W3C | TAG | Previous: 26 Jan teleconf | Next: 9 Feb Videoconf

Minutes of 2 February 2004 TAG teleconference

Nearby: Teleconference details · issues list (handling new issues)· www-tag archive

1. Administrative (20min)

1. Roll call: SW, TBL, DC (Scribe), NW, CL, PC, RF, MJ, IJ. Regrets: DO, TB

   The TAG welcomed the newest TAG participant: Mario Jeckle. Mario is involved in Web Services Choreography, some Semantic Web stuff, and a Grid services project, as well as other Working Groups (XML Schema, WSA, DI, XMLP).

2. Resolved to accept minutes of the 26 Jan teleconf
3. Accepted this agenda
4. Reminder: No meeting 16 Feb.
5. Proposed next meeting: 9 Feb 2004 Videoconf. See agenda proposal from SW

   [DanC_desk]

   ... discussion of whether namespaceDocument-8 merits discussion time... seems to merit ~ 1/2 hr...

   ... noting TBray's regrets

   SW reviews 9Feb agenda proposal... we seem to be closing about 2 or 3 issues per year; perhaps clustering would help

   DC: initial reaction: let's move admin out of our time together

   SW: pls help me flesh out the technical stuff. DC: will do/try
   PC: how about pending last call comments?

   DanC_desk: please don't put Ian in the critical path for responding to comments

1.1 Technical Plenary

1. Liaisons: In principle agreements and scheduling (see email from Stuart):
   1. I18N
   2. XML Schema
   3. SVG
   4. HTML. See notes from IJ
   5. Voice. See notes from IJ
   6. XML Core
   7. WSDL
2. Action SW 2003/11/15: Take to tech plenary committee the TAG's proposal. See proposal from Stuart.
3. TAG ftf meeting observer requests (see email from SW)
4. TAG 2 Mar 2004 ftf meeting page

[DanC_desk]

SW: CL, do you expect I18N stuff to merit ftf time in Cannes?

CL: no, I suppose not

SW: SVG?

CL: the SVG WG wants to meet and talk about linking, mixed namespaces

ACTION CL: propose a time for SVG/TAG to meet in Cannes

SW: XML Core? I suppose not

[Zakim]

Chris, you wanted to say "I thought we decided not to discuss linking at tp"

[DanC_desk]

CL, RF express interest in presenting webarch to Tech Plenary

SW: I expect TAG members participate in other panels for the next few hours

1.1/3 TAG ftf meeting observer requests

SW: sent mail; no negative commentary; intend to say OK to the few requests I see

1.1/4 TAG 2 Mar 2004 ftf meeting page. noted.

1.2 TAG meeting schedule in 2004

1. Action PC 2004/01/05: Propose meeting schedule for next 4 (or so) TAG ftf meetings. Due: 23 Jan 2004. (Proposal from PC)

[DanC_desk]

PC in sum: May (week before AC/WWW conf), ...

PC I see responses from just three...

CL I think I replied...

SW: in sum, ftf May, July, Nov

[Chris]

CL actually replied privately to Paul and will send a reply to the list

[Norm]

Note that XML 2004 is in November this year

[DanC_desk]

TBL: possible conflict with Ottowa

[timbl]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0077.html

[DanC_desk]

NW: 12-14 May is what I see from PC's mail

SW: I see conflicts with that

NW: I propose 24-26 May.

[Stuart]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0097.html

[DanC_desk]

"Wed-Fri May 12-14, F2F, Location TBD, (host TBD)" -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Jan/0097.html
PC: so we're still collecting input.

2. Technical (70min)

See also open actions by owner and open issues.

2.1 Update on findings

• qnameAsId-18
  • 14 Jan 2004 draft finding "Using Qualified Names (QNames) as Identifiers in Content"
  • Action CL, TB, TBL 2004/01/26: Read finding.

    CL, TBL: No progress.

• contentTypeOverride-24:
  • 27 Jan 2004 draft finding "Client handling of MIME headers"
  • See comments from SW
  • See comments from RF (arrived after meeting).
  • PC: I'm working on IJ's request for specific wording.

