IRC log of er on 2007-05-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:34:05 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #er

13:34:06 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/05/09-er-irc

13:34:15 [JohannesK]

Zakim, this will be ERT

13:34:15 [Zakim]

ok, JohannesK; I see WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 26 minutes

13:34:52 [JohannesK]

Agenda+ HTTP Vocabulary in RDF comments

13:35:03 [JohannesK]

Meeting: ERT WG

13:36:03 [JohannesK]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007May/0008

13:36:23 [JohannesK]

Chair: JK

13:59:38 [Zakim]

WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has now started

13:59:45 [Zakim]

+JohannesK

14:00:14 [drooks]

drooks has joined #er

14:00:54 [JohannesK]

Regrets: CV, SAZ

14:03:07 [CarlosI]

CarlosI has joined #er

14:04:57 [Zakim]

+ +34.98.429.aaaa - is perhaps Encarna

14:05:51 [JohannesK]

Zakim, +34.98.429.aaaa is really CarlosI

14:05:51 [Zakim]

sorry, JohannesK, I do not recognize a party named '+34.98.429.aaaa'

14:06:30 [JohannesK]

Zakim, ??.aaaa is really CarlosI

14:06:30 [Zakim]

sorry, JohannesK, I do not recognize a party named '??.aaaa'

14:06:58 [CarlosI]

Zakim, who's on the call?

14:06:58 [Zakim]

On the phone I see JohannesK, Encarna

14:07:02 [rruemer]

rruemer has joined #er

14:07:10 [CarlosI]

zakim, encarna is really CarlosI

14:07:10 [Zakim]

+CarlosI; got it

14:07:16 [JohannesK]

:-)

14:10:17 [rruemer]

i cannot call in via nice...

14:12:05 [Zakim]

+ +43.70.aabb

14:12:35 [JohannesK]

Zakim, +43.70.aabb is really Reinhard

14:12:35 [Zakim]

+Reinhard; got it

14:14:20 [rruemer]

No, Nice, didn't! I called in via Boston

14:16:00 [Zakim]

+David

14:16:40 [JohannesK]

Scribe: drooks

14:16:51 [JohannesK]

Zakim, take up agendum 1

14:16:54 [Zakim]

agendum 1. "HTTP Vocabulary in RDF comments" taken up [from JohannesK]

14:17:28 [JohannesK]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/issues

14:19:27 [drooks]

johannesk: reply to issue001 from jo rabin - we don't care if no response

14:20:26 [drooks]

johannesk: does anyone think we need to deal with broken connection/no responses?

14:21:56 [drooks]

johannesk: do we need to record the reason?

14:23:15 [drooks]

carlosI: thinks this is outside the scope of the language

14:25:02 [drooks]

drooks: it sounds to me like we are trying to define how we handle exceptions

14:25:18 [drooks]

drooks: i.e. unexpected responses/no response

14:25:30 [drooks]

drooks: is that for us to define?

14:27:17 [drooks]

johannesk: vote for a NO to this issue?

14:27:24 [CarlosI]

http:Response

14:27:31 [CarlosI]

http:responseCode

14:27:41 [CarlosI]

5xx or whatever

14:30:09 [drooks]

carlosI: if there is no response there is nothing to record

14:31:18 [JohannesK]

PROPOSAL: 1. Incomplete response: record at least the parts of the response that are received. 2. No response at all: out of scope.

14:33:41 [drooks]

CarlosI: if request doesnt not have a recorded response then it means there was no response so we kind of have a 'no response' covered

14:34:15 [drooks]

johannesk: but we cant recored why there was no response

14:36:50 [JohannesK]

PROPOSAL: 1. Incomplete response: record at least the parts of the response that are received. 2. No response at all: only recording the request means there was no response (for whatever reason).

14:37:06 [drooks]

+1

14:37:42 [rruemer]

+1

14:37:50 [CarlosI]

+1 but maybe it need a good explanation (to avoid confusion with 5xx)

14:38:04 [JohannesK]

RESOLUTION : ISSUE-001 1. Incomplete response: record at least the parts of the response that are received. 2. No response at all: only recording the request means there was no response (for whatever reason).

14:38:37 [drooks]

johannesk: we can deal with issue 003 and 004 together

14:39:47 [drooks]

johannesk: should we use existing properties or invent our own?

14:40:15 [JohannesK]

s/003 and 004/003 and 002/

14:40:21 [drooks]

CarlosI: thinks we can use dcterms

14:40:50 [JohannesK]

http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/

14:45:31 [JohannesK]

http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec13.html#sec13.2.3

14:49:09 [drooks]

carlosI: would prefer them to be an extension

14:50:34 [JohannesK]

PROPOSAL: ISSUE-002/-003 Put a note to "Vocabulary Scope": Timestamping is not part of the HTTP/1.1 spec, so it is out of scope for HTTP-in-RDF, it may be handled outside of this vocabulary

14:50:59 [drooks]

+1

14:51:06 [rruemer]

+1

14:51:25 [JohannesK]

RESOLUTION: ISSUE-002/-003 Put a note to "Vocabulary Scope": Timestamping is not part of the HTTP/1.1 spec, so it is out of scope for HTTP-in-RDF, it may be handled outside of this vocabulary.

14:51:32 [CarlosI]

+1

15:00:43 [drooks]

johannesk: we've run out of time

15:01:29 [Zakim]

-Reinhard

15:01:35 [drooks]

drooks has left #er

15:01:38 [Zakim]

-CarlosI

15:01:39 [Zakim]

-David

15:01:40 [JohannesK]

Zakim, close agendum 1

15:01:40 [Zakim]

agendum 1, HTTP Vocabulary in RDF comments, closed

15:01:43 [Zakim]

I see nothing remaining on the agenda

15:02:10 [JohannesK]

RRSAgent, make minutes

15:02:10 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/09-er-minutes.html JohannesK

15:02:36 [JohannesK]

Zakim, bye

15:02:36 [Zakim]

leaving. As of this point the attendees were JohannesK, +34.98.429.aaaa, CarlosI, Reinhard, David

15:02:36 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #er

15:02:43 [JohannesK]

RRSAgent, bye

15:07:03 [JohannesK]

RRSAgent, bye

16:59:29 [shadi]

shadi has joined #er

16:59:49 [shadi]

rssagent, make logs world

16:59:51 [shadi]

rssagent, make logs world

16:59:53 [shadi]

r

16:59:58 [shadi]

rrsagent, make logs world

17:00:03 [shadi]

rrsagent, make minutes

17:00:03 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/09-er-minutes.html shadi

17:00:04 [shadi]

rrsagent, make logs world

17:00:09 [shadi]

rrsagent, bye

17:00:09 [RRSAgent]

I see no action items