IRC log of tagmem on 2004-08-30
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:07:10 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
- 19:07:26 [Norm]
- UK holiday
- 19:07:45 [Norm]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 19:07:45 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Norm, Roy_Fielding, Chris, PaulCotton, TimBL, DanC
- 19:08:21 [DanC]
- q+ to comment on the agenda; my KeepPostRecords action was withdrawn in Ottawa
- 19:10:12 [timbl]
- RRSAgent, Pointer?
- 19:10:12 [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2004/08/30-tagmem-irc#T19-10-12
- 19:10:12 [Norm]
- thank you, timbl
- 19:11:04 [DanC]
- (formally, it's a problem that we don't have ftf records within 2 weeks of the meeting. but... too bad.)
- 19:11:56 [timbl]
- Norm: We have aproblem that we have no approved minutes of past calls, from even before the face-face.
- 19:12:26 [timbl]
- Chris: for thr Jul 23rd one, I will send raw text to you. (action continues)
- 19:12:29 [DanC]
- ack danc
- 19:12:29 [Zakim]
- DanC, you wanted to comment on the agenda; my KeepPostRecords action was withdrawn in Ottawa
- 19:13:18 [timbl]
- http://dm93.org/z2001/KeepPostRecords
- 19:14:12 [timbl]
- The TAG in the f2f meeting decided to drop that action item, it reappears by mistake on this agenda.
- 19:14:37 [DanC]
- 2004-09-13 I'm available, though I take off the next day
- 19:14:44 [timbl]
- Call for 6th Sepetmber is Cancelled.
- 19:14:53 [timbl]
- Regrests fro 13th: Chris
- 19:15:00 [timbl]
- Collolly is available.
- 19:15:16 [timbl]
- Basle meeting
- 19:15:35 [timbl]
- Roy: Please see email.
- 19:15:55 [timbl]
- Roy: Who will chair the meeting, to the extent of setting the agenda.
- 19:16:09 [timbl]
- Norm: Stuart, I expect -- else I can take a stab at it.
- 19:16:18 [timbl]
- [Paul offers to help]
- 19:16:23 [timbl]
- 1.2 on the agenda
- 19:17:13 [Norm]
- timbl: there will be an appointment, but there's been pushback on filling the other vacancy
- 19:18:48 [timbl]
- PaulC: Suggest we push back to the AB
- 19:19:06 [timbl]
- .... Lauren had suggested the same thing, he thought to the AB.
- 19:19:16 [timbl]
- .. Could we ask theAB?
- 19:19:18 [Norm]
- +1 to pushing back to the AB
- 19:19:25 [Roy]
- me too
- 19:19:29 [Chris]
- +1
- 19:19:35 [timbl]
- Norm: let's ask the AB.
- 19:19:51 [timbl]
- ... the difference is the credit people get for the commitment they make.
- 19:20:14 [timbl]
- ACTION timbl push back to the AB asking their opinion.
- 19:21:01 [Norm]
- For 1.3, norm summarizes the mail from Ian: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Aug/0043.html
- 19:21:35 [timbl]
- """The Team has made progress on the issue of licensing
- 19:21:36 [timbl]
- obligations (if any) for TAG participants, but due to the
- 19:21:36 [timbl]
- August slowdown has not yet closed it. I expect we
- 19:21:36 [timbl]
- will close that issue soon and I'll bring the results
- 19:21:36 [timbl]
- back to the TAG. At that point the rest of the charter
- 19:21:37 [timbl]
- development can continue."""
- 19:21:39 [timbl]
- ------
- 19:21:43 [timbl]
- Agenda item 2
- 19:21:50 [timbl]
- 2.1 Approving the draft findinging
- 19:22:14 [timbl]
- Norm: I sent in a draft. I know Paul reveealed it to members of the XMLQ WG. Shall we make it public?
- 19:22:17 [Roy]
- +1 for making public
- 19:22:31 [timbl]
- Chris: I sent feedback, as did Henry [thompson]
- 19:23:00 [timbl]
- Norm: I will take that feedback into account before making it public.
