IRC log of tagmem on 2005-02-07

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:11:56 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
19:12:03 [RRSAgent]
is logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-irc
19:12:19 [Stuart]
zakim, this will be tag
19:12:19 [Zakim]
ok, Stuart; I see TAG_Weekly()2:30PM scheduled to start in 18 minutes
19:12:28 [Norm]
Hi Stuart
19:13:26 [Stuart]
Lo... dinner calls... be back soon...
19:33:38 [DanC]
DanC has joined #tagmem
19:44:55 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem
19:59:15 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()2:30PM has now started
19:59:18 [Zakim]
+Norm
19:59:57 [Zakim]
+Stuart
20:00:01 [Zakim]
-Stuart
20:00:05 [Zakim]
+Stuart
20:01:42 [Zakim]
+Vincent
20:01:46 [Ed]
Ed has joined #tagmem
20:01:54 [Zakim]
+??P18
20:02:14 [Vincent]
Vincent has joined #tagmem
20:02:39 [DanC]
Scribe: Ed
20:02:41 [Stuart]
zakim, ??18 is Ed
20:02:41 [Zakim]
sorry, Stuart, I do not recognize a party named '??18'
20:02:51 [Stuart]
zakim, P18 is Ed
20:02:51 [Zakim]
sorry, Stuart, I do not recognize a party named 'P18'
20:03:04 [Zakim]
+DanC
20:03:05 [Zakim]
+Noah
20:03:19 [Ed]
Scribe: Ed Rice
20:03:19 [ht]
ht has joined #tagmem
20:03:25 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
20:03:25 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
20:03:27 [Zakim]
+Ht
20:03:40 [Ed]
ScribeNick: EdR
20:04:14 [Stuart]
zakim, who is here
20:04:14 [Zakim]
Stuart, you need to end that query with '?'
20:04:46 [Stuart]
zakim, who is here?
20:04:46 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, Stuart, Vincent, Ed, Noah, DanC, Ht
20:04:47 [Zakim]
On IRC I see ht, Vincent, Ed, Norm, DanC, RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart, noah
20:04:56 [Ed]
Title: Tag weekly meeting Feb 7, 2005
20:05:41 [Noah_Brisbane]
Noah_Brisbane has joined #tagmem
20:06:09 [DanC]
Regrets+ TimBL
20:06:54 [Zakim]
+Roy
20:07:26 [noahm]
noahm has joined #tagmem
20:07:59 [Roy]
Roy has joined #tagmem
20:08:44 [ht_sof]
ht_sof has joined #tagmem
20:09:41 [DanC]
q+
20:09:53 [Ed]
Ed: Next meeting Feb 14th, xml schema team will join
20:10:27 [DanC]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Jan/0018.html on Extending and Versioning draft findings Dan Connolly (Monday, 24 January)
20:10:39 [Ed]
ACTION: DanC to send note to xml schema team to confirm meeting
20:10:46 [ht_sof]
HST sends regrets for the joint meeting on 14 Feb
20:10:53 [DanC]
s/DanC to send/Stuart to send/
20:12:13 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Roy
20:12:17 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Ed
20:12:20 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DanC
20:13:09 [Ed]
ACTION: noah and Norm agree to scribe Feb 14th
20:14:07 [Ed]
RESOLUTION: Resolved to accept the minutes of Jan 31st 2005
20:14:20 [DanC]
4 answers so far http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34270/telweekly/results
20:15:18 [Ed]
ACTION: All Tag members to respond to on-line survey as to best meeting time.
20:16:18 [ht]
I.e. Monday and Thursday
20:16:48 [Ed]
ACTION: Deadline to respond to on-line Survey is Feb 10th 2005
20:19:16 [Ed]
Topic: Technical Plenary
20:19:29 [DanC]
I'm flexible too.
20:20:08 [DanC]
(I added mon11 and thru11; I sure hope that doesn't screw up the answers already given... I think it does not...)
20:20:23 [Stuart]
http://www.w3.org/2005/03/02-TechPlenAgenda.html
20:20:34 [DanC]
(ah; good; it doesn't screw up the extant answers)
20:21:11 [DanC]
(hmm... it might invalidate comments ala "All of the times work for me except ...")
20:24:45 [Ed]
Action: Stuart contact Rich to see if there is room on the panel for session three
20:25:03 [Ed]
Topic: Tag Face to Face
20:25:28 [Ed]
Vincent has agreed to chair/drive face to face
20:25:49 [noahm]
Noah preliminary answers posted on Web Survey. Monday and Thurs 11AM are OK, maybe just a bit less desirable than mid-afternoon, but given our European participants, I'd be glad to do either one. I should say that I have a conflict with this Thurs, 2/10, but I suspect we wouldn't go for another meeting this week in any case.
20:26:24 [noahm]
Also, regarding change of schedule, I note that we seem committed to doing 2/14 with the XML Schema WG, so suggest that any changes be not before then.
20:27:05 [Stuart]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/01/TechnicalPlenaryLiaisons.html
20:27:10 [Ed]
Action: Vincent to send out tentative agenda by next weeks meeting for review and email discussion.
