IRC log of tagmem on 2002-07-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:04:03 [Ian]
Ian has changed the topic to: W3C TAG 29 Jul:
18:54:04 [TimBL]
TimBL has joined #tagmem
18:54:28 [TimBL]
Zakim, who is here?
18:54:29 [Zakim]
sorry, TimBL, I don't know what conference this is
18:54:30 [Zakim]
On IRC I see TimBL, Zakim, Ian, RRSAgent
18:54:48 [TimBL]
Zakim, this will be tag
18:54:49 [Zakim]
ok, TimBL, I see TAG_Weekly()2:30PM already started
18:54:59 [TimBL]
cool, zak.
18:55:05 [Ian]
Why 2:30?
18:55:06 [TimBL]
so who's here?
18:55:10 [Ian]
I guess we have the bridge 30 mins in advance
18:55:27 [TimBL]
Yes, by my request so people could get sorted out before the meeting began.
18:55:37 [Zakim]
18:56:15 [TimBL]
Zakim, who is here?
18:56:16 [Zakim]
On the phone I see TimBL, Ian
18:56:17 [Zakim]
On IRC I see TimBL, Zakim, Ian, RRSAgent
18:56:19 [Ian]
19:01:19 [Ian]
Then if you want to go nuts Vancouver is just laced with dazzling 12-star hotels with
19:02:56 [Zakim]
19:03:26 [Chris]
Chris has joined #tagmem
19:03:35 [Roy]
Roy has joined #tagmem
19:04:03 [TBray]
TBray has joined #tagmem
19:04:25 [Zakim]
19:04:44 [Ian]
zakim, ??P8 TimBray
19:04:45 [TBray]
zakim, ??p8 is TBray
19:04:45 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??P8 TimBray', Ian. Try /msg Zakim help
19:04:45 [Zakim]
19:04:46 [Zakim]
+TBray; got it
19:05:03 [TimBL]
Posisbly PaulC
19:05:15 [TimBL]
Expecting Roy on the phone
19:05:20 [TimBL]
Expecting DanC on the phone
19:05:32 [Zakim]
19:05:40 [Ian]
zakim, ??P7 is Roy
19:05:41 [Zakim]
+Roy; got it
19:05:49 [Ian]
Let's assume regrets from PC.
19:05:50 [Chris]
zakim, mute me
19:05:51 [Zakim]
ChrisL should now be muted
19:05:57 [TBray]
zakim, mute me
19:05:58 [Zakim]
TBray should now be muted
19:06:02 [Chris]
is that better?
19:06:06 [Ian]
Regrets from Norm and Stuart
19:06:17 [TBray]
we hear ya
19:06:18 [DanC]
DanC has joined #tagmem
19:06:34 [TimBL]
we'll getstarted
19:06:36 [Ian]
Scribe: IJ
19:06:46 [TBray]
I expect Paul & DaveO will show up together from Redmond
19:06:47 [TimBL]
Confirming scribe -- Ian. confirmed
19:06:50 [Ian]
Roll: DO, TBL, TB, CL, IJ, RF
19:06:57 [TimBL]
RRSAgent, pointer?
19:06:57 [RRSAgent]
19:07:04 [TimBL]
meeting si now in progress
19:07:10 [Ian]
Regrets: SW, NW, PC
19:07:19 [Zakim]
19:07:22 [Ian]
Accept 22 July minutes?
19:07:26 [TBray]
zakim, unmute me
19:07:27 [Zakim]
TBray was not muted, TBray
19:07:58 [TimBL]
19:08:10 [TBray]
zakim, mute me
19:08:12 [Zakim]
TBray should now be muted
19:08:17 [Ian]
22 July minutes accepted.
19:08:26 [Ian]
Accept this agenda?
19:08:31 [Ian]
19:08:49 [TBray]
zakim, unmute me
19:08:50 [Zakim]
TBray was not muted, TBray
19:08:59 [Chris]
zakim, unmute me
19:09:00 [Zakim]
ChrisL was not muted, Chris
19:09:26 [TimBL]
Regrets all canadians and DanC.