- 19:23:11 [timbl]
- DanC: I won't review it until it is public.
- 19:23:23 [Chris]
- Overall it was very good
- 19:23:28 [timbl]
- Chris: I did send in criticism, but the overal l things is very good.
- 19:23:43 [Chris]
- approve publication
- 19:23:56 [timbl]
- RESOLVED: The editors draft of the finding will be made public.
- 19:24:43 [Roy]
- s/2.1 Approving the draft findinging/2.1 Make xmlChunk draft finding public/
- 19:25:12 [Chris]
- are you objecting?
- 19:25:22 [DanC]
- Connolly abstaining. don't see why a group decision is in order.
- 19:25:35 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlChunkEquality.html
- 19:25:40 [timbl]
- --------------------
- 19:25:44 [timbl]
- List of open issues
- 19:26:07 [timbl]
- Norm: I struggled a bit with organizing these as I left the f2f meeting.
- 19:26:38 [timbl]
- You seemed to get to a certain point (IRI27) and stop
- 19:26:44 [DanC]
- agenda + public-webarch-comments summary
- 19:26:50 [timbl]
- Paul: Yes, we ran out of energy there.
- 19:27:34 [timbl]
- DanC: There have been some comments on public-webarch-comments which I am prepared to summarize.
- 19:27:57 [timbl]
- Chris: I have a vague recollection of being asked to write down some minor "aha" moment.
- 19:28:21 [Norm]
- We're on 28
- 19:28:38 [timbl]
- .
- 19:28:41 [Roy]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1#fragmentInXML-28
- 19:28:41 [timbl]
- IRI 27
- 19:28:42 [Chris]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/05/14-tag-summary.html#fragmentInXML-28
- 19:29:37 [timbl]
- Norm: Please ignore items 3 and 4 on the agenda -- their inclusion is a mistake.
- 19:29:44 [timbl]
- ACTION CONINUES: Chris: http://www.w3.org/2004/05/14-tag-summary.html#fragmentInXML-28
- 19:29:57 [timbl]
- XMLprofile29
- 19:30:24 [Norm]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html
- 19:30:25 [Chris]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1
- 19:31:18 [timbl]
- 29: We agreed with the commenter and asked the core WG to go do it.
- 19:31:24 [Chris]
- ok try this view instead
- 19:31:26 [Chris]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=wg
- 19:31:32 [DanC]
- on issue 29, we asked the commentor if our decision was ok http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jan/0418.html
- 19:31:34 [timbl]
- Norm: I think I have an action in the core working group.
- 19:31:45 [Roy]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#xmlProfiles-29
- 19:31:46 [timbl]
- Paul: But it isn't in the new Core WG charter.
- 19:32:00 [timbl]
- Paul: Announced 2003?!!
- 19:32:07 [timbl]
- DanC: Yes, 2003
- 19:32:41 [timbl]
- Norm: The reviced charter has expict deliverables which do *not* include this -- but it does appear in "Other work".
- 19:34:00 [timbl]
- Norm: The TAG told the corre wg to do it; the core started to look at it; the charter was getting revised, and was being revised in a way I didn't like and I may have lost track; the core wg does NOT have an action item now.
- 19:34:03 [Norm]
- ACTION: Norm to talk to the Core WG about what we should do about xmlProfiles-29
- 19:34:18 [timbl]
- IAs it does have it in "other work" in eth charter i will get them to do it.
- 19:34:38 [timbl]
- ACTION Norm: Get XML Core WG to take on XMLProfiles-29
- 19:34:46 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#xmlProfiles-29
- 19:34:51 [timbl]
- .
- 19:34:54 [timbl]
- ____________
- 19:34:59 [paulc]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/xbc-use-cases/
- 19:35:10 [Norm]
- ACTION: Norm to add xbc use cases to binaryXML-30
- 19:35:12 [DanC]
- q+ to speak to TB's actions
- 19:35:15 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#binaryXML-30
- 19:35:39 [timbl]
- Paul: Chris, you wrote a txonomy f the problem space.
- 19:36:03 [timbl]
- Paul: I wonder whether the 14 use casesin this dcouemnt cover all the cases you ennumerated.
- 19:36:19 [DanC]
- at a glance, http://www.w3.org/TR/xbc-use-cases/ is well done. I grok the TOC at a glance.
- 19:36:34 [timbl]
- Paul: There is space and time needs for compression, and other distinictions.
- 19:36:55 [DanC]
- XML Binary Characterization Use Cases
- 19:36:55 [DanC]
- W3C Working Draft 28 July 2004
- 19:37:05 [timbl]
- ACTION Chris: Review the connection between the use cases and the taxomony on Chris's note
- 19:37:17 [Norm]
- q?
- 19:37:34 [Norm]
- ack danc
- 19:37:34 [Zakim]
- DanC, you wanted to speak to TB's actions
- 19:37:42 [timbl]
- Deadline for above action: 2004-09-30
- 19:37:55 [Chris]
- due date: before the tag f2f
- 19:38:37 [timbl]
- DanC: There was an acttion on Tim Bray in this isses list. Can we withdrawn them?
- 19:38:48 [timbl]
- Paul: TimBray accepted it then dropped it.
- 19:39:05 [timbl]
- DanC: It is called "no decision, deferred".
- 19:39:19 [Chris]
- yes. someone else is doing the work
- 19:39:38 [timbl]
- Paul: There is a planning WG -- we shoudl hold it until they have looked at teh problem. That's what that means.
- 19:39:57 [timbl]
- danC: That should be called "Pending".
- 19:40:14 [Chris]
- i agree that tag issue state nomenclature is suboptimal
- 19:40:32 [timbl]
- ________________________
- 19:40:34 [timbl]
- 31
- 19:40:43 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#metadataInURI-31
- 19:40:57 [timbl]
- Paul: DaveO has an action item.
- 19:41:03 [timbl]
- Norm: So does Tuart.
- 19:41:57 [timbl]
- Tim: See recent mail suggesting one should encode version information in a URI. A good example of what not to do.
- 19:42:30 [timbl]
- Norm: Let's wait for stuart. DaveO was going to send rationale for WSDL WG peeking inside a URI.
- 19:43:02 [timbl]
- ACTION Paul find out what happened to DaveO's action item there.
- 19:43:09 [timbl]
- ______________________________
- 19:43:11 [timbl]
- 32
- 19:43:19 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#xmlIDSemantics-32
- 19:43:37 [Chris]
- q+ to request a change to the issue
- 19:43:40 [timbl]
- Norm: We sent that off o the XML core WG, and it an explicit issue in the charter. the editros
- 19:43:51 [timbl]
- didn't have time so I took over editing.
- 19:44:25 [timbl]
- Chris: Can we change the background color of the finding to show it as approved.
- 19:44:27 [Chris]
- s/Draft finding from Chris Lilley/Approved finding from Chris Lilley
- 19:45:18 [timbl]
- _______________________________________
- 19:45:19 [timbl]
- 33
- 19:45:31 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
- 19:46:04 [DanC]
- +1 point to workshop record from issue 33
- 19:46:12 [timbl]
- Chris: A link should be made in the issue record to the workshop record.
- 19:46:24 [timbl]
- ... A WG will be spun up too.
- 19:46:41 [timbl]
- ... It is the AC discussion before AC review phase.
- 19:46:44 [DanC]
- The W3C Workshop on Web Applications and Compound Documents http://www.w3.org/2004/04/webapps-cdf-ws/summary
- 19:47:05 [Chris]
- thanks dan
- 19:47:15 [timbl]
- ACTION Norm update the issues list to point to that.
- 19:47:22 [timbl]
- ___________________________________
- 19:47:25 [timbl]
- 34
- 19:47:34 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#xmlFunctions-34
- 19:47:43 [timbl]
- Norm: This is just sitting there.
- 19:48:00 [timbl]
- ... the last thing that happened was TimbL wrote a piece about it.
- 19:48:32 [timbl]
- DanC: GRDDL involved ointing from for example XMl documents to XSLT transforms.
- 19:48:52 [timbl]
- ...there is a similar proposal to use the XML stylesheet procesing instruction to do almost the same thing.
- 19:49:01 [timbl]
- ... which is relevant beacuse.
- 19:49:13 [timbl]
- ... I asked them why they used PI insead of a link.
- 19:49:28 [timbl]
- ... IThe question of "who goes first" wasimportant to that.
- 19:49:49 [timbl]
- Norm: One aspects of the TRIX proposal was that it works with more than XHTML.
- 19:50:18 [timbl]
- Chris: Some discission of whether GRDDL applies to only HxTML or all XML
- 19:50:30 [DanC]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#grddl-xml
- 19:50:37 [DanC]
- xmlns:data-view="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#"
- 19:50:39 [timbl]
- DanC: GRDDL applies to any XML, always has.
- 19:50:58 [DanC]
- s/always has/has for quite some time/
- 19:51:02 [timbl]
- ... It is *not* xHTML-specific.
- 19:51:08 [Chris]
- discussion was exclusively in context of XHTML, I asked for frequent clarifications
- 19:51:45 [DanC]
- TriX : RDF Triples in XML http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-56.html
- 19:51:47 [timbl]
- norm: As a mechanism for talking about the interpretation of XML documents, I am a lot happier with this tyle with things we have done in the past.
- 19:52:18 [timbl]
- Norm: There could be multiple style sheets happening in series maybe, (actually abusing the stylesheet PI)
- 19:53:04 [timbl]
- Tim: Did they flag a problem with GRDDL?
- 19:53:47 [timbl]
- DanC: They stop conflict between TRIX and an XSLT style sheet by using up that syntax slot so you can't get both.
- 19:54:16 [DanC]
- I think trix uses <?xml-stylesheet?> rather than an attr to avoid the "what if you have both?" question
- 19:57:40 [timbl]
- http://www.w3.org/2003/02/06-tag-summary.html#mixedNamespaceMeaning-13
- 19:57:50 [timbl]
- ^ decision to raise it.
- 19:58:52 [Norm]
- ack crhis
- 19:58:55 [Norm]
- ack chris
- 19:58:55 [Zakim]
- Chris, you wanted to request a change to the issue
- 19:58:56 [Norm]
- ack danc
- 19:59:52 [timbl]
- ACTION timbl take another stab at specifying the problem
- 20:00:21 [timbl]
- Daanc: Eg .... what happens if you do include and the xmls schema include.
- 20:00:41 [timbl]
- Should not that test be in eth CR phasse of XINCLUDE?
- 20:01:27 [timbl]
- Naorm: include in schema has [schema-deopendent stuff]
- 20:01:44 [Chris]
- IIRC Oxygen implements XInclude
- 20:02:02 [Norm]
- libxml does
- 20:02:04 [DanC]
- # how does XInclude mix with XML Schema? XSLT? Dan Connolly (Monday, 30 August) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2004Aug/0003.html
- 20:02:04 [Chris]
- sorry, oXygen
- 20:02:49 [timbl]
- Tim: My note was supposed to say that there is one logical way of looking at it.
- 20:03:11 [timbl]
- Norm: Test case:
- 20:04:12 [timbl]
- ... An XSLT style sheet which inlcudes an XInclude element -- either the xinclude element is to be resolved first, or it would be XSLT is to produce an XIncldue document.
- 20:04:13 [Norm]
- I could say <xi:include>...</xi:include>
- 20:04:25 [Norm]
- Or I could say <xsl:element name="include" namespace="xi-uri">...
- 20:05:34 [timbl]
- Norm: I think that this should abmbiguous and left so and a sep. langauge shoudl be sued to specify of all the weays of processing it which should be used.
- 20:05:43 [timbl]
- Tim: I disgree, i think quite strongly.