20:27:37 [DanC]
ACTION Vincent: to send out tentative agenda by next weeks meeting for review and email discussion.
20:27:41 [Norm]
FYI: The Core WG now expects it will be valuable to meet to discuss XML 2.0
20:29:27 [Ed]
voice browswer WG is a lunch time agenda
20:30:36 [Roy]
I can attend all of the liaison meetings.
20:32:41 [noahm]
Possible other item to discuss briefly: we've talked about possible Monday dinner. I've offered to make a reservation and thrown one possible restaurant into the suggestion pool. No rush yet, but at some point we'll want to figure out what we're doing.
20:33:16 [Ed]
chairs of the qa working group
20:33:18 [ht]
Noah, I can make Monday
20:35:11 [Ed]
Noah, I am open on Monday.. open to trying new types of food (or old)
20:35:24 [Ed]
Noah will coordinate and schedule.
20:35:55 [Ed]
Topic: Current Tag open issues list.
20:36:04 [Stuart]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?view=normal&closed=1
20:39:40 [Stuart]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/11/openIssues.html
20:40:46 [DanC]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/11/29-30-tag#item_07
20:41:00 [DanC]
ack danc
20:41:00 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to suggest keeping IRIEverywhere open until we have timbl's questions (http://www.w3.org/2003/04/iri.html) answered and to ask if RF would like to continue "ACTION
20:41:03 [Zakim]
... RF: notify the TAG when IESG has decided on IRI spec and suggest answers to timbl's questions"
20:41:04 [Ed]
Action: DanC to enter actions relative to issues list.
20:42:33 [Ed]
review all;
20:43:17 [noahm]
q+
20:43:33 [Ed]
namespaceDocument-8: Tim was champion of, the direction we were heading is the suggestion that this be published as a working group note from the TAG along with an action from Paul Cotton to publish a working not. No progress has been made in the last six months.
20:44:09 [Ed]
Action: norm to pick up Paul Cotton's work on namespaceDocument-8
20:44:11 [Roy]
Please continue my action on IRIEverywhere, may be good for discussion at F2F.
20:44:45 [noahm]
q?
20:45:30 [Stuart]
ack noah
20:45:44 [Stuart]
ack noah
20:45:56 [Stuart]
q- sees
20:46:21 [DanC]
(I'm happy to sorta reboot, HT; I'd be happy to review "the original RDDL" (whatever that is; I lose track) if that's what your experience suggests. I think my reason for not liking some version of RDDL was that there wasn't an RDF mapping, when it looked so close)
20:47:07 [ht]
That's a good reason -- RDDL was supposed to be automatically exploitable, if it can't be mapped to RDF trivially that's evidence that it's not
20:47:14 [Norm]
I'm happy to do a little reboot too, I don't have all the versions in wetware now either
20:47:42 [DanC]
q+
20:48:12 [ht]
q+, to volunteer to pick up DanC's toRDF stylesheet
20:48:20 [Ed]
Dan states, the strong signal is that people want this solved in the particulars. If the TAG does not agree, we should respond that we're not going to.
20:48:36 [ht]
q+
20:48:59 [Stuart]
ack DanC
20:49:48 [Stuart]
ack ht
20:50:05 [Ed]
Henry will work with Norm to take up namespaceDocument-8 topic.
20:51:06 [Ed]
Action: Henry to produce a Rdl1 to RDF Style sheet of explain why not
20:51:20 [ht]
s/Rdl1/RDDL1/
20:51:33 [ht]
s/of explain/or explain/
20:51:37 [Ed]
Topic: httpRange-14
20:52:28 [Ed]
if you use a URI and you use an http without a hash, it needs to point to a network resource (information resource)
20:52:54 [Ed]
other side if you use an http: with no hash mark, it may as well be an html algorithm
20:53:00 [Ed]
there is no consensus
20:54:25 [Ed]
Topic: HTTPSubstrate-16
20:54:42 [Ed]
should http be uses as a substrate protocal
20:55:03 [Ed]
Noah: send email right before the call proposing to open new tag issue.
20:55:17 [DanC]
(SemWeb IG agenda-in-progress makes no mention of httpRange-14 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/interest/meetings/tp2005.html )
20:57:22 [DanC]
(it doesn't appeal to me that clustering will help. 31 and this new issue seem very different, to me)
20:57:43 [Ed]
Proposal: Noah suggests to take a cluster of these and set them aside for a week to see if we should adress these
20:58:29 [Ed]
substrate 16 is currently deferred.
20:59:15 [Ed]
deferred = until there is new information about this topic we will not discuss further.
20:59:29 [Ed]
Topic: xlinkScope-23
21:00:26 [Ed]
background - where should we be using xlink.
21:01:05 [Ed]
Should be returned to once the xml working group resolves a couple of minor bugs. The xml core working group has committed to doing this quickly.
