> ACTION-116 Align the tabulator internal vocabulary with the vocabulary in the rules http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswDboothsRules,getting changes to either as needed. due date now + 8 weeks
<johnk> ACTION-399?
<trackbot> ACTION-399 -- John Kemp to prepare F2F discussion of sniffing, being sure to check status of other pertinent actions -- due 2010-03-18 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/399
close action-399
<trackbot> ACTION-399 Prepare F2F discussion of sniffing, being sure to check status of other pertinent actions closed
action-340?
<trackbot> ACTION-340 -- John Kemp to review XHR and UMP together and provide comments to TAG as relevant -- due 2010-03-10 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340
<DanC> (going on on which list?)
NM: JK to prepare a discussion for the May 6 call
<DanC> action-340?
<trackbot> ACTION-340 -- John Kemp to summarize recent discussion around XHR and UMP -- due 2010-05-04 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/340
close action-215
<trackbot> ACTION-215 Send minutes of 15 Apr TAG teleconference to www-tag for review closed
<DanC> action-384: most recent msg seems to be http://www.w3.org/mid/E345E885-AC39-4E16-B8B3-982513A303A2@jkemp.net 22 Mar
<trackbot> ACTION-384 CVS usage edits notes added
<DKA> FYI this is the CfP for the privacy workshop (reference ACTION-408): http://www.w3.org/2010/api-privacy-ws/
<DanC> action-408: CFP (draft?) is http://www.w3.org/2010/api-privacy-ws/
<trackbot> ACTION-408 Look into next steps on a workshop around device APIs, privacy etc. with tlr notes added
action-401?
<trackbot> ACTION-401 -- Ashok Malhotra to ask WebApps working group to review John Kemp's taxonomy -- due 2010-03-18 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/401
AM: One reply came back
action-401 pending review
<DanC> action-401?
<trackbot> ACTION-401 -- Ashok Malhotra to ask WebApps working group to review John Kemp's taxonomy -- due 2010-03-18 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/401
<johnk> this is the email I sent with the CVS diff of edits related to ACTION-384 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2010Mar/0054.html
<DanC> action-213 due 4 May
<trackbot> ACTION-213 Prepare 22 Apr weekly teleconference agenda due date now 4 May
<DanC> action-370?
<trackbot> ACTION-370 -- Henry S. Thompson to hST to send a revised-as-amended version of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.html to the HTTP bis list on behalf of the TAG -- due 2010-04-08 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/370
<DanC> action-370 due +2 weeks
<trackbot> ACTION-370 HST to send a revised-as-amended version of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Dec/0068.html to the HTTP bis list on behalf of the TAG due date now +2 weeks
NM: HST to catch up/roll forward his behind-actions ASAP
NM: Did you close this last week by mistake?
(Tim Berners-Lee joins the call)
<DanC> action-407?
<trackbot> ACTION-407 -- Henry S. Thompson to propose an update to DanC's prose from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.html to explicitly reference or encorporate the HTML history, similarly to the way 2854 does -- due 2010-04-22 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/407
HST: Let's reopen it and keep it PENDING REVIEW
... So there have been several replies to my email [link coming]
<noah> Please paste link to public-html thread
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/thread.html#msg1052
<DanC> works for me: "Labeling a
<DanC> resource with the text/html type asserts that the resource is
<DanC> to be interpreted as an HTML document using the HTML syntax, and
<DanC> that it conforms either to this specification or to an earlier
<DanC> HTML specification.
<DanC> "
<DanC> (no conformance claim? that seems silly to me)
<scribe> scribenick: noah
HT: Serving as text/html makes >no< conformance claims...it just says, use this spec
DC: That's not a conformance claim?
HT: No. I took it that the wording we carefully agreed had the intent "use this spec"; whether you think there's an implicit claim of conformance...well, we didn't say that.
<DanC> action-407: hst plans to reply on his own behalf to the thread http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/thread.html#msg1052 and leave it to the group to decide in due course
<trackbot> ACTION-407 Propose an update to DanC's prose from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0878.html to explicitly reference or encorporate the HTML history, similarly to the way 2854 does notes added
<ht> scribenick: ht
AM: WebApps WG is publishing a number of specs
... We have agreed to look at the motivation -- what's behind them
... The WAWG have a model of how that world is going to evolve
... but it's not completely spelled out
... Two requirements: 1) You should be able to 'run' a WebApp offline;
... 2) You should be able to run a WebApp with data from more than
... So they have a spec. callled "Programmable Caching", which lets you bring in data from multiple websites, cache it, purge it, use it, etc.
... which is quite well-motivated.
