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


    ... 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


SW: CL, do you expect I18N stuff to merit ftf time in Cannes?
CL: no, I suppose not
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
Chris, you wanted to say "I thought we decided not to discuss linking at tp"
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)
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
CL actually replied privately to Paul and will send a reply to the list
Note that XML 2004 is in November this year
TBL: possible conflict with Ottowa
NW: 12-14 May is what I see from PC's mail
SW: I see conflicts with that
NW: I propose 24-26 May.
"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

2.2 New issue: xmlChunk-44

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...]
timbl: [... coordination... which group needs what? etc. ...]
Can I suggest that someone setup a meeting with SemWeb CG, I18N, and me?
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.
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.
DanC_desk, you wanted to offer to think out loud
Straw poll: New issue?
Defn of issue: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html
Need for a canonicaliztion at the XML + NS syntax level.
yes, that is clear enough (the discussion on the telcon was not clear enough to poll on)
CL: based on 113, looks worth a TAG issue
(next available # is 44)
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"
Description? Short name?
PROPOSED: xmlChunk-44
Support for XMLChunk-44: NW, RF, PC, DC, TBL, SW, MJ, CL
RESOLVED. there is a new issue: xmlChunk-44
A new issue is born, and takes its place in the crowd of issues.
Title: "Chunk of XML" - Canonicalization and equality
+1 to meeting with xml core
PC: reconsider our disinclination to meet with XML Core in Cannes?
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 <>.

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


CL: reviews 0008, proposes we accept C128
That was from long ago, Stuart. It sounded reasonable to me.
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

3. Issues

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

4. Status report on these findings

See also TAG findings

5 Other action items

Ian Jacobs for Stuart Williams and TimBL
Last modified: $Date: 2004/02/04 23:13:43 $