21:01:53 [Norm]
XLink extensions note from Core WG: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-xlink10-ext-20050127/
21:02:14 [Ed]
Topic: contentPresentation-26
21:02:27 [DanC]
(I was going to ask henry to take an action re xlinkScope-23 or tell us how it'll get from the /TR/ page to our agenda, but it would probably fall on me to get that into the issues list, and I'm hopelessly behind on that sort of thing, so never mind.)
21:02:46 [Ed]
there was a draft finding from Chris. But it has not been discussed.
21:02:50 [ht]
DanC, I'll keep it in mind, not to worry
21:03:04 [Roy]
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/contentPresentation-26.html
21:03:12 [DanC]
-> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/contentPresentation-26.html draft finding
21:04:46 [Ed]
Ed asked if we should all review offline and discuss in two weeks during weekly meeting
21:05:22 [DanC]
ah... no, having us "all" review it is the anybody/somebody/nobody pattern. a pattern that works is to have 2 reviewers.
21:06:55 [Ed]
Ed offers to be a reviewer on this topic, will contact Chris.
21:07:33 [Ed]
ACTION: Ed to meet with chris and review/update the document.
21:08:05 [Ed]
Topic: IRIEverywhere-27
21:08:12 [Ed]
already discussed.
21:08:27 [Ed]
Topic: fragmentInXML-28
21:10:22 [Ed]
Note: Chris has an action to write up a resolution, but current status is not know.
21:11:02 [Ed]
Action: Henry to monitor and bring back up when time is appropriate.
21:11:21 [Ed]
Topic: binaryXML-30
21:11:39 [Ed]
a workshop and working group is studying issue, should be complete in March.
21:13:13 [Ed]
the current work-group is mostly made up of people who want a binary xml, the TAG may need to understand and represent the users who want a text xml.
21:16:19 [ht]
DanC has a process concern, that once they recommend we do a _real_ Binary XML WG, it will go ahead without much/any critical review
21:16:43 [ht]
Their output will be a Group Note, not a WD
21:18:53 [ht]
DanC, I'm happy to talk to you about this, but it's Liam and Philippe, not me, who are on point
21:19:08 [Ed]
Ed has joined #tagmem
21:19:18 [Ed]
I'm back.
21:19:27 [DanC]
I have comments on the XBC WDs; if I manage to write them up and send them, I'll let the tag know.
21:19:50 [Ed]
Topic: metadataInURI-31
21:20:07 [DanC]
(ah... now I see the connection to the issue noah proposed)
21:20:21 [Stuart]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Nov/0129.html
21:20:31 [noahm]
Does metadataInUri also relate to the various WS Addressing issues, at least insofar as some are tempted to ask: "why don't you put all those properties and/or parameters into a URI"
21:21:15 [Ed]
Stuart has agreed to continue working on this issue if the TAG would prefer.
21:22:12 [Ed]
Stuart: asks to partner with noah on 31 on an informal basis.
21:23:22 [Ed]
Topic: xmlIDSemantics-32
21:23:42 [Ed]
Norm: this one is the process of wrapping up. The CR draft is expected to be published tomorrow.
21:25:11 [Ed]
Norm: High confidence in closure soon.
21:25:25 [Ed]
Topic: mixedUIXMLNamespace-33
21:25:51 [Ed]
This one and xmlFunctions-34 and RDFinXHTML-35 are grouped.
21:26:35 [Stuart]
ack DanC
21:26:35 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to note we decided the mixedNamespaceMeaning-13 issue had a dependency on issue 42
21:26:54 [Ed]
There is a new compound documents working group working which may be working on 33.
21:27:51 [Ed]
Action: Chair to negotiate joint meeting to review during boston trip.
21:28:55 [Ed]
Topic: xmlFunctions-34
21:30:22 [Stuart]
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/XML
21:30:23 [noahm]
q+ to say that SOAP headers violate functional view of XML, I think
21:31:32 [Stuart]
ack noah
21:31:32 [Zakim]
noahm, you wanted to say that SOAP headers violate functional view of XML, I think
21:32:04 [Ed]
zakim, bye
21:32:04 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were Norm, Stuart, Vincent, Ed, DanC, Noah, Ht, Roy
21:32:04 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem
21:32:14 [Ed]
rrsagent, draft minutes
21:32:23 [DanC]
RRSAgent, make logs world-access
21:32:54 [Vincent]
Vincent has left #tagmem
21:59:44 [Ed]
Ed has left #tagmem
22:04:17 [Norm]
rrsagent, by
22:04:17 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'by', Norm. Try /msg RRSAgent help
22:04:26 [Norm]
rrsagent, bye
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
I see 6 open action items:
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DanC to send note to xml schema team to confirm meeting [1]
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-irc#T20-10-39
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: noah and Norm agree to scribe Feb 14th [2]
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-irc#T20-13-09
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: All Tag members to respond to on-line survey as to best meeting time. [3]
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-irc#T20-15-18
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Deadline to respond to on-line Survey is Feb 10th 2005 [4]
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-irc#T20-16-48
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Vincent to to send out tentative agenda by next weeks meeting for review and email discussion. [5]
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-irc#T20-27-37
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ed to meet with chris and review/update the document. [6]
22:04:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/07-tagmem-irc#T21-07-33