    Discussion of whether choice of browser is relevant to giving assent

• siteData-36
  • "There is no such thing as a Web site"

2.2 New issue: xmlChunk-44

• Action TBL 2004/01/05: Propose a new issue regarding canonicalization to www-tag (Done). PC to respond with pointers to relevant specifications (Done).

[DanC_desk]

SW: I wonder if this is something we should perhaps encourage XML Core to take this up

TBL: yes, that is the question...

[TBL reviews 0013...]

[DanC_desk]

timbl: [... coordination... which group needs what? etc. ...]

[Norm]

Can I suggest that someone setup a meeting with SemWeb CG, I18N, and me?

[DanC_desk]

TBL and PC discuss canonicalization, equivalence ...

PC: ... fn:deep-equal in XQuery ... one man's equal is another man's unequal...

... more discussion ...

... schema-aware canonicalization, wisdom thereof...

DC parenthetically: I'm tempted to summarize input from PC and TBL as: yes, pls make this a TAG issue. clearly they're happy to talk about it in the presence of other TAG members.

[timbl]

Yes, defining a more acceptable canonicalization which picks up, for example, the language, base, and namespaces and puts if necessary a wrapper is a possible solution to this problem.

[Zakim]

DanC_desk, you wanted to offer to think out loud

[timbl]

Straw poll: New issue?

Defn of issue: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html

[timbl]

Need for a canonicaliztion at the XML + NS syntax level.

[Chris]

yes, that is clear enough (the discussion on the telcon was not clear enough to poll on)

[DanC_desk]

CL: based on 113, looks worth a TAG issue

[Ian_]

(next available # is 44)

[Chris]

its an issue. 'how long is a piece of string' is an issue, but that doesn't mean there is a single answer.

Is the answer to "is x=y" is "why do you need to know"

[Ian]

Description? Short name?

[DanC_desk]

PROPOSED: xmlChunk-44

[timbl]

Support for XMLChunk-44: NW, RF, PC, DC, TBL, SW, MJ, CL

[DanC_desk]

RESOLVED. there is a new issue: xmlChunk-44

[timbl]

A new issue is born, and takes its place in the crowd of issues.

Title: "Chunk of XML" - Canonicalization and equality

[Chris]

+1 to meeting with xml core

[DanC_desk]

PC: reconsider our disinclination to meet with XML Core in Cannes?

[timbl]

Metadata for issues list: iss:xmlChunk_44 dc:title "Chunk of XML - Canonicalization and equality"; mtg:raised <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html>; mtg:discussed <>.

[Norm]

ACTION NW: Summarize xmlChunk-44, solicit input from www-tag.

ACTION NW: Coordinate joint meeting with XML Core, notably around xmlChunk-44.

2.3 Follow-up on Internationalization Issues

• charmodReview-17
  1. actions
  2. TAG finding related to adoption of Charmod? See mail from TBL
• URIEquivalence-15
• IRIEverywhere-27

[Chris]

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/charmod-lastcall2/

[Stuart]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Feb/0008.html

[DanC_desk]

CL: reviews 0008, proposes we accept C128

[Norm]

That was from long ago, Stuart. It sounded reasonable to me.

[DanC_desk]

ACTION CL: respond as proposed
DC: If we made a decision, Connolly abstained.

The TAG did not discuss topics below this line at this meeting.

2.4 Follow-up on namespaceDocument-8

• namespaceDocument-8
  1. RDDL2 Background from Tim Bray.
  2. grokRDDL.xsl mapping to RDF from Dan Connolly.

3. Issues

Issues that are open and that we expect to close by the end of last call:

• rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6
• whenToUseGet-7
• contentTypeOverride-24

4. Status report on these findings

See also TAG findings

• abstractComponentRefs-37:
  • 30 Oct 2003 draft finding "Abstract Component References"
• contentPresentation-26:
  • 30 June 2003 draft finding "Separation of semantic and presentational markup, to the extent possible, is architecturally sound"
• metadataInURI-31

5 Other action items

• Action RF 2003/10/08: Explain "identifies" in RFC 2396.
• Action DC 2003/11/15: Follow up on KeepPOSTRecords with Janet Daly on how to raise awareness of this point (which is in CUAP).
• Action CL 2003/10/27: Draft XML mime type thingy with Murata-san