W3C . TAG

TAG Weekly

30 Aug 2005

Attendees

Present
Norm, Ed, Ht, TimBL, Vincent, DanC
Regrets
Noah, Dave
Chair
Vincent
Scribe
DanC

Contents

See also: proposed Agenda, IRC log


Administrative (roll call, review of minutes, agenda)

VQ: agenda comments?

later, errata maintenance and issues list maintenance were added to the agenda

<DanC_> 23 Aug minutes

VQ: I made a small change re attendance 23 Aug

RESOLUTION: to approve 23 Aug minutes

<DanC_> minutes 12 July

RESOLUTION: to approve 12 July minutes.

VQ: upcoming telcons... grid...

NDW: I'm willing to scribe next week.

VQ: if I can't find Roy, then yes, please.

<timbl_> Regrests for 6th Sept and 13th

<timbl_> Also, Regrets for 4th October

<timbl_> Also, regrets for 8 and (29 is AC meeting) November

<ht> HST regrets for 13 September

HT: still working on getting somebody from [missed] to our ftf

Preparing agenda for Edinburgh f2f (20-22 Sep)

VQ: agenda page is in progress
... meeting goals? our June meeting focussed on long-term plans...
... perhaps try to close some issues this time?

DanC: re authentication, I'm prepared to discuss, but not sure I'll get my writing assignment done
... e.g. openid

HT: sounds plausible
... I have an XML 2005 paper in progress that's relevant to a number of issues/actions on languages/namespaces/etc.

<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ... re URI scheme and certain vendors

VQ: see also next item for today

DanC: maybe namespaceDocument-8...

Ed: let's review priorities from Jun ftf...
... e.g. grid

<DanC_> minutes June ftf in Cambridge

DanC: seems like we had several lists; do you remember which one?

VQ: I think so

Guidelines and Registration Procedures for new URI Schemes

Please send any comments to the iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists ...
From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org On Behalf Of The IESG
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 3:33 PM
To: IETF-Announce
Subject: Last Call: 'Guidelines and Registration Procedures for new URI...

<timbl_> Draft of Formal TAG Last Call Comment on RFC2717bis/RFC2718bis

RESOLUTION: to send Comment on RFC2717bis/RFC2718bis as above in the name of the TAG to the IESG and the authors, with copy to uri@w3.org and www-tag@w3.org with follow-up directed to uri@w3.org

<scribe> ACTION: HT to send TAG comments on URI guidelines and registration procedures to the IETF [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

DanC: I'd like to be more explicit, a la "The dav: scheme is a poor use of this valuable shared resource, and should not be used as a precedent."

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to send individual comment on dav: to ietf [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

namespaceDocument-8

<DanC_> Revisiting namespaceDocument-8 Norman Walsh (Friday, 24 June)

NDW: yes, there was some discussion...
... (a) JB objects to GRDDL alone on the basis that it doesn't ensure human-readability
... (b) [missed]

<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask for a particular namespace to focus on... xquery? xml schema? hypothetical-ml?

<ht> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema

<Norm> adaptation of XML Schema namespace document using GRDDL and RDDL 1.0

<Norm> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/06/23-rddl/rddl2.xml adaptation of XML Schema namespace document using GRDDL and "RDDL 2"

DanC: yes, let's focus on http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema

HT: so which...?

NDW: backing up... we've considered alternatives to RDDL 1.0, but since then RDDL 1.0 deployment is becoming more and more substantial; e.g. microsoft...
... and we have GRDDL that can work either way...
... yes, 2005/06/23-rddl/rddl1.xml is written in the dialect with large deployment

DanC: so is that "valid"?

HT: well, it's valid modular XHTML, but that's not supported by validat.w3.org

DanC: so text/xml by design?

NDW: well, I meant meant application/xhtml+xml

(try .htaccess, maybe)

    $ HEAD 'http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/06/23-rddl/rddl1.xml'

    Content-Type: text/xml; qs=0.9
    

DanC: so which media types are preferred? acceptable? for RDDL, application/xhtml+xml ? is application/xml ok?

HT: I think the answer is the same as for XHTML. so no, not application/xml
... applicatin/xml is acceptable in some circumstances, e.g. when the client asks for it

DanC: so what exactly are the URIs in the RDDL vocabulary?

<Norm> http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation

<Norm> http://www.rddl.org/purpose

<ns0:purpose xmlns:ns0="http://www.rddl.org/"

<Norm> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema.xsd

<DanC_> I get 404 @ http://www.rddl.org/purpose

DanC: 4xx conflicts with "should make respresentation available". 2xx conflicts with our decision on httpRange-14

NDW: namespace names interact with deployed RDDL...

