17 Jan 2007


See also: IRC log


Shadi, Johannes, Jim, CarlosI, CarlosV


SAZ: Any Additional items to the agenda after the long break?

F2F agenda and registration

SAZ: I'll be updating with Hotel information shortly. Everyone should register even if to say they won't be able to come.
... hopefully everyone should be able to come, and should consider rescheduling if many people can't make it.
... Any questions? Anyone who can't make it?

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2007/02/f2f-agenda

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
... I prefer the first one as it forces better reviews

CV: Will there be phone access to be able to phone in?

CI: I believe so, I will check.

SAZ: People like the approach?


Yep for me too

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/32094/ERTWG_F2F_FEB2007/

SAZ: JL will the pointers draft be ready?

JL: I would certainly hope so!

HTTP Vocabulary in RDF issues

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/issues

SAZ: JK to lead through discussion of the issues

JK: Issue 010 We just use shortnames too much, rather than full names
... We should be consistent throughout the docs

CV: Yes do the same

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2003/Editors/

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/

SAZ: The manual of style I think covers Karl's issue
... We should review fully against it

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-HTTP-in-RDF-20061220#introduction

SAZ: ... I agree it could be more usable with the expanded text

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#ref-section

SAZ: What do people think?

JL: I think it would be good to have the expanded link, like Karl's proposal.

SAZ: Frequency of usage is important so we can have small links if used often

RESOLUTION: 010 Adopt Karl's proposal of expanded text where appropriate

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#References

SAZ: We also need to review docs ref. the Manual of style
... 008 is a tongue twister - editorial improvement

JK: 012 Coordinate work with RFC 822-XML
... We only use the RFC 822 place in part, we could see to review it

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
... I'd propose to look at it, and see if it meets are needs already and can drop the namespace

JK: 011 The request is for information about the Use Cases related to content negotiation

CV: Who wrote the use cases?

SAZ: I think I created them all
... Proposals are to refine or drop the use cases.

CV: I don't think we should drop
... No, no proposal to drop from anywhere - I think it makes sense as it is.

SAZ: We could elaborate a little bit more
... Add more information about what the Vocab is for a sentance about recording headers etc.
... Shall we resolve to improve the wording if possible rather than expand more use cases?
... Does anyone think they should?

JK: I think we need to describe use case 2 better to meet Karl's suggestion
... i.e. make it extremely clear what making a conformance claim about
... We could add use cases after feedback from other groups with different aims from us

SAZ: We should send out a reminder, I understand Philippe and TimBL are interested in using

<scribe> ACTION: SAZ ping people to get use cases from other domains [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/17-er-irc]

RESOLUTION: Issue 011 Improve wording of section even if we get no new use cases

SAZ: Next meeting is 31st

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: SAZ ping people to get use cases from other domains [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/17-er-irc]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
$Date: 2007/01/18 11:46:22 $