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