IRC log of tagmem on 2004-07-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:58:46 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
18:58:50 [Norm]
zakim, this will be tag
18:58:50 [Zakim]
ok, Norm; I see TAG_Weekly()2:30PM scheduled to start 28 minutes ago
19:00:52 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has now started
19:00:59 [Zakim]
19:01:02 [DanC]
I get 404 @
19:01:17 [Chris]
Dan - yes you do. Its not comitted yet
19:01:18 [Chris]
19:01:32 [Chris]
so we can't approve the minutes this week
19:01:56 [Chris]
nope, it will become true shortly after the call
19:02:10 [Chris]
tried to get it done before the call, gothalf way through
19:02:13 [Zakim]
19:02:30 [Chris]
zakim, call chris-617
19:02:30 [Zakim]
ok, Chris; the call is being made
19:02:31 [Zakim]
19:05:25 [Zakim]
19:05:44 [Norm]
zakim, [Microsoft is PaulC
19:05:44 [Zakim]
+PaulC; got it
19:05:58 [Norm]
zakim, who's on the phone?
19:05:58 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, DanC, Chris, PaulC
19:06:01 [PaulCotton]
PaulCotton has joined #tagmem
19:06:16 [Norm]
zakim, PaulC is PaulCotton
19:06:16 [Zakim]
+PaulCotton; got it
19:09:29 [DanC]
Regrets: TimBL, SW, IJ
19:09:37 [DanC]
Zakim, list attendees
19:09:37 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Norm, DanC, Chris, [Microsoft], PaulCotton
19:09:47 [DanC]
wondering about Roy
19:10:06 [DanC]
review of 19July minutes postponed until they become available
19:10:09 [DanC]
agenda seems OK
19:10:29 [DanC]
next week: NW regrets. PC regrets.
19:11:21 [DanC]
we don't expect SW is available 2 Aug
19:12:28 [DanC]
RESOLVED: to cancel 2 Aug telcon. next meeting: ftf 9-11 Aug
19:12:43 [Norm]
19:12:47 [DanC]
--- Ottawa meeting update
19:13:07 [Zakim]
19:13:56 [DanC]
NW: toward having a good meeting in Basel, "Our goal for this face-to-face is to leave with a technically complete second Last Call working draft."
19:14:25 [DanC]
... aiming for publication [n]th of [month?] last call for about a month.
19:14:31 [Norm]
one month
19:14:49 [DanC]
ChrisL: have we started negotiating with peer groups about LC schedule?
19:14:54 [DanC]
NW: no; haven't started
19:15:33 [DanC]
PC notes I18N WG's recent inquiry about LC schedules
19:16:01 [DanC]
ACTION NW: respond to I18N's inquiry about LC schedules, noting TAG's evolving plans
19:16:33 [DanC]
PC: we're hoping to be able to edit the webarch doc during the meeting
19:17:28 [DanC]
NW reviews daily schedule in
19:18:40 [DanC]
NW: we're considering inviting DaveO to participate by phone...
19:18:58 [DanC]
PC: I was in contact with DaveO; he's considering it among various obligations
19:19:12 [DanC]
... monday might fit his schedule better
19:19:29 [DanC]
NW: I'm open to monday if others are
19:19:46 [DanC]
DC: likewise
19:19:55 [DanC]
NW: I'll follow up.
19:20:24 [DanC]
PC: I expect DaveO to reply to your earlier message
19:21:47 [DanC]
PC asked about possibility of remote participation by IJ. DanC was thinking we encouraged him to focus on other things.
19:22:24 [DanC]
thanks Paul and NW for preparing the agenda.
19:22:53 [DanC]
===== Action Item List
19:23:24 [DanC]
Action NW: 2004/07/12: Write XMLChunk-44 as a finding. continues
19:23:37 [Norm]
ack danc
19:23:37 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to speak to XML Schema action
19:23:54 [DanC]
Action TBL/RF: 2004/05/13 Write up a summary position to close httpRange-14, text for document (need to reschedule httpRange-14 when TBL available-single issue telcon? guest?). CONTINUES.
