See also: IRC log
Jeni to scribe next week, if Larry not present
for next week, regrets from Ashok and Peter
approval of minutes:
RESOLUTION: Minutes of 4-6 January 2012 F2F http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2012/01/04-agenda are approved
Yves to create a local arrangements page the next f2f meeting
Noah: I will probably miss the IETF meeting prior TAG f2f
ht: the point was for us to learn about IETF more than being sure TAG is represented
approval of january 19th minutes postponed
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/persistence.html
Dated version: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/persistence-2012-01-23.html
ht: there are high level goals, despite focusing mainly on http uris (but not only). What is lacks crucially is next steps
the only pending thing was the workshop report, which is linked now and was circulated widely.
Key deliverables and schedules are empty as we are missing next steps
jar: if we had a clear view of who would be the customers, it would help
jar: maybe a community group?
ht: community group are about what W3C can do.
not sure what we want out of this is a REC track doc
<noah> I've tried to push us to have goals and success critera that aren't document; documents should be deliverables in support of some goal
Yves: CGs are not only to do pre-REC track work, it can be there to clarify things on a topic
Noah: how about saying that our work is done, we helped.
ht: we need to do something, as if things break here, we wouldn't have done our job
HT: Success would be coming into existence of a mechanism for creating persistent domains
jar: we are not empowered or able to achieve this kind of success. We can produce document, recipes to get persistent domain names, but other will have to implement
<noah> I note that we pretty much aren't empowered to do anything. I still think it sometimes make sense to point out that success can be defined at more than one level. Sometimes, I think it's OK to set success criteria even when the means of achieve that success is not entirely within our control
real success would be creation of such domains, but it's not something we can achieve
<jar> noah says 2 goals: #1 persistent domains, #2 publishing a recipe for causing persistent domains to come about
<noah> I thought I said two goals: 1) real success is causing the community to converge on a practical means of maintaining persistent domains -- that's a goal we can't achieve by ourselves in support of which 2) publish a document, a goal we can definitely achieve
<noah> ACTION-528?
<trackbot> ACTION-528 -- Henry Thompson to create and get consensus on a product page and tracker product page for persistence of names -- due 2012-01-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/528
<noah> ACTION-653?
<trackbot> ACTION-653 -- Noah Mendelsohn to schedule telcon discussion of Persistence product page (which was drafted for but not reviewed at F2F -- due 2012-01-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/653
Noah: is the question "are there people lining up to create that CG" or "are there people to produce work in that CG" ?
ht: both, first work would be to get people engaged
<noah> From: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/
<noah> Draft of product plan was discussed 4-6 January 2012 TAG F2F: this version was proposed by Henry Thompons, but more discussion is needed to agree on the plan.
<JeniT> jar, you need to propose it and a some minimum number of people need to express interest
<noah> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/
<noah> close ACTION-528
<trackbot> ACTION-528 Create and get consensus on a product page and tracker product page for persistence of names closed
<noah> . ACTION: Henry to update http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/persistence-2012-01-23.html to reflect agreement on 26 January telcon regarding settling at F2F
<noah> ACTION: Henry to update http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/persistence-2012-01-23.html to reflect agreement on 26 January telcon regarding settling at F2F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/26-tagmem-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-666 - Update http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/persistence-2012-01-23.html to reflect agreement on 26 January telcon regarding settling at F2F [on Henry Thompson - due 2012-02-02].
<noah> ACTION-653?
<trackbot> ACTION-653 -- Noah Mendelsohn to schedule telcon discussion of Persistence product page (which was drafted for but not reviewed at F2F -- due 2012-01-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/653
<noah> close ACTION-653
<trackbot> ACTION-653 Schedule telcon discussion of Persistence product page (which was drafted for but not reviewed at F2F closed
<noah> ISSUE-58 (namespaceDocument-8): XML Schema Namespace Document
<noah> ACTION-23?
<trackbot> ACTION-23 -- Henry Thompson to track progress of #int bug 1974 in the XML Schema namespace document in the XML Schema WG -- due 2012-01-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/23
ht: the schema datatype spec has a small section about namespace usage
issue is that the ns document is missing an anchor
HT: For XSD datatypes, it suggests that to talk about e.g. any uri, you use XMLSchemaNamespace#anyURI. Problem is, you can get a namespace document, and it has no such anchor.