... The other spec. we talked about and I have looked at are two database specs: Light Database and ?? Database
... These seem less well-motivated
... I asked Ian Hickson why they were doing these specs
<DanC> (sorry, I can't pin down the 2 DB specs among the blizzard on http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus )
AM: Ian replied it was a replacement for cookies
<Ashok> "Cookies are unreliable, sent to the server, have a small quota, and have a terrible API. Web Storage is intended to fix that."
NM: I understand the cookie overlap
... but when I see these database things, I think -- cookies for identifying me to gmail, but databases to actually _store_ my email
... which seems to go a lot further
AM: Right, that's the offline operation side of things
NM: The other thing about cookies is their special status wrt HTTP and client-server interaction
<DanC> (did anybody take the ball for writing about this stuff? darn; we didn't scribble names into http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/03/webappsoutline.html ; gotta look back over http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/03/26-minutes.html#item03 )
AM: These specs are very high-functionality, with a lot of standard DB transactional stuff including commit and rollback
<DanC> (ah... "AM: I'll contribute on section 5, app state")
AM: Summarizing: replace cookies, offline storage enabling offline execution; data from multiple websites
NM: At the f2f, we agreed to try to find people to pick up bits of the outline we produced
... and start writing at least a summary of the state of play, as in TV's [#-in-URI]
... So in particular, AM, are you willing to go on the list against section 5: Application State
AM: Yes
<scribe> ACTION: Ashok to propose a plan for his contributions to section 5: Client-side state [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/04/22-tagmem-irc]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-430 - Propose a plan for his contributions to section 5: Client-side state [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2010-04-29].
<DanC> action-xxx due +4 weeks
action-409 due +1 week
<trackbot> ACTION-409 Run Larry's plan for closing IRIEverywhere by the XML Core WG due date now +1 week
action-430 due +1 week
<trackbot> ACTION-430 Propose a plan for his contributions to section 5: Client-side state due date now +1 week
DC: TBL, when did you write the Tabulator?
TBL: Three years ago, maybe?
DC: I wonder if it might be worth trying to get from you what you learned from that exercise
... about security, storage, . . .
... Maybe via an interview?
TBL: About . . .
DC: Javascript, security limitations
<noah> I'm curious what the result of the interview would be: a) input to the TAG work b) magazine article c) ???
TBL: Started out as a webapp, turned into a local app == a firefox extension, because that got it inside the trust envelop
... You should talk to James Hollenbach <jambo@csail.mit.edu> about this, he's been taking it forward
... using CORS
<DanC> http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2005/ajar/ajaw/people/Overview.html Jim Hollenbach
<timbl_> <http://web.mit.edu/jambo/www/foaf.rdf#jambo>
NM: So if we did such an interview, would it be as an input to our thinking about WebAppArchitecture, or as a publication in its own right?
DC: more the latter, see the series Ian Jacobs has been doing
NM: Next steps?
DC: I found out what I wanted to. . .
<DanC> pointer, ashok?
AM: We did get one reply to our request to review our webapps taxonomy
<DanC> action-401?
<trackbot> ACTION-401 -- Ashok Malhotra to ask WebApps working group to review John Kemp's taxonomy -- due 2010-03-18 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/401
<Ashok> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Mar/0072.html
<DanC> close action-354
<trackbot> ACTION-354 Review client side storage apis (web simple storage etc.), looking for architectural issues or other critical problems... or interesting design features the TAG should know about closed
NM: [we'll come to that under next+1 agendum]
close ACTION-354
<trackbot> ACTION-354 Review client side storage apis (web simple storage etc.), looking for architectural issues or other critical problems... or interesting design features the TAG should know about closed
<noah> DC: looked at Zotoro? tool, and saw they were using Tabulator as data store
ACTION-392?
<trackbot> ACTION-392 -- Dan Connolly to look into using new client side storage APIs as an RDFa or tabulator data store -- due 2010-03-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/392
DC: So I thought there was a connection, and I sent email
... but the reply was not positive
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Feb/0152.html
DC: TBL, are the client-side storage APIs any use for storing triples?
TBL: Some kind of RDF API standardisation is probably needed -- RDF is 10 years old, maybe an XG, we need to move on this
<DanC> close action-392
<trackbot> ACTION-392 Look into using new client side storage APIs as an RDFa or tabulator data store closed
close ACTION-392
<trackbot> ACTION-392 Look into using new client side storage APIs as an RDFa or tabulator data store closed
<noah> Email from Ashok to Web Apps
<noah> Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Mar/0072.html
JK: I understand the poster's concern about my use of the word 'trust', but I think it was OK in the narrow sense I used it,
... but I also agree that the larger issue has not been completely covered
<DanC> (this widget stuff is crossing various sorts of finish lines; e.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/CR-widgets-access-20100420/ Widget Access Request Policy )
AM: So yes, he's asking for more detail on something which was just a bullet point
<noah> Dan, do you think we need to do anything on that?