19:24:28 [Zakim]
19:24:42 [DanC]
DanC: I asked the XML Schema WG for telcon time; haven't heard back yet...
19:24:51 [DanC]
PaulC: shall I call the chair?
19:25:09 [DanC]
PaulC is excused to call the XML Schema WG chair for a few minutes...
19:25:23 [DanC]
----- Web Architecture Document Last Call
19:25:56 [DanC]
NW: let's continue sorting into OBE, LC-critical, open
19:26:13 [Roy]
Roy has joined #tagmem
19:26:44 [DanC]
-- nottingham1: Second bullet doesn't make sense 1.2.1. Orthogonal Specifications
19:26:55 [DanC]
NW: doesn't look OBE
19:27:07 [DanC]
... relevant text is still there, though moved
19:27:15 [Zakim]
19:27:52 [Chris]
I agree thatperformance is the reason in practice (parsing all content to look for headers)
19:28:14 [DanC]
PaulC reached Ezell, who has now seen the request and intends to answer presently, after consulting some XML Schema WG members.
19:28:35 [DanC]
NW: I'd like to be available Thu, but I see that I'm not. so I still prefer Fri.
19:29:16 [Norm]
19:29:24 [Norm]
19:29:42 [Norm]
19:30:17 [DanC]
CL: suggest open. webarch makes a good point here.
19:31:24 [Zakim]
19:31:34 [DanC]
... commentor says "it's not deployed because of performance"; perhaps so, but it's also a problem w.r.t. architecture
19:32:03 [DanC]
NW: so... nottingham1 open?
19:32:13 [DanC]
NW: so... nottingham1 open.
19:32:25 [Roy]
oops, was trying to say it was not a bad idea -- there is a lot more history involved
19:32:43 [DanC]
roy, is that re nottingham1?
19:32:47 [Roy]
19:32:59 [Norm]
You've fallen off the phone, will you be able to come back, Roy?
19:33:01 [DanC]
do you want the TAG to discuss nottingham1 further?
19:33:19 [Roy]
19:33:23 [DanC]
we can stick it in LC-critical for now if you like.
19:33:35 [DanC]
i.e. schedule it for discussion later
19:33:38 [Chris]
we are saying that even if perfrmance was great, its still a level-breaking architecture problem
19:33:39 [Roy]
19:33:57 [DanC]
ok, nottingham1 is LC-critical
19:34:33 [Zakim]
19:34:36 [DanC]
-- klyne7 Use other schema than mailto as example
19:35:25 [DanC]
ACTION NW: take klyne7 as editorial.
19:35:46 [DanC]
-- klyne9: Add stronger language on not permitting unregistered URI schemes
19:36:50 [DanC]
CL: yeah... "is discouraged" isn't clear enough. "should not"
19:37:03 [DanC]
ACTION NW: treat klyne9 as editorial
19:37:08 [DanC]
PC: yeah, that text is still ther.
19:37:13 [DanC]
19:37:39 [DanC]
-- klyne12: Proposal to drop paragraph on inconsistent frag ids
19:38:14 [DanC]
19:38:26 [DanC]
19:38:43 [DanC]
NW: odd; greek letters are still in 3.3.1. CL: yes, see proposed text from my action. NW: good!
19:39:57 [DanC]
NW: we've re-written this; it's now in 3.3.2
19:40:11 [DanC]
(CL, you're welcome to write him individually)
19:40:26 [DanC]
NW: klyne9 is OBE.
19:40:43 [Chris]
yeah okay
19:41:10 [DanC]
NW: klyne12 is OBE. [rather than klyne9]
19:41:40 [DanC]
-- klyne17: Worth pointing out value of RDF descriptions depends on URI persistence?
19:41:56 [DanC]
CL: commentor not sure or something... NW: open, at least; we've re-written some.
19:42:29 [DanC]
NW: klyne17 open.
19:42:43 [DanC]
-- klyne20: Say something about relationship between Hypertext Web and Semantic Web?
19:43:23 [DanC]
NW: Ian 8Jun rev seems to deal with this. DC: yes, 4.6.
19:43:29 [DanC]
NW: klyne20 OBE.
19:44:18 [DanC]
-- klyne21: Add statement about scalability concerns
19:44:25 [DanC]
CL: fair point; hmm... I have an action
19:44:42 [DanC]
NW: klyne21 is LC-critical, to review CL's action
19:45:02 [DanC]
ACTION CL: Draft text to explain that there's a tradeoff in this situation. continues from 14 May 2004
19:45:23 [DanC]
-- klyne25 klyne25: Add reference to RFC3117, section 5.1?
19:46:07 [DanC]
"On the Design of Application Protocols"
19:46:31 [DanC]
sec 5.1 Framing and Encoding
19:47:03 [DanC]
DC: I'm interested to look at it
19:47:15 [DanC]
NW: klyne25 LC-critical.
19:47:32 [DanC]
ACTION DanC: report on study of RFC3117, section 5.1
19:48:06 [DanC]
PC: note BXXP is in the same design space as SOAP... CL: yes, there are probably lots of things written about "Why we did X with XML".
19:48:18 [Chris]
The pain of recreating this social infrastructure
19:48:18 [Chris]
far outweighs any benefits of devising a new representation. So, if
19:48:18 [Chris]
the "make" option is too expensive, is there something else we can
19:48:18 [Chris]
"buy" besides XML? Well, there's ASN.1/BER (just kidding).
19:48:36 [DanC]
-- manola17: "Agent" that includes "people" source of confusion
19:48:42 [DanC]
DC: I think this is OBE
19:48:55 [DanC]
NW: manola17 is OBE.
19:49:17 [DanC]
-- manola27: Provide examples of mistaken attempts to restrict URI usage
19:49:45 [DanC]
CL: yes, fair point... e.g. "we assume HTTP" in a format spec would be bad.
19:50:15 [DanC]
NW: manola27 is LC-critical
19:50:25 [DanC]
ACTION CL: draft example ala manola27: Provide examples of mistaken attempts to restrict URI usage
19:50:51 [DanC]
-- i18nwg5: Discussion of content-type header hint
19:51:04 [DanC]
PC: looks like nottingham1
19:51:36 [DanC]
DC/scribe: it's LC-critical.
19:51:55 [DanC]
NW: i18nwg5 is LC-critical, like nottingham1
19:52:47 [DanC]
-- i18nwg8
19:52:55 [DanC]
PC: looks worth discussion. CL: yup
19:53:14 [DanC]
RF: Ian's dealt with this, yes?
19:53:45 [DanC]
PC: yes, but let's look again.
19:53:51 [DanC]
NW: yes, let's look again
19:54:00 [DanC]
NW: i18nwg8 is LC-critical
19:54:14 [DanC]
-- i18nwg16: Good practice on URI opacity impossible to follow for humans.
19:55:01 [Norm]
zakim, who's talking?
19:55:11 [Zakim]
Norm, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Norm (9%), Roy (9%)
19:55:19 [DanC]
NW: we've changed to "SHOULD NOT"... OBE?
19:55:22 [DanC]
DC: either way...
19:55:29 [DanC]
NW: i18nwg16 is OBE
19:55:45 [DanC]
-- i18nwg19: text/foo+xml considered useless?
19:56:00 [DanC]
CL notes recent Internet Draft relevant to this.
19:56:07 [DanC]
... deprecates this.
19:56:41 [Chris]
rfc3023 revision:
19:56:42 [DanC]
DC: worth reflecting in webarch? NW: I think we do already. OBE.
19:56:50 [DanC]
NW: i18nwg19 is OBE
19:56:51 [Chris]
19:57:17 [Chris]
Major differences from [RFC3023] are deprecation of text/xml and
19:57:17 [Chris]
text/xml-external-parsed-entity, the addition of XPointer and XML
19:57:17 [Chris]
Base as fragment identifiers and base URIs, respectively.
