IRC log of tagmem on 2004-06-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:55:54 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
18:56:02 [Chris]
zakim, this will be tag
18:56:02 [Zakim]
ok, Chris; I see TAG_Weekly()2:30PM scheduled to start 26 minutes ago
18:56:20 [Chris]
rrsagent, pointer?
18:56:20 [RRSAgent]
18:57:11 [Chris]
zakim, who is here?
18:57:11 [Zakim]
sorry, Chris, I don't know what conference this is
18:57:12 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Norm, Chris
18:57:20 [Norm]
zakim, this will be tag
18:57:20 [Zakim]
ok, Norm; I see TAG_Weekly()2:30PM scheduled to start 27 minutes ago
18:57:36 [Chris]
zakim, i already told you that
18:57:36 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'i already told you that', Chris
18:57:46 [DanC]
DanC has joined #tagmem
18:57:48 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has now started
18:57:55 [Zakim]
18:58:32 [Norm]
Norm has changed the topic to:
18:58:36 [Zakim]
18:59:00 [Chris]
zakim, dial chris-617
18:59:00 [Zakim]
ok, Chris; the call is being made
18:59:01 [Zakim]
18:59:21 [Chris]
zakim, who is here?
18:59:21 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, DanC, Chris
18:59:22 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DanC, RRSAgent, Zakim, Norm, Chris
19:00:17 [DanC]
we shouldn't expect MJ
19:00:31 [DanC]
Roll call. Regrets: TBL, SW, IJ
19:01:27 [DanC]
NW: Let's record our regret at the tragic and untimely death of Mario
19:01:35 [DanC]
CL: 2nded
19:02:41 [Zakim]
+ +1.613.248.aaaa
19:02:51 [Norm]
zakim, aaaa is PaulC
19:02:51 [Zakim]
+PaulC; got it
19:03:12 [Stuart]
Stuart has joined #tagmem
19:03:51 [Norm]
Did you get home early, Stuart
19:04:14 [Stuart]
Yes.... will call in momentarily
19:05:16 [Zakim]
19:06:38 [DanC]
anyone who didn't realize the extent of Mario's work in support of the Web and W3C should definitely browser around his homepage
19:07:07 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
19:07:07 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, DanC, Chris, PaulC, Stuart
19:09:49 [DanC]
RESOLVED: to record our regret at the tragic and untimely death of Mario
19:10:46 [Norm]
Thanks for letting me know, DanC
19:11:26 [Chris]
19:11:44 [Norm]
zakim, who's on the phone?
19:11:44 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, DanC, Chris, PaulC, Stuart
19:12:05 [skw-scribe]
Regrets: TBL, IJ
19:12:05 [DanC]
I'm OK with
19:12:15 [skw-scribe]
Absent RF
19:12:16 [Roy]
Roy has joined #tagmem
19:12:36 [skw-scribe]
RESOLVED to accept previous meeting minutes
19:12:58 [skw-scribe]
Agenda check:
19:13:13 [skw-scribe]
Agenda accepted.
19:13:19 [DanC]
I'm not available 21Jun
19:13:31 [Norm]
Regrets: NW, PC
19:13:48 [skw-scribe]
Next Meeting 21st June
19:13:54 [Norm]
Probably regrets: TBL
19:14:09 [Roy]
I am at risk (in Basel) on 21st
19:14:09 [skw-scribe]
Regrets from PC, NW, DC
19:14:58 [DanC]
I'm not available 28Jun either. I'm travelling by car from KC to NH with lots of other stops
19:16:02 [skw-scribe]
RESOLVE to cancel 21 June telcon
19:16:27 [skw-scribe]
Next Meeting 28 June: Regrets DC, TBL.
19:16:52 [Zakim]
19:17:13 [skw-scribe]
RESOLVE to cancel 5th July. Next then 12th July.
19:19:16 [Roy]
/me me too
19:19:27 [skw-scribe]
Stuart notes future regrets 19th July-7th August
19:19:53 [skw-scribe]
NW/PC volunteer to prepare F2F agenda
19:20:20 [skw-scribe]
NW voluteers to chair telcons throug SW Absense.
19:20:34 [Norm]
NW notes that's 19 and 26 July
19:20:55 [DanC]
(has anybody picked which hotel they're going to? I like the redundancy of staying where somebody else has blazed the trail)
19:21:30 [Norm]
(not yet, but I'm going to try the place Paul suggested,if the price is within Sun limits)
19:21:34 [skw-scribe]
AC Meeting rescheduling. Seems unconfirmed. Carried forward.
19:21:55 [skw-scribe]
PC summarizes arrangements so far for Aug F2F.