HST: But it doesn't compromise the taxonomy?
AM: Right, it does not.
close ACTION-401
<trackbot> ACTION-401 Ask WebApps working group to review John Kemp's taxonomy
DC: Does this connect with our outline and writing?
<DanC> stuck it where? pointer?
AM: I took comments from the email and added them to the WebApps outline under point 1 Architecture
DC: Where?
<Ashok> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/04/WebApps.html
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2005/03/28-editor-style.html
<DanC> action-401: note http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2010/04/WebApps.html
<trackbot> ACTION-401 Ask WebApps working group to review John Kemp's taxonomy notes added
<DanC> action-352?
<trackbot> ACTION-352 -- John Kemp to integrate whiteboard drawings into a prose document about ways to distribute applications -- due 2010-03-08 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/352
<Ashok> I cannot cahnge the access right -- needs team priviledges
<noah> John, should we close 352
<DanC> john, NM thinks maybe it's just an admin error that 352 isn't closed
<noah> should we have closed it at the F2F?
<johnk__> I did ACTION-352, but, at the F2F we decided to keep the action open
<DanC> scribenick: DanC
<johnk__> as a placeholder for me to do more work on it
<johnk__> in the WebApps subject
ok
<noah> OK, with what due date and what next goals, please?
<noah> Anyway, please update as you see fit. We'll move on if you can't get back on the phone.
<johnk__> ACTION-352?
<trackbot> ACTION-352 -- John Kemp to integrate whiteboard drawings into a prose document about ways to distribute applications -- due 2010-03-08 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/352
action-352 due +2 weeks
<trackbot> ACTION-352 Integrate whiteboard drawings into a prose document about ways to distribute applications due date now +2 weeks
<johnk__> hmm, OK, so, I'll change the due date and add relevant notes
thanks.
<DKA> action-376?
<trackbot> ACTION-376 -- Daniel Appelquist to send to www-tag a pointer to and brief summary of Mobile Web Best Practices working group's "Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies" and its implications for content sniffing: http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/ -- due 2010-03-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/376
<johnk__> but I'm staying on IRC
<noah> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Feb/0171.html
<noah> DC: I looked and was curious whether the guidelines should cite IETF work.
DKA: yes, this is done
<noah> DKA: Yes, I had a discussion with XXX and Larry, and the net was that Larry was satisfied that the correct material was ref'd
DKA: yes, we finished that discussion with Larry about citing the IETF material
close ACTION-376
<trackbot> ACTION-376 Send to www-tag a pointer to and brief summary of Mobile Web Best Practices working group's "Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies" and its implications for content sniffing: http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/ closed
<noah> DC: OK, Larry can come back if he still has a problem
<noah> close ACTION-376
<trackbot> ACTION-376 Send to www-tag a pointer to and brief summary of Mobile Web Best Practices working group's "Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies" and its implications for content sniffing: http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/ closed
<noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/pendingreview
<noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/322 - Ask for W3C resources on writing on hyperlinking
NM: so next time for this one?
DC: yes
action-353?
<trackbot> ACTION-353 -- Noah Mendelsohn to do just a bit of work framing some issues around identification for Ajax apps (remembering the merged maps use case) -- due 2010-03-08 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/353
<noah> close ACTION-353
<trackbot> ACTION-353 Do just a bit of work framing some issues around identification for Ajax apps (remembering the merged maps use case) closed
NM: I think we did this at the ftf; Raman is following up
DanC: re 379... it's certainly published... but oh yeah... we weren't sure if we should follow up re lack of schemas
action-384?
<trackbot> ACTION-384 -- Noah Mendelsohn to CVS usage edits -- due 2010-03-04 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/384
action-384?
<trackbot> ACTION-384 -- Noah Mendelsohn to cVS usage edits -- due 2010-05-11
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/384
NM: yes, 407 and 424 are properly pending
<noah> HENRY ===> PLEASE REMOVE URI FOR PRIVACY CFP FROM PUBLISHED MINUTES
ADJOURN
s,FYI this is the CfP for the privacy workshop (reference ACTION-408): http://www.w3.org/2010/api-privacy-ws/,,
s,action-408: CFP (draft?) is http://www.w3.org/2010/api-privacy-ws/,,
<timbl> Couldn't fd any evidence for Royal Mail saying you couldn't link to
"We constantly change and update sections of our site, and want to ensure that you and your customers continue to get the latest information and services you need. Therefore, please don’t provide links to pages on our website other than those listed above." -- http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/content1?catId=28000674&mediaId=28100668