19:09:29 [Ian]
5 August: Regrets: DO, DC (likely), TB (likely)
19:09:49 [Ian]
5 August: CL regrets
19:09:51 [TimBL]
19:10:00 [Chris]
zakim, mute me
19:10:01 [Zakim]
ChrisL should now be muted
19:10:25 [Ian]
Still echo
19:10:31 [TimBL]
5th cancelled.
19:10:37 [DanC]
I'm available 12Aug
19:10:52 [TimBL]
12th no regrets except for DO
19:10:54 [DanC]
DO: regrets 12Aug
19:11:02 [TimBL]
... and CL
19:11:03 [Ian]
12 August: Available: DC, TB, RF, IJ, TBL. Regrets: DO, CL
19:11:11 [Ian]
Next meeting: 12 August
19:11:14 [TimBL]
Wwe on for next meeting 12th august
19:11:50 [DanC]
you can do "Zakim, I am ChrisL"
19:12:48 [Ian]
1. Action SW 2002/07/22: Persuade TimBL to write an exposition of his position on httpRange-14.
19:12:49 [Ian]
19:13:02 [ChrisL]
I have just posted a snapshot of chapter 2 in progress
19:13:02 [Ian]
TBL Submission:
19:13:12 [ChrisL]
planned to comit to cvs but not done before call
19:13:39 [Ian]
Agenda accepted.
19:13:42 [ChrisL]
action item was for *tomorrow* so this is early ;-)
19:13:58 [TBray]
good Chris, give him a cookie
19:15:04 [DanC]
"The TAG expects to include these findings in the TAG's Architectural Recommendations" --
19:15:24 [Ian]
IJ: Right - not sure if they will be incorporated wholesale.
19:15:35 [Ian]
IJ: But I agree that there is an expectation about inclusion.
19:15:41 [Ian]
19:15:41 [Ian]
Arch doc
19:15:45 [Ian]
1. Action CL 2002/07/08: Propose text for section 2 (Formats). Deadline 30 July. Done
19:16:05 [ChrisL]
which action item is it?
19:16:23 [ChrisL]
tthe 'repost' or the 'write chapter 2'
19:16:24 [TimBL]
2.1 1 1
19:16:24 [Ian]
19:16:24 [Ian]
Action TB: Send info about hotels to TAG.
19:16:24 [Ian]
19:16:25 [DanC]
" 1. Action CL 2002/07/08: Propose text for section 2 (Formats). Deadline 30 July."
19:16:32 [ChrisL]
ok, in progress
19:16:50 [Ian]
TBL: Why to tag not www-tag?
19:17:59 [Ian]
19:18:19 [Ian]
Action CL: Save in another place, IJ will merge with next draft.
19:18:41 [TBray]
I hear no echo now
19:19:19 [TimBL]
2) Action DC 2002/07/08: Ask Michael Mealing when IETF decided not to use HTTP URis to name protocols. Awaiting reply
19:19:30 [ChrisL]
zakim, mute me
19:19:31 [Zakim]
ChrisL should now be muted
19:19:44 [Ian]
DC: Not done. Please chagne to IESG
19:19:45 [TimBL]
... should be "ask IESG"
19:20:32 [Ian]
# Action DC: 2002/07/15: Generate tables of URI scheme props from RDF. (Take another stab?)
19:21:09 [Ian]
DC: I propose to withdraw.
19:21:18 [Ian]
TBL: I think the table is useful (pointers to specs, for example).
19:21:31 [Ian]
DC: I don't like the table as is.
19:21:48 [Ian]
Action transferred to TBL.
19:21:55 [Ian]
19:21:55 [Ian]
4. Action IJ 2002/07/08: Produce WD of Arch Doc. Harvest from DanC's URI FAQ. Deadline 30 August.
19:22:32 [Ian]
IJ: Sorry. Will have something this week.
19:22:37 [Ian]
19:22:37 [Ian]
* Action PC 2002/07/08: Propose alternative cautionary wording for finding regarding IANA registration. Refer to "How to Register a Media Type with IANA (for the IETF tree) "
19:22:47 [Ian]
(PC not here)
19:23:45 [Ian]
19:23:58 [Ian]
1. httpRange-14
19:23:58 [Ian]
19:24:03 [Ian]
See doc posted by TBL:
19:24:11 [Ian]
19:24:13 [Ian]
And history by RF:
19:24:18 [Ian]
19:24:35 [Ian]
TBL: In my doc, I explain why the alternatives don't work.
