W3C | TAG | Previous:26 Aug | Next: 9 Sep
Minutes of 30 August 2002 TAG teleconference
Nearby: Teleconference details · issues list · www-tag archive
1. Administrative
- Roll call: NW (Chair), TB, CL, DC, IJ, DO (partial). Regrets: TBL, PC,
SW, RF
- Accepted 26 Aug minutes
- Accepted this agenda
- Next meeting: 9 Sep. Regrets: IJ, possibly CL.
- Action IJ 2002/07/08: Produce WD of Arch Doc. Harvest from DanC's URI FAQ.
Deadline 30 August. Done: See 30
August draft.
- Arch doc actions from 26 August:
- All resolutions taken into account.
- Action IJ and NW: Work on this footnote text. Foot note
deleted.
- Action IJ: Tweak this text to reflect TB and RF
comments.
- Action IJ: Talk to Janet about press release issue. No press
release.
- Action DC: Get another w3m member to approve short name
(since first public WD): webarch
- Action IJ: Update issues list w.r.t. closing augmentedInfoset-22
- Action IJ: Announce new issue contentPresentation-26.
2. Technical issues
- Comments on Architecture Document
- xlinkScope-23
- deepLinking-25
- uriMediaType-9
- URIEquivalence-15
- Postponed
The TAG is happy about the publication of the 30 August draft of the Architecture
Document.
[Ian]
- DC: Easy or hard to decided to publish?
- NW: I was comfortable.
- TB: Polish has improved intensely.
- [DanConn]
- Architectural
Principles of the World Wide Web
- W3C Working Draft 30 August 2002
- ^hooray!
- If anybody comes up with speaking points, please share them.
- [Ian]
- [Press issues]
- IJ: I think Janet Daly will be happy if TB alerts the press.
- CL: I would be pleased.
- IJ: What pieces in section 2 are sorely missing?
- TB: I think over next few meetings, I think arch doc improvements
should be high priority. I would focus on section 3 next.
- NW: Focus on issues pre-ftf, then new text after tag ftf meeting.
- TB: I think sections shouldn't be here unless they contain
principles.
- [DanConn]
- ^hmm... interesting idea
- "9. Do not use unregistered URI schemes:" looks like a good practice
thingy more than a principle.
- [Ian]
- IJ: Not addition of good practice note. May also justify a
section.
- [DanConn]
- "When one expects to interact with a resource" <- stilted. I hope
we can do away with that sort of language.
- [Ian]
- IJ: Also, sections exist where there are issues.
- NW: 2.2.3 linked to frag ids.
- CL: Frag ids halfway between ids and formats.
- TB: 2.2.3 suggests a good practice note: "Be careful about using frag
ids in the following situations."
- [DanConn]
- "2.6. Some generalities about absolute URI references"
- IJ: I'm not sure 2.6 will still be around, in the end, but it's kind of
handy, and I'm not sure where that material is covered elsewhere
yet.
- [Ian]
- IJ: I think 2.6 might be exploded. But I think it's a useful
FAQ..
- TB: Yes, I think it's correct to leave here for now, until we figure
it out.
- IJ: Is there something major missing in section 2? Please speak up
soon if so.
See issue
xlinkScope-23
[Ian]
- TB: See may comments
on traffic on xml-dev on this issue.
- [DanConn]
- hm... s/Recently Published Working Drafts/Working Drafts this
Month/
- (the "Recently Published" words at the start of headings makes it
hard to navigate the /TR/ page)
- [Ian]
- [Some discussion of hlink specification from HTML WG.]
- TB: I think being a linking schema language is a useful way to think
about hlink
- NW: Difficult to have discussions on this draft since not yet
published.
- CL: I think the TAG should request that the HTML WG publish this.
- DC: I nominate CL to ask them.
- Resolved: to encourage HTML WG to
publish their recent work related to linking.
Action CL: Request that this be done
(through HTML CG, WG, or whatever works)
See issue
deepLinking-25
[Ian]
- DC: Joseph Reagle now in the loop; see message
from Joseph.
- TB: He debunks the notion that we are wasting our time talking about
it.
- NW: I think that we would agree that the web arch would be broken if
you had to ask for permission before creating a link.
- DC: It's not a good model for human communication.
- TB: The Web arch includes sufficient infrastructure that, if you want
to establish access control, there is a good and automated way to use
that (per spec), and doing so is fine.