HT: I filed a bug a very long time ago
the bug is still open, while schema language is updating its version
<jar> are we talking about http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema ?
<JeniT> yes, I believe so
<jar> isn't the same true of the XHTML ns doc?
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#namespaces
<jar> oh no it's not.
ht: I notified the chair and it will be going forward
<noah> The rec is at: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ which defines namespaces http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema and http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-datatypes (the latter being rarely used, I think)
<jar> xhtml doesn't specify use of #-concatenated URIs, xml schema does (IIUC)
<ht> So, e.g. http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#anyURI
Jeni: do you need to do conneg to be able to resolve the fragment?
ht: if you ask for application/xml first you'll get the xml schema, not the html
<jar> it would be easy enough to kludge up some RDFa
Jeni: if you have anchor in the HTML,
it will mean something you may not mean
... what does http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#foo
mean?
<noah> FYI, http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-datatypes.xsd contains:
<noah> <simpleType name="anyURI"><restriction base="anyURI"/></simpleType>
<jar> I also think it is meant to refer to the datatype, not to an HTML element… but maybe not clear... this is a good exercise to force the question
<ht> "Each built-in datatype defined in this specification can be uniquely addressed via a URI Reference constructed as follows:
<ht> the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace
<ht> the fragment identifier is the name of the datatype
<ht> For example, to address the int datatype, the URI is:
<ht> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int"
Ashok: you don't want to refer to a place in the document, you want to refer to a datatype. So a different use of a fragid
noah: when talking about 3023bis, we tripped over the same issue with rdf+xml, saying that the fragment is not identifying what is meant by 3023bis. Now there are two more exceptions, xpath functions and now xml schema
<ht> <xs:simpleType name="int" id="int">
<ht> [from the schema-doc for schemas --- so there are anchors there already, the conneg problem is that there are no such anchors in the other leg of the conneg]
jar: no need to talk about 3023bis. Only read 3023 which is what is in effect right now
<jar> application/xhtml+xml already specifies rdf-style fragids… we could just assume that and put rdfa in the ns doc.. don't talk about 3023bis now
noah: our goal with 3023bis was to help move out, so it's relevant
jar: relevant to 3023bis, but not to this discussion
ht: the wording in the schema spec is using "
Each built-in datatype in this specification (both "primitive" and "derived") can be uniquely addressed via a URI Reference constructed as follows:
"
if we conneg, we have a document where the anchor is defined, one where the anchor is not
<noah> noah: I thought our tentative agreement with RFC 3023bis authors (Chris Lilley and Murata Makoto) was that application/rdf+xml would be called out as the one exception to the rule that someURIreturningXML#fragid would in all cases be interpreted per XPointer
ht: note that this issue was before http-range-14
<noah> noah: I'm pointing out that we're hearing that XSD datatype namespace documents and XQuery function namespace documents may be two more exceptions. I'm suggesting this should be discussed with Murata-san and Chris
<jar> FOAF spec sets good example, I think? (for the rdf-style fragids at least)
<noah> noah: I hear Henry saying "yeah, I have a broader action to get back to the 3023bis folks"
Jeni: the other way of resolving it would be to remove the ids from the schema doc
<noah> ACTION-564?
<trackbot> ACTION-564 -- Henry Thompson to track fragid issues in 3023bis, report to TAG and/or communicate with 3023bis editors as appropriate -- due 2012-02-14 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/564
ht: the group will probably think that it will breaks backward compatibility
<jar> ht: "can be addressed" in schema spec is webarch-anomalous
<JeniT> it's been a useful example I think on the fragid work
<noah> XSD 1.1 datatypes document: http://www.w3.org/2009/XMLSchema/datatypes.xsd
<noah> Oops, that's for markup like <xs:facet>. Sorry.
Ashok: let's turn the question around: you got a collection of data types, you want to talk about data types, and collection of data types. What mechanism can be used?
jar: RDF semantics tells you what those URIs means
<jar> google rdf-mt
<JeniT> ashok, you could use RDF that said xsd:int rdfs:isDescribedBy <schema.xsd#int-anchor>
<noah> ACTION-560?