19:24:52 [Ian]
DO: I'd like a week to read up on this.
19:25:00 [DaveO]
DaveO has joined #tagmem
19:25:23 [DaveO]
I have been on mute, except when speaking :-)
19:25:33 [Ian]
TB: If TBL convinces us that HTTP URIs are for docs only, where would we write this? What are the practical consequences?
19:25:37 [TBray]
heavy echo
19:25:39 [TimBL]
Zakim, please mute ChrisL
19:25:40 [Ian]
19:25:40 [Zakim]
ChrisL should now be muted
19:25:51 [ChrisL]
I was already muted, in fact
19:25:52 [TimBL]
Zakim, please unmute ChrisL
19:25:53 [Zakim]
ChrisL was not muted, TimBL
19:25:54 [Ian]
zakim, mute me
19:25:55 [Zakim]
Ian should now be muted
19:26:05 [ChrisL]
zakim, mute ChrisL
19:26:06 [Zakim]
ChrisL should now be muted
19:26:13 [Ian]
TB: Where would this show up in the arch document if we agreed with TBL?
19:26:41 [Ian]
TBL: s/resource/document, for example.
19:27:03 [Ian]
TBL: So representations don't apply to mailboxes, e.g..
19:27:08 [Ian]
zakim, unmute me
19:27:09 [Zakim]
Ian should no longer be muted
19:27:15 [TimBL]
Zakim, who is talking?
19:27:26 [Zakim]
TimBL, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: TBray (42%), ChrisL (73%)
19:27:29 [Ian]
TB: It would certainly add focus to the debate if we had some actual practical consequences.
19:27:33 [TimBL]
Zakim, please mute ChrisL
19:27:34 [Ian]
zakim, must ChrisL
19:27:34 [Zakim]
ChrisL should now be muted
19:27:35 [ChrisL] seems to equate 'document' and 'any collection of bits'
19:27:35 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'must ChrisL', Ian. Try /msg Zakim help
19:27:46 [TBray]
zakim, mute me
19:27:47 [Zakim]
TBray should now be muted
19:27:50 [TimBL]
19:27:53 [DaveO]
very nice DanC voice, Tim.
19:28:14 [TBray]
I think echo situation improved when I muted myself
19:28:22 [Ian]
TBL: Practical consequences -
19:28:28 [DanC]
Zakim, who's talking?
19:28:37 [Ian]
1) RDF Core would have to stop using doc-looking URIs to refer to some classes.
19:28:40 [Zakim]
DanC, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: TimBL (66%), ChrisL (39%)
19:29:10 [Ian]
RF: I am certain Dublin Core doesn't need to change.
19:29:11 [TBray]
no echo !
19:29:21 [Ian]
TBL: The URI of title has no hash, so is confusable between document/resource.
19:29:26 [Ian]
RF: It doesn't matter.
19:29:29 [ChrisL]
61# works. zakimbot is broken
19:30:17 [Ian]
TBL: Before RDF, people haven't used URIs to refer to other things than web pages.
19:30:21 [ChrisL]
Never understood the RDF way of using # to mean "not za fragment identifier"
19:30:22 [Ian]
DC: There are namespace names.
19:30:47 [ChrisL]
people do indeed use URI to refer to things other than web pages
19:30:47 [Ian]
TBL: If it doesn't affect the software, it's irrelevant philosophy.
19:30:48 [TBray]
19:30:54 [ChrisL]
19:31:00 [Ian]
19:31:30 [Ian]
19:31:47 [ChrisL]
No, the *definition* of dc.title has that length
19:31:52 [ChrisL]
19:32:11 [Ian]
DC: I would note that the XML Schema WG used URI refs to talk about data types. They use hash marks in them.
19:32:23 [TBray]
19:32:37 [Ian]
RF: What about POST?
19:32:42 [TimBL]
q+ RF
19:32:49 [DanC]
"aren't fragment identifiers"???
19:32:54 [Ian]
CL: This use of "#" as non fragment id's has always struck me as odd.
19:32:57 [Ian]
ack ChrisL
19:33:26 [Ian]
CL: Why is a fragment special?
19:34:05 [Ian]
TBL: With and without a hash is fundamentally different. A URI Ref is a completely different animal than a URI. Need to look at another spec.
19:34:25 [Ian]
CL: But the history is that these were the same thing.
19:34:33 [Ian]
TBL: No, defined in same spec, but not the same thing.
19:35:23 [Ian]
TBL: When you use "#" in an HTML doc, not a huge effect. But in RDF, a huge difference - takes you into abstract space.
19:35:59 [Ian]
CL: I don't like the implication that non-RDF languages are non-semantic.
19:36:21 [Ian]
CL: What is good practice for using the "#"?
19:36:32 [Ian]
TBL: You define that in the format spec, part of MIME registration.
19:36:41 [Ian]
19:37:39 [Ian]
CL: Most specs other than RDF use sense of "fragment" (whether temporal or element-based).
19:37:49 [DanC]
really? there are ways to refer to 7 seconds into a video? I've been waiting for those, but haven't seen them.
19:37:52 [Ian]
19:37:54 [ChrisL]
good summary, ian
19:37:56 [Ian]
ack RF
19:37:59 [ChrisL]
19:38:47 [TimBL]
@@@@@ dropped response to Chris
19:38:50 [DanC]
[yet somehow, magically, calling it a "Document" precludes cars. Pls pick one side of your mouth to speak out of, timbl]
19:39:24 [TBray]
19:39:26 [Ian]
TBL: Ambiguity about owner's intent of what is identified.
19:40:03 [ChrisL]
WebCGM fragment syntax
19:40:04 [Ian]
DC: What if it's ambiguous but two things identified are identical?
19:40:37 [ChrisL]
SVG fragment identifiers
19:41:05 [Ian]
DC: Can you point to a car that's also a web page?
19:41:10 [Ian]
TBL: For me that's incoherent.
19:41:17 [ChrisL]
19:41:25 [Ian]
DC: But in common sense, you can't post to documents.
19:41:36 [Ian]
TBL: Documents are inanimate. Cars are animate.
19:41:44 [Ian]
TBL: They have a physical presence.
19:43:25 [Ian]
TBL: No way I can determine whether I can use the URI to talk about a Web page since owner may have not meant it that way.
19:43:26 [ChrisL]
19:43:29 [Ian]
RF: You can do this with RDF.
19:43:30 [TBray]
what Roy said
19:43:36 [ChrisL]
Hyperlinking and timing
19:43:36 [ChrisL]
A hyperlink into or within a timed document may cause a seek of the current presentation time or may activate an element (if it is not in violation of any timing model rules).
19:43:39 [Ian]
TBL: But this won't retrofit to 10 billion existing web pages.
19:43:40 [Ian]
19:43:58 [Ian]
RF proposal:
19:44:11 [Ian]
- Given lack of any other assertions, you can assume that a URI refers to a document.
19:44:33 [Ian]
RF: You are saying that because you don't have a default, therefore the entire HTTP namespace should be your lowest common denominator.
19:44:56 [Ian]
19:45:02 [TBray]
19:45:28 [ChrisL]
zakim, pick a chair
19:45:29 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'pick a chair', ChrisL. Try /msg Zakim help
19:45:36 [Ian]
19:45:37 [DaveO]
19:46:10 [Roy]
19:46:30 [Ian]
TB: A URI is a string you can compare. An HTTP URI can be dereferenced. The Web arch doesn't allow you to know what the resource is. This is why RDF is a good thing. Allows you to make such assertions.
19:46:31 [DaveO]
how do we ACK the queue?
19:46:36 [Ian]
ack TBray
19:46:38 [DanC]
ack tbray
19:47:01 [DanC]
DaveO, when I get the floor, can I discuss with TimBL?
19:47:04 [Ian]
TB: Once you have RDF, I still don't see why you need to limit the range of HTTP URIs or other URI schemes.
19:47:09 [Ian]
ack ChrisL
19:47:15 [DaveO]
Dan, sure.
19:47:16 [DanC]
my car is on the web.
19:47:24 [Ian]
CL: The car is a physical object, but it's not on the web. the concept is a title but is not on the web.
19:47:31 [Ian]
CL: You can point to the concept of "title".
19:47:40 [Ian]
CL: If you can point to "title", you can point to "car".
19:47:58 [Ian]
CL: I don't think you can point to a "title". You can point to a document where people say what they mean by title.
19:48:48 [Ian]
CL: Even with "#" you are pointing to a piece of a document. That piece may be an assertion. But could be pulled out and put in its own document, and I could refer to it without a "#".
19:48:54 [Ian]
19:49:37 [Ian]
DC: You can always use the URI for a Web page. If the Webmaster has also said that that URI identifies a car, that's fine.
19:49:48 [Ian]
TBL: When I do an HTTP transaction, can I store the results in RDF?
19:49:49 [Ian]
DC: Yes.
19:50:07 [Ian]
DC: In the example of my Web page, the Web page is a car.
19:50:11 [TBray]
19:50:28 [Ian]
TBL: What if a Web page talks about another Web page that talks about a car?
19:50:59 [Ian] -> -> car
19:51:36 [Ian]
TBL: As author of the first URI I assert that it identifies the second page.
19:51:45 [Ian]
TBL: I assert that they identify the same thing.
19:52:00 [Ian]
TBL: Not sure that identical if you get different pages back from the Web.
19:52:50 [Ian]
ack DanC
19:53:14 [Ian]
19:53:26 [Ian]
RF: The statement HTTP URIs identify documents is false.
19:53:49 [Ian]
TBL: We are working out a consistent set of terms. If "document" is the wrong term, that's fine; we can work out another.
19:53:57 [Ian]
TBL: I"m interesting in what machines can do.
19:54:08 [ChrisL]
I propose that Tim's definition of "document" is any bag of bits
19:54:12 [Ian]
ack Roy
19:54:46 [Ian]
RF: The software disagrees with you. I can't define proxies in your terms.
19:55:03 [Ian]
TBL: You can: where you say "resource", say "document". It's sufficiently generic to cover your proxies.
19:55:30 [DanC]
if timbl really means that roy could s/resource/document/g, it's much cheaper for timbl to s/document/resource/g.
19:55:46 [DaveO]
19:56:04 [Ian]
TBL: People think of the term "document" in a particular way, but that was the term as I originally intended (in an abstract sense).
19:57:11 [TBray]
19:58:11 [Ian]
RF: What do "wais:"
19:58:15 [Ian]
URIs identify?
19:58:25 [Ian]
RF: Search services.
19:58:33 [Ian]
RF: It's an information retrieval protocol.
19:58:35 [ChrisL]
so they identify a search engine
19:58:42 [DanC]
btw... timbl mentioned the cyc ontology; it really does have a wealth of nifty and relevant stuff on this topic...
19:58:46 [Ian]
RF: When you access a wais resource through a proxy.
19:58:47 [Ian]
19:58:54 [DanC]
timbl:Document = cyc:ConceptualWork, I think.
19:59:02 [Ian]
RF: you are saying - give me a representation of this resource through wais.
19:59:12 [ChrisL]
(this is the general gatewaying problem, which was established at Cern)
19:59:35 [Ian]
DO: This is a point that has been skirted around -use of proxies.
19:59:45 [Ian]
DO: Could RF write up something on proxies?
20:00:24 [Ian]
RF: I will read TBL's doc first.
20:00:28 [Ian]
ack TBray
20:01:16 [Ian]
TB: Suppose I believe that DC's car URI really denotes DC's car. Suppose I write a bunch of stuff in RDF about the car, and I have a carfinder service online to sift among cars out there. All that is logical and self-coherent and causes no heartburn.
20:01:49 [Ian]
TB: Suppose RF doesn't believe it's a car but the URI identifies a Web page. He writes a bunch of other RDF that talks about the Web page.
20:02:11 [Ian]
TB: Our assertions are not interoperable but could be bridged with some metadata. But at the end of the day, so what?
20:02:31 [Ian]
TB: The idea that you will have universal agreement on what is identified is a chimera.
20:02:40 [Ian]
TB: But what's the difference?
20:02:54 [ChrisL]
(sounds like "do we assume all assertions are true")
20:03:26 [Ian]
TB: If we need to work together, we will do the work to understand each other.