- DC: If you put a sign on your store "Don't come in after 8pm" without
a lock, you would be silly.
- TB: Publication of a URI without access control is an invitation to
dereference.
- CL: Also, confusion between publication of content and how it's used.
How I use material is relevant.
- DC: Someone is committing fraud if they change the referrer field
value.
- TB: I might be inclined to go after someone in court.
- IJ: Sounds like TB perilously on the edge of a finding...
- DC: Everything we do is related to public policy.
- CL: There is also the W3C T&S Domain.
- DO: Go for it TB!
- CL: I have a concern: Suppose I have a UA that takes note of
information about a page, and stores it in a bookmark. And the UA knows
that if it sends a referrer value, it will get the desired content.
- DC: Fraud is closely related to intent. The principle is that links
are like citations. I can talk about anybody's stuff.
- TB: I agree.
- DC: Misrepresentation is another story (e.g., copyright
infringement).
- CL: But framing may be used for purposes other than deception.
- TB: The court enters for edge cases. That's appropriate. You have a
trial when I think you are damaging my interests.
- DC: Fair use enters here (you can quote 10% but not all; there's
reams of law in this area).
- TB: It's unequivocally the case that I can publish a document that
says "The dissertation published here is junk."
- DC: Publishing on the Web is not much different than publishing on
paper. Not identical, but very analogous.
- CL: Example of TB's "Annotated XML 1.0".
- TB: There are two frames - spec at top and commentary on the
right.
DC: It created a wrinkle in our policy: we now say this was done with
permission.
Action TB: Draft a finding for
deepLinking-25.
See issue
uriMediaType-9
- uriMediaType-9:
Status of negotiation with IETF? See message
from DanC.
- Action TBL: Get a reply from the IETF on the TAG finding.
- [Ian]
DC: We said we wanted IANA to make available stable URIs for media
types. The way you ask the IETF something is to write an Internet
draft.: I wrote to www-tag and then got Mark Baker's attention.
- [Norm]
- Action DC to write draft. Deadline, 30
Sep
See issue
URIEquivalence-15
[DanConn]
- Architecture document, "2.2.1. Comparison of identifiers" mentions
URIEquivalence-15. Suggestion: ask Martin Duerst to review section
2.2.
- [ian_]
- TB: Martin says you have no hope but a hard line (see Martin's
email). Whether %7e = %7E in all cases is a slippery slope. I
thought we could retroactively assert that post-normalization affects
escapes, but I don't think we can.
- DC: I want people to copy paste URIs as is, and question any
changes.
- TB: I would like I18N WG to should "Always use lower case." There's
a contradiction between the RFC and the namespaces spec.
- DC: Clear to me that we need to say loudly: "If you mean the same
thing, say it the same way!": I am willing to redraft 2.2.1.
- Action DC: Redraft 2.2.1.
- TB: I don't think we can sweep away apparent contradiction with HTTP
URIs. Avoid "byte" and "binary".
- DC: Use "characters".
- TB: No, compare code points.
- [DanConn]
- If you know the characters are encoded in US-ASCII, you can compare
bytes, for example.
- and you can generalize for all other character encoding schemes,
including, e.g. EBCDIC.
- [ian_]
- IJ: In the redraft, can we work in proposals on URIEquivalence-15,
notably re: good practice?
- Action CL: I will ask Martin for
suggestions for good practice regarding URI canonicalization issues,
such as %7E v. &7e and suggested use of lower case.
- httpRange-14: Need to make
progress here to advance in Arch Document.
- RFC3023Charset-21:
- Chris sent information
to www-tag. What is necessary to close this issue?
- Action IJ 2002/09/26: Work CL language into "TAG Finding:
Internet Media Type registration, consistency of use". Ping PC to
let him know (since he has some text to change as well).
- Status of discussions with WSA WG about SOAP/WSDL/GET/Query strings?
Findings in progress, architecture document
See also: findings.
- Architecture document
- Action DC 2002/08/12: Ask www-tag for volunteers to work with TAG
(and possibly IETF) on HTTP URI stuff; CRISP. [This action supersedes
the previous action: Ask IESG when IETF decided not to use HTTP URIs
to name protocols.] Sent.
Awaiting reply.
- Action TBL: 2002/07/15: Create a table of URI properties.
- Internet Media Type registration, consistency of
use.
New issues?
- Use of frags in SVG v. in XML
Ian Jacobs, for TimBL
Last modified: $Date: 2002/08/30 21:04:13 $