<trackbot> ACTION-560 -- Henry Thompson to review HTML polyglot last call Due 2011-06-06 -- due 2012-01-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/560
<Ashok> Yes, Jeni, we could now ... there was no RDF when we decided on that convention
<JeniT> ashok, sure :)
<noah> Referring to HTML issue 120
ht: this has to do with my concern with HTML issue 120, allowing to remove all ns definitions from html5
<noah> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/120
<noah> Henry please clarify: are you speaking specifically of the text/html serialization? I assume application/xhtml+xml supports namespaces and puts them in the DOM in any case, right?
the status quo seemed to mean that ns definition was allowed in html5, but it is still unclea
unclear
<noah> RDF or RDFa?
<JeniT> RDFa
<Zakim> noah, you wanted to get clarification and ask about the DOM
noah: by html5, you wanted to say the html serialization or the xml one?
ht: it's about the use of ns declaration with the html parser (as opposed to the xml parser)
<JeniT> the RDFa-in-HTML doc that talks about interpreting namespace declarations is http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-in-html/#backwards-compatibility
ht: RDFa talks about the DOM and about the infoset. There is something in the html spec about how to get an infoset out of the html parser
<noah> ACTION-560?
<trackbot> ACTION-560 -- Henry Thompson to review HTML polyglot last call Due 2011-06-06 -- due 2012-01-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/560
<noah> noah: My point was, we should focus not so much on whether HTML5 claims to drop or not drop namespaces, but rather on what's in the DOM, and whether downsteam specs can build on that to get namespaces when they need them
<noah> ACTION-560 Due 2012-02-28
<trackbot> ACTION-560 Review HTML polyglot last call Due 2011-06-06 due date now 2012-02-28
<noah> ACTION-632?
<trackbot> ACTION-632 -- Ashok Malhotra to frame issues around client-side storage work -- due 2012-02-07 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/632
<noah> ACTION-647?
<trackbot> ACTION-647 -- Ashok Malhotra to draft product page on client-side storage focusing on specific goals and success criteria Due: 2012-01-17 -- due 2012-02-07 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/647
<noah> ACTION-572?
<trackbot> ACTION-572 -- Yves Lafon to look at appcache in HTML5 -- due 2011-11-29 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/572
Noah: draft product page on this
we got feedback from Robin on the ML
<noah> Draft product page: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/clientsidestorage-2012-01-24.html
Ashok: Robin comments were very useful. I don't think that he objecting to the product page
noah: I'm proposing we get as far as we can with those of us on the call, and we will address any remaining concerns Robin may have when he's available
Ashok: we need to clarify what the issues are.
<noah> Goals
<noah> The goal of this work is to document for the community good practices relating to the use of client-side local storage by Web Applications.
<noah> YL: Seems to be about use of current technologies....
<noah> AM: You are right, was going to get to that, but will do so now.
<noah> AM: One of the things you want are apps that can run connected or disconnected
<noah> AM: Should be easy to switch modes
<noah> AM: If you actually look at appcache, which helps you with offline, you can't do that. The app is either online or offline. Your files are the resources that you have stored locally. You cannot update, etc.
<noah> AM: There's no synchronization, etc. If we start with "this is what client-side storage should enable", you want up with a bunch of requirements, many of which are not yet addressed in current technology. So, we're speaking about requirements for a client-side storage facility.
<noah> AM: This is different in spirit than what we usually do.
<noah> YL: Clarification about app cache. It's more about having consistent state of resources belonging to web apps. If you're offline, you'll have in your cache all the data you need to run. it's consistent, and it's all there. WHen connected, you might get updates.
<noah> YL: That's a bit different from local storage, or a comprehensive approach to disconnected operation that might include PUT/POST, etc.
<noah> YL: So appcache and local storage are different
<Zakim> noah, you wanted to say we want architectural principles.
noah: we should emphasize on architectural issues. The success criteria starts with "what are the requirements", but it may not be TAG's role to take the lead here. TAG's role might be more in the use of URI, the interaction with the HTTP cache, etc...
Ashok: we also need to say what we want local storage to do for us
noah: we want to understand the use cases, but the main thing is about the architectural principles
like linking
ex: if you are creating something locally and it will be exported, what is the linking story there?
let's continue in two weeks, when Ashok and Robin will be there
ADJOURNED