19:23:31 [skw-scribe]
1.3 TAG Charter updates
19:23:54 [skw-scribe]
No available update re AB discussion.
19:24:08 [skw-scribe]
2 Technical
19:24:11 [skw-scribe]
19:25:05 [skw-scribe]
RESOLVED to drop Action IJ 2004/05/24/: Announce the closure of issue URIEquivalence-15
19:26:30 [Norm]
19:26:47 [skw-scribe]
ACTION to Chris and Dan recorded as done or moot.
19:27:07 [skw-scribe]
19:27:10 [skw-scribe]
19:29:36 [skw-scribe]
RESOLVE ACTION Done: Action NW 2004/06/07: Write up XML 1.1 Question for the TAG. If there are no objections to formulation, forward to the XML CG on behalf of TAG
19:29:55 [skw-scribe]
RESOLVE to forward to XML CG
19:31:09 [skw-scribe]
Norm and Paul have already discussed with XML CG who are willing to pick this up
19:31:41 [skw-scribe]
2.2 httpRange-14 status update
19:31:44 [skw-scribe]
19:31:52 [skw-scribe]
RF: No news since F2F
19:32:21 [skw-scribe]
DC: Roy do you have an update re: discussion on URI list.
19:32:42 [skw-scribe]
RF: Not at the moment - spam impaired.
19:33:02 [skw-scribe]
2.3 IRI Draft Status
19:33:05 [skw-scribe]
19:34:36 [skw-scribe]
DC: Reminds TAG wrt request to remove IRI section 7 from Charmod Fundementals.
19:35:29 [skw-scribe]
DC: Introduces note from i18n seeking clarification.
19:35:48 [skw-scribe]
RF: The IRI spec. is not done yet.
19:36:21 [skw-scribe]
CL: I accept this in theory, but ...??? (help)
19:37:19 [skw-scribe]
DC: Recap's on TAG request to split Charmod.
19:37:21 [paulc]
paulc has joined #tagmem
19:37:32 [DanC]
CL (and I) find their argument reasonably well-made but not (yet?) convincing.
19:37:53 [Chris]
.... but in practice it becomes vanishingly less likely
19:38:42 [skw-scribe]
RF: As long as i18n are willing to accept the dependency on IRI wrt Charmod progress to REC.... wouldn't recommend it, but they could do that.
19:39:01 [skw-scribe]
RF: IRI isn't done until the IESG say that it is.
19:39:18 [skw-scribe]
RF: I'd prefer that they split it out.
19:40:23 [skw-scribe]
CL: i18n are arguing that testing should be addressed in IRI spec rather than Charmod.
19:40:41 [skw-scribe]
DC: Looks very much like a normative reference.
19:41:15 [DanC]
ack danc
19:41:15 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to note Roy seems to be answering one of the I18N WG's questions "2. Is the concern about the draft status of the IRI document or about the maturity of IRIs as a
19:41:18 [Zakim]
... technology?"
19:41:43 [skw-scribe]
DC: Question from i18n: are we concern about maturity of spec. or the IRI technology.
19:41:48 [paulc]
Steve Bratt message to AC members re Mario:
19:42:51 [skw-scribe]
RF: Explains that IESG will be very concerned about anything that affects/impacts DNS. Concerns over where Punycode gets done.
19:43:34 [skw-scribe]
RF: Both URI and IRI are consistent, BUT both are I-Ds and may both encounter pushback from IESG.
19:43:46 [skw-scribe]
CL: There is deployment experience in Korea?
19:44:05 [skw-scribe]
RF: Some implementations in browsers...
19:44:28 [skw-scribe]
CL: Was talking about DNS more generally.?
19:44:49 [skw-scribe]
RF: It's deployed elsewhere too... Poland...
19:45:04 [Norm]
ack DanC
19:45:04 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to voice an I18N WG question about tests
19:45:08 [skw-scribe]
PC: Does the note from i18n require a response.?
19:45:18 [skw-scribe]
DC: yes.
19:45:36 [skw-scribe]
DC: Addressing the question what should we test...
19:46:17 [skw-scribe]
DC: quoting "IE, Opera, Safari have been doing the right thing...."
19:46:25 [Chris]
opera and safari and mozilla do the utf-8 to punycode conversion on dereference
19:47:06 [skw-scribe]
DC: Testing all the specs that reference the IRI spec is not, should not be the job of i18n.
19:47:48 [skw-scribe]
CL: Can't really just say that these things are doing the right thing. Need test cases that can be separately verified.
19:47:52 [skw-scribe]
19:48:08 [Norm]
ack skw-scribe
19:48:56 [skw-scribe]
SW: Asks whether IRI spec contains test case cf test cases as in URI spec.