- 20:06:29 [Chris]
- There is an xslt test suite fom Oasis. Apparently there are problems with it:
- 20:06:32 [Chris]
- http://www.biglist.com/lists/xsl-list/archives/200401/msg01222.html
- 20:06:52 [Chris]
- NIST also has an XSLT test suite
- 20:06:53 [Chris]
- http://xw2k.sdct.itl.nist.gov/xml/page5.html
- 20:07:13 [Chris]
- "The XSLT/XPath tests are of an atomic nature and have been submitted to the OASIS XSLT/XPath Conformance Committee for inclusion in their official test suite. Currently, there are over 200 tests that exercise various XSLT/XPATH features."
- 20:07:51 [Norm]
- timbl: It's important that things at the bottom be stable. The XInclude spec should be a lot more like a modification of the XML Recommendation; it is always interpreted exactly as it says.
- 20:08:32 [Norm]
- q+
- 20:09:16 [DanC]
- XSLT has sufficient quoting mojo
- 20:09:22 [Norm]
- XSLT *has the quoting*
- 20:10:12 [Norm]
- ack Norm
- 20:11:18 [Chris]
- I can see both sides - make XInclude a fundamental part of processing, and also that there is a need for flexible processing depending on what you want to do
- 20:13:44 [timbl]
- Or it should not, it should define a default expansion which most specs will use, still allowing XSLT -like specs to add special processing, like quoting.
- 20:19:09 [Chris]
- I would be happy with a finding that points out boith sides of the issue
- 20:20:50 [timbl]
- AC TION Timbl: write that by f2f-10days.
- 20:20:55 [Norm]
- Review will continue starting with RDFinXHTML-35
- 20:21:03 [timbl]
- __________________________________
- 20:21:21 [timbl]
- DanC: Did you attempt to review the comment sin prepareing the agenda?
- 20:21:24 [timbl]
- Norm: No.
- 20:21:40 [timbl]
- DanC: I will try to bring the comments to his attention.
- 20:21:41 [timbl]
- .
- 20:21:50 [timbl]
- COMMENT ON public-webarch-comments
- 20:22:01 [timbl]
- danc: De-spamming is in progress, no visible progress.
- 20:22:13 [timbl]
- ... Dominique sent 3 piles of comments.
- 20:22:26 [timbl]
- ... Extensabilty, editorial resources ...
- 20:22:42 [timbl]
- .... let's deal wit comments as soon as we can.
- 20:22:52 [DanC]
- dom's editorials http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0033.html
- 20:22:58 [timbl]
- Norm: I will deal with the editorial pil eof Dom's comments.
- 20:23:11 [timbl]
- ACTION NORM: deal with the editorial pil eof Dom's comments.
- 20:23:43 [timbl]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/
- 20:25:03 [Chris]
- what is the date?
- 20:27:34 [Norm]
- The bogus message is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0045.html
- 20:29:15 [Roy]
- [discussing comment from AP Meyer]
- 20:29:23 [Norm]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0046.html
- 20:30:36 [timbl]
- Roy: I would prefer not to use "agent".
- 20:30:51 [timbl]
- ... "component" is better IMHO.
- 20:31:09 [timbl]
- ... except that other people use "component" for all kinds of things.
- 20:32:30 [timbl]
- [Paul reads through the many qualified uses of the "agent" in the document]
- 20:33:16 [timbl]
- Paul: This should be in our work list.
- 20:34:11 [timbl]
- ADJOURN
- 20:34:19 [Zakim]
- -TimBL
- 20:34:20 [Zakim]
- -Norm
- 20:34:21 [Zakim]
- -DanC
- 20:34:22 [Zakim]
- -PaulCotton
- 20:34:28 [Zakim]
- -Roy_Fielding
- 20:34:33 [Roy]
- Roy has left #tagmem
- 20:39:28 [Zakim]
- disconnecting the lone participant, Chris, in TAG_Weekly()2:30PM
- 20:39:30 [Zakim]
- TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has ended
- 20:39:31 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Norm, Roy_Fielding, Chris, TimBL, PaulCotton, DanC
- 22:11:23 [DanC]
- DanC has left #tagmem
- 22:24:52 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #tagmem