DanC: well, not necessarily the RDF output

NDW: right

DanC: so W3C namespace policy... could we have a W3C REC for RDDL that endorses http://www.rddl.org/purpose?

<ht> After some effort, hst concludes that norm's rddl1 example is identical the the existing XMLSchema namespace document plus GRDDL link, so, I will edit in those changes so the namespace doc't can be used for testing . . .

TimBL: ah... hmm... we'd need assurance that rddl.org has similar policies as w3.org; e.g. that if they go poof W3C could take it over.
... not sure that's existing W3C policy yet

<DanC_> URIs for W3C Namespaces

<Norm> Note, ht, that my grddl XSL stylesheet has no normative weight so I think it may be premature to add it to the official Schema namespace

<ht> RDDL has no normative weight, but it's been at the namespace URI for years!

<Norm> Fair enough

<ht> All this stuff is there to encourage experimentation, IMHO

"For Recommendation Track documents, the persistence policy for the namespace MUST use the template shown below."

several: seems quite reasonable to keep rddl.org in the namespace name, though yes, W3C policy as written conflicts with that so far.

VQ: this reminds me of "Tim to provide a draft of new namespace policy doc" action from http://www.w3.org/2005/03/08-tagmem-minutes.html#action04

TimBL: yes, that's in progress...

<timbl_> Ian's latest draft

v 1.25 2005/08/18 15:08:07

TimBL: see esp new material in 4. Namespace Changes over Time

<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to say I think I'm in sync with ndw's draft on ns8

DanC: I wonder about depending on other than text/html ...

<DanC_> GRDDL namespace doc, which is XHTML 1.x

HT: RDDL 1.0 supports DTD-based validation...

DanC: I could do class/rel stuff ala microformats... with relax-ng if you like

NDW: JB suggests RDDL 1.0 or the attribute-based thing...

HT: if we have the GRDDL wildcard, do we need another RDDL dialect besides 1.0?

DanC: no

<Ed> Ed agrees.. we dont need 2.0

NDW: so RDDL 1.0, or other human-readable with GRDDL [that's what I wanted to hear; not sure that's what he said]

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to draft a section on using XHTML 1.x (not RDDL) with GRDDL and relax-ng [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

<scribe> ACTION: NDW to follow-up on namespaceDocument-8, based on DanC's vanilla XHTML example [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

VQ: plan to close at the ftf? or take more time?

NDW: well, provided we get the writing and the feedback, let's try to close it. but there's considerable risk in that schedule

DanC: yeah.


.
.

Reviewing a few pending actions

<timbl_> Ian's latest draft

v 1.25 2005/08/18 15:08:07

<scribe> ACTION: Tim to provide a draft of new namespace policy doc [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

no news on David Orchard to contextualize his scenarios ...

<scribe> ACTION: David Orchard to contextualize his scenarios, such as more on what is happening with SOAP and WSDL. [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

VQ: done? HT: prepare abstractComponentRefs materials for ftf discussion

HT: that was for the previous [June] ftf
... hmm... I need to check back with the XML Schema WG about pointing to the p element, but as for this action, pls consider it closed.

VQ: very well

<scribe> ACTION: HT to prepare abstractComponentRefs materials for ftf discussion [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

issues list maintenance

<DanC_> httpRange-14

DC: httpRange-14 isn't closed in the issues list...

VQ: yes, that's straightforward for me to fix

webarch errata

<Norm> proposed errata

<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask that we please don't maintain errata numbers other than information in the message, e.g. message-ids, subjects, dates

DC: in particular, I don't want a state in between "message made it to the archive" and "request is in our queue".

<Norm> ACTION: Norm to find better numbers for the errata [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

PROPOSED: to acknowledge that Typo in Status , Typo in Status, Missing anchor messages report actual problems

so RESOLVED.

<Norm> ACTION: Norm ot produce an erratum document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]

<ht> I note that the Schema WG has agreed that they will distinguish between errata and corrigenda, henceforth

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: DanC to draft a section on using XHTML 1.x (not RDDL) with GRDDL and relax-ng [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
[NEW] ACTION: DanC to send individual comment on dav: to ietf [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
[NEW] ACTION: HT to send TAG comments on URI guidelines and registration procedures to the IETF [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
[NEW] ACTION: NDW to follow-up on namespaceDocument-8, based on DanC's vanilla XHTML example [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
[NEW] ACTION: Norm ot produce an erratum document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
[NEW] ACTION: Norm to find better numbers for the errata [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
 
[PENDING] ACTION: David Orchard to contextualize his scenarios, such as more on what is happening with SOAP and WSDL. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
[PENDING] ACTION: Tim to provide a draft of new namespace policy doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
 
[DONE] ACTION: HT to prepare abstractComponentRefs materials for ftf discussion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/09/01 17:25:06 $