20:03:30 [ChrisL]
20:03:54 [Ian]
TBL: Cataclysmic interoperability problem is the heartburn.
20:04:03 [Ian]
TB: That's the reality of life. You can't make it go away.
20:04:16 [TimBL]
20:04:55 [Roy]
given any identifier, I can make a webpage out of it
20:05:21 [Ian]
TB: Another spin: suppose I want to make assertions that the Web page is a standin for W3C. Are Josh's views and mine that inconsistent? Perhaps on the surface, and we would need to work together. But I don't believe this problem can go away.
20:05:41 [Ian]
TBL: You can make it go away. You can merge data when using same ontologies.
20:06:00 [DaveO]
20:06:21 [Ian]
TBL: The situation TB describes is frightfully messy to me.
20:06:40 [Ian]
TBL: Where you have to do a massive conversion when merging data.
20:06:55 [TimBL]
x [ is fff of x ]
20:07:10 [Ian]
zakim, unmute me
20:07:11 [Zakim]
Ian should no longer be muted
20:07:24 [TimBL]
x -> [ is fff of x ] mapiing woul dhave to be introdde between 2 incompatible webs
20:07:27 [TimBL]
ack ian
20:07:28 [DaveO]
can't hear you ian...
20:07:31 [ChrisL]
is iamn there?
20:08:37 [TimBL]
20:09:00 [TimBL]
20:09:19 [DaveO]
or <xml:lang="sp">si</> ?
20:09:34 [ChrisL]
<foo xml:lang="es">Si</foo> <!-- I suggest -->
20:09:46 [TimBL]
(On the contrary it does mean that TimBL's stuff breaks when Roy's data is introduced)
20:10:20 [Roy]
then it is already too broken to use
20:10:42 [DaveO]
20:10:49 [DanC]
DanC has joined #tagmem
20:10:51 [Ian]
DC: TimBL wants a guarantee that someone will never find a car at the other end.
20:11:28 [DanC]
it's not "I can't know that". TimBL's saying "I consider that false."
20:11:38 [Ian]
RF: You need RDF to know what my URI identifies.
20:11:55 [Ian]
RF: If you want to be able to reason using this URI in an unambiguous manner, then you will need more information.
20:12:24 [Ian]
IJ: Then what does it mean that a URI means the same thing in any context?
20:12:30 [ChrisL]
isn't this an arcrole to say how much dereferencing is happening?
20:12:51 [Ian]
TBL: In general, there is an axiom that a URI identifies one thing in all cases.
20:12:51 [DanC]
I don't believe that axiom any more, btw, timbl.
20:13:08 [Ian]
TBL: If you use a URI in a relationship, it can indirectly refer to other things.
20:13:14 [Ian]
ack Ian
20:13:19 [ChrisL]
except in the trivial case - it identifies the resource that you get by dereferencing it
20:13:32 [DanC]
Chris, that's one (coherent) position: there are different ways to point. *p vs **p, in a sense.
20:13:41 [TimBL]
Roy has said that he can't use TimBL's scheme because proxies won't work because he thinks tim's system has no difference between document an representation, but there he i swrong, presumbably because he hasn't read TimBL's stuff yet.
20:14:12 [ChrisL]
arcrole of "the organisation that published this page"
20:14:13 [Ian]
TB: I suggest we publish the logs and stand back and see what happens on wwwt-ag.
20:14:41 [ChrisL]
as opposed to, say, arcrole of "the isp that hosts this page" or any other such arc role
20:14:54 [ChrisL]
ack ChrisL
20:15:16 [DanC]
In AaronSw's reply to TimBL ( I find much that I agree with.
20:15:41 [Roy]
Roy says that TimBL's document == resource and therefore it is confusing to call them documents
20:15:48 [Ian]
20:15:58 [DaveO]
I cede the chair back to TimBL...
20:16:21 [Ian]
20:16:21 [Ian]
20:16:21 [Ian]
# RFC3023Charset-21:
20:16:21 [Ian]
* Action CL: Send copy of information sent to tag regarding RFC3023Charset-21 to www-tag.
