14:53:44 RRSAgent has joined #er 14:53:44 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/01/17-er-irc 14:53:51 Zakim has joined #er 14:54:02 zakim, this will be ERT 14:54:02 ok, shadi; I see WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes 14:54:08 meeting: ERT WG 14:54:13 chair: Shadi# 14:54:15 chair: Shadi 14:54:47 agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Jan/0014.html 14:55:08 agenda+ F2F agenda and registration 14:55:20 agenda+ HTTP Vocabulary in RDF issues 14:58:48 JibberJim has joined #er 14:59:59 WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has now started 15:00:01 +Shadi 15:00:51 +??P1 15:00:59 JohannesK has joined #er 15:01:53 +CarlosV 15:02:04 Zakim, CarlosV is really Johannes 15:02:04 +Johannes; got it 15:02:11 CarlosI has joined #er 15:02:32 zakim, ??p1 is really Jim 15:02:32 +Jim; got it 15:03:01 +berrueta 15:03:14 CarlosV has joined #er 15:04:03 +Johannes.a 15:04:38 scribe: Jim 15:04:47 scribenick: JibberJim 15:04:56 zakim, Johannes.a is CarlosV 15:04:56 +CarlosV; got it 15:07:10 SAZ: Any Additional items to the agenda after the long break? 15:07:10 zakim, take up agendum 1 15:07:10 agendum 1. "F2F agenda and registration" taken up [from shadi] 15:08:45 SAZ: I'll be updating with Hotel information shortly. Everyone should register even if to say they won't be able to come. 15:09:08 SAZ: hopefully everyone should be able to come, and should consider rescheduling if many people can't make it. 15:09:58 SAZ: Any questions? Anyone who can't make it? 15:10:35 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2007/02/f2f-agenda 15:12:11 SAZ: Thought it would be an option to go through section by section, and raise issue and list them all so we know them all, to then be addressed after or alternative generate issue lists before the f2f and then address the issues at the meeting 15:12:20 SAZ: I prefer the first one as it forces better reviews 15:13:04 CV: Will there be phone access to be able to phone in? 15:13:13 CI: I believe so, I will check. 15:14:19 zakim, mute me 15:14:19 Shadi should now be muted 15:15:25 zakim, unmute me 15:15:25 Shadi should no longer be muted 15:15:57 SAZ: People like the approach? 15:16:00 JK: YEP 15:16:06 Yep for me too 15:16:54 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/32094/ERTWG_F2F_FEB2007/ 15:17:31 SAZ: JL will the pointers draft be ready? 15:17:38 JL: I would certainly hope so! 15:17:41 zakim, close agendum 1 15:17:41 agendum 1, F2F agenda and registration, closed 15:17:42 I see 1 item remaining on the agenda: 15:17:43 2. HTTP Vocabulary in RDF issues [from shadi] 15:17:48 zakim, take up agendum 2 15:17:48 agendum 2. "HTTP Vocabulary in RDF issues" taken up [from shadi] 15:18:13 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/issues 15:19:18 SAZ: JK to lead through discussion of the issues 15:20:53 JK: Issue 010 We just use shortnames too much, rather than full names 15:21:46 JK: We should be consistent throughout the docs 15:21:54 CV: Yes do the same 15:22:46 http://www.w3.org/2003/Editors/ 15:23:18 http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/ 15:24:06 SAZ: The manual of style I think covers Karl's issue 15:24:16 SAZ: We should review fully against it 15:24:32 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-HTTP-in-RDF-20061220#introduction 15:25:42 SAZ: I support Karl's proposal 15:26:16 s/I support Karl's proposal// 15:26:35 SAZ: I agree it could be more usable with the expanded text 15:28:22 http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#ref-section 15:30:13 SAZ: What do people think? 15:30:34 JL: I think it would be good to have the expanded link, like Karl's proposal. 15:31:16 SAZ: Frequency of usage is important so we can have small links if used often 15:33:26 RESOLUTION: 010 Adopt Karl's proposal of expanded text where appropriate 15:33:44 http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#References 15:34:39 SAZ: We also need to review docs ref. the Manual of style 15:35:33 SAZ: 008 is a tongue twister - editorial improvement 15:37:53 JK: 012 Coordinate work with RFC 822-XML 15:39:33 JK: We only use the RFC 822 place in part, we could see to review it 15:41:50 SAZ: I think scope creep if we start to widen ourselves into RFC-822 XML format - we're only interested in a small part of the whole 15:43:02 SAZ: I'd propose to look at it, and see if it meets are needs already and can drop the namespace 15:44:27 JK: 011 The request is for information about the Use Cases related to content negotiation 15:45:10 CV: Who wrote the use cases? 15:45:20 SAZ: I think I created them all 15:46:57 SAZ: Proposals are to refine or drop the use cases. 15:47:08 CV: I don't think we should drop 15:47:32 CV: No, no proposal to drop from anywhere - I think it makes sense as it is. 15:48:44 SAZ: We could elaborate a little bit more 15:49:54 SAZ: Add more information about what the Vocab is for a sentance about recording headers etc. 15:51:42 SAZ: Shall we resolve to improve the wording if possible rather than expand more use cases? 15:51:48 SAZ: Does anyone think they should? 15:53:56 JK: I think we need to describe use case 2 better to meet Karl's suggestion 15:54:50 JK: i.e. make it extremely clear what making a conformance claim about 15:57:18 JK: We could add use cases after feedback from other groups with different aims from us 15:58:53 SAZ: We should send out a reminder, I understand Philippe and TimBL are interested in using 15:59:08 ACTION: SAZ ping people to get use cases from other domains 16:01:47 RESOLUTION: Issue 011 Improve wording of section even if we get no new use cases 16:03:00 SAZ: Next meeting is 31st 16:03:04 -Johannes 16:03:06 -CarlosV 16:03:10 -Shadi 16:03:12 -Jim 16:03:19 -berrueta 16:03:20 WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has ended 16:03:21 Attendees were Shadi, Johannes, Jim, berrueta, CarlosV