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