IRC log of tagmem on 2005-03-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:59:50 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
17:59:50 [RRSAgent]
logging to
18:00:20 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()12:30PM has now started
18:00:27 [Zakim]
18:00:40 [noah]
zakim, [IBMCambridge] is me
18:00:40 [Zakim]
+noah; got it
18:00:45 [DanC]
ah... httpRange-14 is not on the agenda... I kinda expected it to continue from last week... ah... two weeks... 29 MAr
18:00:57 [Zakim]
18:01:21 [Zakim]
18:01:29 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
18:01:29 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
18:01:31 [Zakim]
18:01:44 [Zakim]
18:02:16 [DanC]
"Next week's scribe will be Norm."
18:02:26 [Vincent]
Zakim, who is here?
18:02:26 [Zakim]
On the phone I see noah, DanC, [INRIA], Ht, Dave_Orchard
18:02:27 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, noah, Vincent, Norm, ht, DanC
18:02:37 [Norm]
Crap. Sorry. I'm on another call and can't get away for a few minutes
18:03:03 [Zakim]
18:03:22 [DanC]
Zakim, ??P6 is EdRice
18:03:22 [Zakim]
+EdRice; got it
18:03:28 [noah]
Norm: I will scribe for a few minutes until you show up.
18:03:31 [DanC]
Regrets: TimBL, RoyF
18:04:06 [noah]
Meeting: 22 March 2005 TAG teleconference
18:04:15 [noah]
Topic: Agenda approval
18:04:26 [noah]
Agenda at is approved
18:04:32 [noah]
Topic: scheduling next telcon
18:04:55 [noah]
Telcon on 29 March
18:05:03 [noah]
Possible regrets from Noah next 3 weeks
18:05:11 [noah]
Topic: attendance
18:05:23 [DanC]
-> 15 March 2005 Tag Teleconference
18:05:30 [noah]
VQ: Here: everyone except Roy, Tim and Norm
18:05:51 [Ed]
Ed has joined #tagmem
18:05:56 [noah]
scribe: Noah
18:06:05 [noah]
scribe: Noah Mendelsohn
18:06:12 [noah]
scribenick: noah
18:06:24 [noah]
Henry will scribe on 29 March
18:06:49 [noah]
Topic: approval of minutes from 15 March
18:07:20 [noah]
RESOLUTION: minutes of 15 March at are approved
18:07:49 [noah]
VQ: shall we move the minutes in date space?
18:07:56 [noah]
DC: No, leave them where they are.
18:08:24 [noah]
HT: That means they are in an attachment in an email archive, which makes searching hard. I needed that today. Is it not policy to have them in date space?
18:08:43 [noah]
DC: They need to be linked from the tag home page
18:08:50 [noah]
VQ: Right, I've been doing that.
18:09:06 [noah]
HT: Well, it's easier to grep if you mirror date space, but I can write a better tool.
18:09:26 [noah]
ED: I somewhat agree, I'd prefer to see them all in common place in date space, per year.
18:09:41 [noah]
DC: You don't have to go through list archives, they're all one click away.
18:09:56 [noah]
DC: In any case, in general, I'd like them to be in a final resting place before we approve them.
18:10:31 [noah]
ACTION: Henry with help from Ed to draft proposal on where in date space to put minutes
18:10:58 [DanC]
(re filing the minutes in CVS/datespace, all of us can send mail, but only some of us can do CVS, and when it goes bad, it tends to fall on the team contact, i.e. me)
18:11:30 [noah]
NM: Scribe's question: should we unapprove the minutes of 15 March until they land in whatever is the best place?
18:11:44 [noah]
Several: No, they're approved, leave them.
18:11:54 [noah]
Topic: F2f 14-16 June
18:12:07 [noah]
VQ: Amy van der Heil reports MIT can host
18:12:16 [noah]
DC: 3 real days?
18:12:37 [noah]
VQ: maybe last day will be short, but otherwise yes, full 3 days.
18:12:55 [noah]
NM: Remember that TimBL will leave early on 15 June due to family birthday
18:13:10 [DanC]
-> TAG action items
18:13:18 [DanC]
(very handy so far, thanks, ht)
18:13:20 [noah]
VQ: When you make flight plans, please let me know so we can schedule wrapup on last day
18:13:27 [noah]
+1 Noah
18:14:06 [noah]
Topic: Pending Action Review
18:14:44 [noah]
See pending actions at
18:15:03 [noah]
DO: Asked some questions about which are assigned to him.
18:15:14 [noah]
NM: Yes, ACTION: Henry and David to draft initial finding on URNsAndRegistries-50 [recorded in]
18:15:29 [noah]
HT: Also, Dave has ACTION TP5-8:David Orchard to contextualize his scenarios, such as more on what is happening with SOAP and WSDL. [recorded in Minutes of the W3C XML Schema Working Group 4th (37th) F2F meeting]
18:15:34 [noah]
DO: Yes working on it
18:15:47 [noah]
DO: I also worked on terminology for extensibility and versioning.
18:16:09 [noah]
DO: sent to Norm and Noah for early review
18:17:00 [noah]
NM: Don't have it yet,
18:17:38 [noah]
HT: I have finished ACTION: HT to review " Storing Data in Documents ..." [recorded in]
18:17:59 [noah]
DC: right, and followup email is largely supporive
18:18:43 [DanC]
action list Date: 2005/03/21 11:50:27
18:19:50 [noah]
VQ: will update action list later today or tomorrow
18:19:55 [DanC]
(re how long done action stay... a week or two, please)
18:20:01 [noah]
Topic: Oasis work on Extensible Resource Identifiers (XRI) -- raised by
18:20:01 [noah]
Norm[10], Oasis announcement[11]
18:20:11 [noah]
s /[11]//
18:20:22 [noah]
18:20:35 [noah]
VQ: Hmm, Norm's not here, let's skip it until he shows up.
18:20:46 [noah]
Topic: How do you extend the HTTP?
18:20:58 [noah]
We received a request at:
18:21:22 [Zakim]
18:21:31 [noah]
VQ: I would like to have some discussion on what to do with this issue.
18:21:38 [noah]
Norm joins the call.
18:21:40 [Norm]
zakim, mute norm
18:21:40 [Zakim]
Norm should now be muted
18:22:20 [noah]
DO: A couple of comments: 1) This issue could use some authoritative comments
18:22:50 [Norm]
DO: expresses concern that TAG is picking up a lot of issues but we aren't closing them very fast
18:22:51 [Vincent]
no echo on my side
18:23:38 [Norm]
DanC: I think you write an RFC and get consensus from the community
18:24:17 [Norm]
NM: Some groups use a new header, some use a new method (WebDAV). These have different characteristics in the face of things like "must understand"
18:24:32 [Norm]
NM: I think he's asking for good practice, clarity on who should do what and when
18:24:50 [DanC]
(hmm... I still don't see an issue any smaller than "please predict the future for me")
18:24:56 [Norm]
VQ: Agrees, it's a good practice request. Not clear who's supposed to do this, us or IETF, for example.
18:25:27 [Norm]
VQ: Shouldn't we do something?
18:25:42 [Norm]
DanC: No, we're not obliged to take on an issue or formally respond to every request
18:25:55 [Norm]
DO: If the TAG is going to decline, we should at least say we decline.
18:25:57 [Norm]
NM: +1
18:26:19 [Ed]
18:26:29 [Norm]
DO: I'd prefer if we could provide a bit of rationale. I don't think we get an enormous number of requests such that we can't reply.
18:26:32 [DanC]
(yes, it's polite to explicitly decline. but if you try to formalize that as a policy, you'll quickly get into denial-of-service, and "have we already declined that request?" stuff)
18:27:04 [Norm]
NM: summarizes, asks if we're ready to decide
18:27:17 [Norm]
NM: I'd be interested in the opinions of timbl and royf.
18:28:53 [Norm]
NM: Two options? 1. reject or 2. pick up the issue and prioritize it later
18:29:11 [Norm]
DanC: Putting it on the issues list is a commtiment to resolve it
18:29:46 [Norm]
DO: Some issues that we took up were reduced in priority before the first webarch but those are being reexamined
18:30:21 [Norm]
DO: Proposes that we defer talking about this issue until timbl and royf are present
18:30:50 [Norm]
VQ: I'll draw their attention to the issue before next time
18:30:59 [Norm]
VQ: Return to XRI.
18:31:19 [noah]
scribe: Norm Walsh
18:31:23 [Norm]
zakim, unmute me
18:31:23 [Zakim]
Norm should no longer be muted
18:31:27 [DanC]
"The public review starts today, 15 March 2005 and ends 14 April 2005."
18:31:29 [noah]
scribenick: norm
18:32:13 [Norm]
ht: Included it in new issue 50. Reinventions of URNs and registries.
18:32:44 [Norm]
NDW: That satisifies my expectations of what we would do with this
18:33:05 [Norm]
ack danc
18:33:05 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to express some patent concerns about reading it at all
18:33:28 [Norm]
DanC: XRIs have crossed my desk a couple of times, but the package seems to be labeled "patent incumbered" so I'm not inclined to read it at all
18:33:34 [Zakim]
18:33:49 [Norm]
DanC: their deadline is 14 Apr. HT, are you inclined to figure something out by 14 Apr?
18:33:52 [Norm]
ht: That seems unlikely
18:34:19 [DanC]
(we had pretty close to a finding on .mobi; we had a web page with TAG endorsement)
18:34:25 [Norm]
ht: At the very least, should we say "uh, guys, would you like to talk to us about this before moving ahead?"
18:34:32 [Zakim]
18:34:41 [Norm]
Ed: I'd be happy to review it and try to highlight some of the major issues
18:35:07 [noah]
zakim, [IBMCambridge] is me
18:35:07 [Zakim]
+noah; got it
18:35:10 [Norm]
DanC suggests mailing comments to www-tag or tag or straight to them. Any of those is fine by me.
18:35:53 [Norm]
Ed agrees to read them and post some notes about it
18:36:26 [Norm]
ht suggests taking a quick glance at urnsAndRegistries-50
18:36:58 [Norm]
VQ: Does that address your concerns?
18:37:04 [Norm]
NDW: Marvelously.
18:38:16 [Norm]
ACTION: Ed to review XRI and provide comments
18:38:54 [Norm]
Topic: xlinkScope-23
18:39:34 [Norm]
ack DanC
18:39:49 [Norm]
DanC: I believe we closed it in Basel. There was some kickback but eventually it did stick.
18:39:51 [DanC]
18:41:30 [Norm]
DanC: I believe the issues list should be updated to record our decision to close the issue
18:41:36 [Norm]
VQ: I'll do that.
18:41:54 [Norm]
VQ: Any other information about this issue?
18:42:51 [Norm]
ht: My memory is that the public believes that the TAG said you should use XLink, HTML WG pushed back, TAG said you should consider it, HTML WG went quiet.
18:43:21 [Norm]
My memory is that the HTML WG said even considering it was too strong, but we stuck our ground.
18:43:33 [DanC]
(well, yes, mark it closed, but note some outstanding dissent)
18:44:19 [Norm]
VQ: Any other business?
18:44:30 [ht]
q+ ht
18:44:38 [Norm]
zakim, ack danc
18:44:38 [Zakim]
I see ht on the speaker queue
18:44:43 [DanC]
ack danc
18:44:44 [Norm]
zakim, ack ht
18:44:44 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
18:45:06 [Norm]
ht: I would be happy if we brainstorm about on URNsAndRegistries-50
18:45:40 [Norm]
ack danc
18:46:25 [Zakim]
18:46:31 [Norm]
DanC: Countless discussions go like this: I'll find some URN scheme or the equivalent, e.g. doi: and urn:doi:
18:46:42 [Norm]
DanC: They've gone so far as to deploy plugins for doi:.
18:46:57 [Norm]
DanC: what the plugin does is lookup
18:47:15 [Norm]
DanC: So they own and operate a mapping from DOI to HTTP
18:47:46 [Norm]
DanC: Ask these folks why not just use http? Why a separate scheme? One part of it is financial incentive for being at the center of one of these namespaces
18:48:00 [Norm]
DanC: The other is that they don't trust DNS and HTTP.
18:48:25 [Norm]
DanC: Engineers can't predict the future. I can't predict that DNS and HTTP will last forever.
18:48:56 [Norm]
DanC: So they really do want their stuff to be looked up and they can't be talked out of it.
18:49:24 [Norm]
NM: They've got a mapping, the insurance they're getting is that if someone steals their DNS name, they can redirect to another.
18:49:33 [Norm]
DanC: Clearly they're creating aliases here, which we've discouraged.
18:49:46 [Norm]
DanC: The other folks don't want their stuff to be looked up.
18:50:07 [Norm]
DanC: e.g., urn:googlesearch:, they don't do anything about grounding that in reality and they don't feel embarrased about it.
18:50:29 [Norm]
DanC: But for some reason they don't want to promise that an address will persist for a long time.
18:50:38 [Norm]
DanC: Consider urn:ietf:...
18:50:47 [Norm]
DanC: How do you manage it? Well, we keep a website with all the names in it.
18:50:52 [Norm]
DanC: Duh!
18:51:07 [Norm]
DanC: So they have no mapping, but to actually manage the namespace...they use a webserver!
18:51:45 [ht]
q+ ht
18:51:45 [Norm]
DanC: I promised to renew that draft if someone would stand by me for the incoming barrage, but there have been no offers
18:51:57 [Vincent]
ack ht
18:52:16 [Norm]
ht: Two things I'd add: apparently the IETF are now running a server that will lookup those URNs.
18:52:31 [Norm]
ht: I haven't persued it, but someone asserted it exists.
18:52:35 [DanC]
-> A Registry of Assignments using Ubiquitous Technologies and Careful Policies
18:53:06 [Norm]
ht: The other example, the ITU are looking at doing this (as is OASIS, i.e. XRI)
18:53:20 [Norm]
ht: Both of these guys say they'll be running servers, in the OASIS case it'll be a SAML server of some kind
18:53:54 [Norm]
ht: The part of the puzzle that I don't understand how to respond to is, the argument that "we need something abstract" something not as concrete as URLs
18:54:02 [Norm]
ht: We need something independent of specific locations.
18:54:21 [Norm]
ht: That sounds like broken record stuff to me, but I'm hoping to hear "oh, they don't understand such and such..."
18:54:29 [Vincent]
ack danc
18:54:49 [Norm]
DanC: I can replay a conversation where I convinced one person.
18:55:16 [Norm]
DanC: The name of the XML spec was a subject of conversation.
18:55:29 [Norm]
DanC: Do you feel bad that there's no URN for it? Answer: yes.
18:56:16 [Norm]
DanC: Why? Because we want it to survive
18:56:32 [Norm]
DanC: Redundancy is the key, putting something in a newspaper gets lots of copies.
18:56:54 [Norm]
DanC: So the copy of the XML spec is all the web caches around the world provides that.
18:57:06 [Norm]
DanC: So he says "gee, then maybe we shouldn never have done that URN stuff"
18:57:53 [Norm]
DanC: The way you make things valuable is by getting agreement that things are shared. So you can use a link instead of sending a 15 page spec.
18:58:18 [Norm]
DanC: The way the binding between the names and what they mean is established is through protocols of some sort. HTTP is one example.
18:59:13 [Norm]
DanC: it makes sense to makup new URI schemes for totally new communication patterns, but if it looks like DNS and HTTP, *use* DNS and HTTP.
19:01:19 [DanC]
( is unavailable at the moment, but records some relevant experience of Norm's)
19:02:45 [Zakim]
19:02:46 [Zakim]
19:02:46 [Norm]
19:02:46 [Zakim]
19:02:48 [Zakim]
19:02:50 [Zakim]
19:02:57 [Zakim]
19:02:58 [Zakim]
TAG_Weekly()12:30PM has ended
19:03:00 [Zakim]
Attendees were noah, DanC, [INRIA], Ht, Dave_Orchard, EdRice, Norm
19:04:19 [Norm]
What's the incantation to get rrsagent to make the log public?
19:04:48 [DanC]
RRSAgent, make logs world-access
19:04:56 [DanC]
norm, do you want it to draft minutes?
19:05:08 [Norm]
19:05:14 [DanC]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:05:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate DanC
19:05:29 [Norm]
I'll take a look at cleaning those up as soon as I get a couple of other things off my plate
19:06:14 [DanC]
not bad... noah knows how to drive it. ;-)
19:08:06 [DanC]
hmm... it doesn't recognize Norm as scribe too...
19:08:12 [DanC]
ScribeNick: Norm
19:08:18 [DanC]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:08:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate DanC
19:08:51 [DanC]
oh well.
20:14:04 [noah]
Sorry, I tuned out. The way I "drive" is to take the raw log from my IRC client, run it locally through the PERL script, and edit the raw form until the formatted version looks right. So, I'd just move the scribe: norm to the right place and rerun.
20:14:41 [noah]
Last week I also had to edit the generated HTML to get around at least one bug in the PERL, and maybe also something where I was too lazy to fix it in another way.
20:14:53 [noah]
If you need the raw log from today, lemme know. I should have it.
20:15:09 [Norm]
No, thanks, Noah, I have a copy. I'm just struggling with other things this afternoon.
20:15:48 [noah]
I find it's nearly impossible to type in real time with enough cleanliness to get things right as I go. Besides, I find it's useful to occasionally rearrange some things that wind up in the wrong place, particularly if someone types a comment on an early topic: right after I start a new one. In those cases, I've moved some of them up.
20:16:12 [noah]
OK, good.
20:17:02 [noah]
Ah, maybe Dan was indicating that my raw form wasn't too bad. If so thanks! I took it as a request for info on how to "drive" the post-meeting formatting process.
21:00:20 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tagmem
21:07:20 [DanC]
right, I was impressed, noah
21:39:36 [Norm]
ht, danc, that URI is back online
21:40:15 [DanC]
indeed... looks vaguely familiar...
21:41:16 [DanC]
ah... yes... that was episode 23239482934 of hash-vs-slash
21:41:27 [Norm]
21:42:29 [Norm]
DanC: can you try for me and tell me if you get an "unavailable page" or a real page?
21:44:52 [DanC]
quite likely, yes
21:45:33 [DanC]
took a few seconds, but I see a friendly and relevant page at
21:48:14 [Norm]
21:48:32 [Norm]
that's now hosted by ibiblio, but I'm not sure the DNS has propagated all the way through yet. Good to see it's progressing though
21:48:49 [Norm]
Experimental release 9 of DocBook "5"
21:49:09 [Norm]
absinthe, bourbon, cacahca, ... hard-cider, ipa, ... jagermeister next!
21:49:15 [DanC]
21:54:41 [Norm]
Norm has joined #tagmem