20:16:41 [Ian]
zakim, unmute ChrisL
20:16:42 [Zakim]
ChrisL should no longer be muted
20:16:58 [Ian]
Chris: I will do.
20:17:12 [Ian]
20:17:13 [DaveO]
20:17:14 [Ian]
# Status of URIEquivalence-15. Relation to Character Model of the Web (chapter 4)? See text from TimBL on URI canonicalization and email from Martin in particular. See more comments from Martin.
20:17:38 [Ian]
TB: Martin has made a kind of overwhelming case that we are stuck with char-by-char equivalence.
20:18:23 [Ian]
TB: We should say "When composing URIs, don't use percent-encoding unless you have to, and use lower case when you do."
20:18:29 [Ian]
DC: If you mean the same thing, spell it the same way.
20:18:52 [Ian]
DC: Someone may use e and E differently, so you'd better have good information before considering them to be equivalent.
20:19:33 [Ian]
TB: the cost seems to be too high for considering %7e and 7%E to be different (see MD's arguments).
20:19:55 [Ian]
DC: The cost of having receivers convert things is astronomical. It's easy for us, on the other hand, to say "use lower case when you percent-escape."
20:20:34 [ChrisL]
action item discharged
20:20:58 [ChrisL]
20:22:29 [ChrisL]
(2) is always needed in HTTP, no?
20:22:32 [Ian]
DC: If you write href="~...", the client better put a "~" byte on the wire, and not a %7e
20:22:38 [ChrisL]
once it goes over the wire?
20:22:43 [TimBL]
20:23:09 [Ian]
TB: Regardless of this, I think we can easily achieve consensus that it's worthwhile to make this point in the arch document. And make the point that for max interoperability, don't %-escape unless you have to, and use lowercase when you do.
20:24:13 [Ian]
DC: If someone gives you a URI, don't screw with it.
20:24:34 [Ian]
TB: Maybe not true: If a user types in a URI that has a space, then you are required to %20 that.
20:24:48 [Ian]
DC: But in that case, the user didn't give a URI.
20:25:32 [Ian]
TB: Right - if given a URI, don't scree with it. if composing a URI, there are cases where must escape things, others where shouldn't, and if given a percent-escape, don't screw with.
20:26:21 [Ian]
CL: You percent-escape Kanji as late as possible.
20:27:08 [Ian]
DC: Spaces and Kanji characters -are they in scope here?
20:27:15 [Ian]
CL: I'm happy to co-write a finding with Martni.
20:28:27 [Ian]
20:28:39 [Ian]
RF: The href attribute is CDATA (or whatever).
20:28:51 [ChrisL]
20:29:12 [Ian]
RF: The attribute value has to be translated from xml entities to something that looks like a URI. If there's a space into it, it needs to be translated into a URI first.
20:29:40 [Ian]
DC: Test case: two documents fed to an xslt processor. One has space, the other %20. The namespaces spec says that these are URi references.
20:30:08 [Ian]
DC: One guy spells the namespace name with 7-bits, the other with more.
20:30:34 [Ian]
RF: Mozilla treats space as illegal char. IE treats as auto-conversion to %2e (for href's in general). IE sends out the space over the wire.
20:30:44 [TimBL]
I have a feeling that there will probably some situation where the TAG has to say: stop, do it differently.
20:31:30 [Ian]
TBL: What's the next step? Continue from here? Or have someone go off and work on it?
20:31:32 [DanC]
my test case is from a question of interpretatoin sent to the XML Core wg (via xml-names-editor or xml-editor or some such).
20:31:48 [TimBL]
Maybe we bneed a set of test cases.
20:32:02 [Roy]
that should be %20
20:32:52 [DanC]
(I'm not sure about my "if you mean the same thing, say it the same way" position, now that we get into the IRI territory)
20:32:53 [Ian]
CL: I'd like to see whether the "character model of the web" says this.
20:33:05 [Ian]
TBL: Please keep this on agenda for next time.
20:33:17 [Ian]
20:33:26 [Zakim]
20:33:28 [TBray]
20:33:29 [Zakim]
20:33:34 [Zakim]
20:33:36 [DaveO]
20:33:36 [Zakim]
20:33:37 [Zakim]
20:36:40 [Ian]
RRSAgent, stop