19:57:22 [DanC]
-- i18nwg20
19:57:49 [DanC]
NW: hmm... same slug as 19...
19:58:45 [DanC]
CL: I can see how readers could come to wrong conclusions...
19:58:58 [DanC]
ACTION CL: propose text based on i18nwg20
19:59:06 [DanC]
NW: i18nwg20 is LC-critical
19:59:26 [DanC]
-- rosenberg3: Reuse appropriate URI schemes (and protocols)
20:00:21 [DanC]
"On the use of HTTP as a Substrate"
20:00:37 [DanC]
NW: we have an issue on that...
20:00:49 [Roy]
/me I'll check the status of 3205 at next week's IETF
20:00:59 [Chris]
20:01:08 [Chris]
Says its a BCP
20:01:26 [DanC]
DC: ah; IJ did this.
20:01:40 [DanC]
NW: rosenberg3 is OBE
20:02:19 [Chris]
20:03:44 [DanC]
ACTION NW: incorporate reference to RFC 3688 per rosenberg
20:04:04 [DanC]
NW: and perhaps bump httpSubstrate up in priority for ftf discussion
20:04:27 [Chris]
If the registrant wishes to
20:04:27 [Chris]
have a URI assigned, then a URN of the form
20:04:27 [Chris]
20:04:27 [Chris]
will be assigned where <class> is the type of the document being
20:04:27 [Chris]
registered (see below). <id> is a unique id generated by the IANA
20:04:28 [Chris]
based on any means the IANA deems necessary to maintain uniqueness
20:04:30 [Chris]
and persistence.
20:04:47 [DanC]
-- rosenberg5: Proposed reference to IANA registry for namespaces and RFC 3688
20:05:26 [DanC]
NW: rosenberg5 is LC-critical. [cf action above]
20:06:14 [Roy]
Roy has left #tagmem
20:06:17 [DanC]
--------- TRIAGE DONE! -------------
20:06:51 [DanC]
-- schema12: [3.6.1] [3.6.1] Good practice: Available representation. Too preferential to dereferencable URIs
20:07:28 [DanC]
DC: note telcon negotiations in progress.
20:11:10 [DanC]
20:11:17 [Zakim]
20:11:36 [Zakim]
20:11:37 [Zakim]
20:11:38 [Zakim]
20:11:39 [Zakim]
20:11:40 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has ended
20:11:41 [Zakim]
Attendees were Norm, DanC, Chris, [Microsoft], PaulCotton, Roy
20:12:14 [DanC]
RRSAgent, make logs world-access
20:13:07 [DanC]
Chair: NormW
20:13:10 [DanC]
Scribe: DanC
20:13:15 [DanC]
20:13:19 [DanC]
Meeting: TAG
20:13:44 [DanC]
Regrets: IJ, SW, TimBL
20:15:05 [DanC]
RRSAgent, pointer?
20:15:05 [RRSAgent]
20:16:26 [DanC]
bummer... forgot to use Topic: so the gizmo doesn't build a TOC
20:23:18 [Norm]
Uhm, I didn't know about topic. Sorry.
20:30:18 [DanC]
RRSAgent, bye
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
I see 8 open action items:
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NW to respond to I18N's inquiry about LC schedules, noting TAG's evolving plans [1]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NW to take klyne7 as editorial. [2]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NW to treat klyne9 as editorial [3]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: CL to Draft text to explain that there's a tradeoff in this situation. continues from 14 May 2004 [4]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DanC to report on study of RFC3117, section 5.1 [5]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: CL to draft example ala manola27: Provide examples of mistaken attempts to restrict URI usage [6]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: CL to propose text based on i18nwg20 [7]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: NW to incorporate reference to RFC 3688 per rosenberg [8]
20:30:18 [RRSAgent]
recorded in