19:49:13 [skw-scribe]
CL: That would be hard in an ascii based doc.
19:49:54 [Norm]
ack DanC
19:49:54 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to follow up on Roy's point about accepting a normative reference to the IRI spec
19:50:05 [skw-scribe]
CL: I would like them to exist in the form that they are to be used.
19:50:41 [skw-scribe]
SW: Clarifies interest is in the existence of such test, comparible with tests in URI spec.
19:51:13 [skw-scribe]
DC/CL: Could request clarification of normative nature of reference to IRI spec.
19:51:40 [skw-scribe]
NW: 3 options
19:52:02 [skw-scribe]
1: something about test assertions.
19:52:35 [Norm]
2: point out that the reference appears to be normative but isn't
19:53:06 [Norm]
3: ask them to acknowledge that they understand that the IRI spec isn't far enough along to normatively reference and ask what they propose to do about that
19:53:17 [DanC]
1: in response to their question of what to test, suggest that "browsers do the right thing" is worth testing
19:53:54 [skw-scribe]
PC: Question... isn't there a problem wrt to i18n declaiming responsibility for testing IRI implementation?
19:54:18 [skw-scribe]
CL: ...yes I agree.
19:54:25 [DanC]
(yes, that "not the job of the I18N WG" comment gave me pause)
19:54:47 [skw-scribe]
CL: reiterates previous aquisence was on the basis of the need for testing.
19:55:07 [Norm]
4: TAG believes that I18N within the W3C needs to get clear understanding with other working groups about who holds the responsiblity for testing I18N features in the other specs
19:55:53 [DanC]
I can't sign up to 4: yet
19:55:59 [skw-scribe]
DC: I think that their position is reasonable - that that WG bears responsibilty for own testing of i18n features.
19:56:45 [skw-scribe]
PC: Possibly need a test-suite that sweeps across multiple specs.
19:57:09 [Chris]
the i18n wg could help ensure that individual wgs do in fact test things like use of non-english tet, etc (not just in iris)
19:57:18 [skw-scribe]
DC: You've identified a problem, but it may not be the most constructive thing to address that at i18n.
19:57:46 [skw-scribe]
NW: Are we at point of dimishing returns wrt this immediate discussion.
19:58:22 [Chris]
ACTION CL: draft text and send to TAG for review
19:59:00 [skw-scribe]
2.4 Web Architecture LC
19:59:16 [skw-scribe]
Action Summary:
19:59:29 [skw-scribe]
Continue: Action NW 2004/06/07: Write up XML 1.1 Question for the TAG. If there are no objections to formulation, forward to the XML CG on behalf of TAG
20:00:10 [skw-scribe]
Action CL 2004/05/14: Some progress, please continue.
20:00:22 [Norm]
Action NW 2004/05/14: Propose text on tradeoffs for section 4.2.2, continued
20:00:27 [Chris]
stuart, nw action is completed
20:00:53 [skw-scribe]
Action TBL 2004/06/08 some progress... continuing.
20:01:16 [Norm]
ack danc
20:01:16 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to suggest soliciting reviewers
20:01:20 [skw-scribe]
Re 8 June Draft: Comments...
20:02:17 [skw-scribe]
DC: Suggest requesting some reviews top to bottom.
20:02:25 [skw-scribe]
DC: Two people.
20:02:34 [skw-scribe]
NW: sections?
20:02:51 [skw-scribe]
PC: There are a bunch of changes.
20:03:08 [skw-scribe]
DC: I'll take section 2.
20:03:22 [skw-scribe]
PC: I'll do section 1
20:03:33 [DanC]
20:03:35 [skw-scribe]
PC: 1,5,6
20:03:49 [skw-scribe]
CL: Section 4.
20:03:56 [skw-scribe]
Norm front to back.
20:04:11 [skw-scribe]
Stuart: front to back too.
20:04:31 [Zakim]
20:05:07 [skw-scribe]
TAG notes Steve's announcment re Mario.
20:05:23 [paulc]
signing off and departing for my flight.
20:05:48 [skw-scribe]
CL: Propose that we individually devote 25 to personal reading of Web Arch.
20:05:59 [skw-scribe]
So. Resolved.
20:06:11 [Zakim]
20:06:13 [Zakim]
20:06:18 [Roy]
Roy has left #tagmem
20:06:24 [skw-scribe]
Meeting Adjourned.
20:06:30 [Zakim]
20:06:31 [Zakim]
20:06:38 [Zakim]
20:06:39 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has ended
20:06:40 [Zakim]
Attendees were Norm, DanC, Chris, +1.613.248.aaaa, PaulC, Stuart, Roy
21:39:11 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
22:26:54 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem