<yamx> This is Yam.

<scribe> Scribe: Steven

Steven: Partial regrets from Alex
... he's only on irc

Mark: I propose Steven as chair

Yam: Second

Announcements

<scribe> New members: Susan and John from Progeny

(sent regrets for today)

FtF in NYC in June

Steven: My feeling is that not enough people could come in June
... so the nex nextt FtF will be in September
... In Madrid if I remember right
... 10 and 11 September

Mark: Yes, Madrid

Steven: So do we want to have an editor's meeting on the Monday and or Tuesday?
... (let's do it offline)

Reports back from conferences

<Alex-DERI> As I already said via mail, I got the OK from DERI, so I could attend the FTF meeting in june

Steven: Mark and I were at the two main ewb conferences the last two weeks
... There was a panel on the future of HTML at XTech
... quite a lot of panelists
... only 45 minutes, so not as lot of time
... BBC interviewed me and Mike Smith (BBC) afterwards
... Another interesting presentation was Joost
... who showed a lovely system using compound documents, XHTML , CSS< SVG
... really nice, and using our idea of how it should be

Mark: The mobile Ajax session was good too, talking about XForms, XHTML2 and so on
... I argued that you can do Ajax declaratively, and the session ended up talking about that as the main point
... Volantis backed me up on this
... they deliver XHTML2 and XForms to mobile devices by transformations

Rich: Do we have any data on how much declarative saves?

Steven: Yes, that is the core of my talks at the moment
... you can show that costs can be reduced to 3% by doing it declaratively
... and we have a couple of real-life examples to back that up

Shane: I wonder if Tina can summarise the thread on www-html

Steven: She sent regrets

Shane: there were two main threads: 1) Why is HTML5 codifying broken behaviour
... why not separate implementation guidelines from spec
... 2) changing the semantics between HTML4 and 5

Steven: It is not clear to me the best way to reach that group of people
... whether it is worth talking on those discussions or not

<Alex-DERI> As a side note, I'm on HTML5 too

Mark: We need to clarify what the difference is between what we are doing and what they are doing

Alex, so is Mark

<Alex-DERI> I know

Mark: You can use XHTML2/XForms to show how much work you save compared with using libraries

Validator

Shane: I fixed the xmlns problem, and passed the changes on, and it will be in the next version
... so you can use xmlns:xxx in markup and not get validation errors
... but you still need a schema

Steven: There was another mail from someone from Japan, mentioning a fix

Shane: That was about C1 characters
... the validator is now fixed, but we need to update our specs
... because we ship xml declarations
... and they now need to be fixed

Steven: In TR space?

Shane: Yes
... but they don't show up in the spec
... I will approach Ian about it

Steven: When will the xmlns fix be shipped?

Shane: It is in beta now

RDFa

Steven: An excellent demo at XTech of an RDFa extension for Mozilla
... seems to point to maturity of RDFa
... we can move forward on this quite fast

Mark: Lots of talks mentioned RDFa at WWW2007

XML declaration

Shane: I have just raised the problem with Ian Jacobs
... he says we can't fix it in place
... we have to reissue the specs

Steven: Why?

Shane: Just because

Steven: So it would be a PER

Shane: Yes

Steven: Painless enough

XML, XML DOM, and QNames

Shane: I had an action item to ask how XML parsing works when QNames get turned into tuples
... the answer was "they don't"
... inside attributes
... and what we are trying to do is allow scoped attribute values in some taxonomy
... so an application has to do the interpretation itself
... So then I said to myself, if the parser isn't helping us, why are we using xmlns to establish the relationship?
... and the conclusion I reached with Mark, is that xmlns is something everyone understands, so we should use it
... but I wonder if we shouldn't use CURIEs, since they don't carry the baggage with them

Mark: Do you mean to change the sysntax of CURIEs?

Shane: No

Mark: It should always have said CURIEs, but because of the pushback we were getting, we said let's use QNames for now

Steven: Are you suggesting we use something other than xmlns for the prefixes?

Mark: We can unbind the connection
... use xmlns, or triples using <link> for instance
... Jeremy Carroll was enthusiastic to use it for SPARQL
... and we can persuade IPTC to use it too
... and it would allow us to have default prefixes
... if profile = X, the dc maps to this, foaf maps to that, etc.
... and then making XHTML documents much easier to write, cut/paste and so on

Steven: Will the same notation (like namespaces) confuse people

Mark: Good question; one option is to change the syntax of CURIEs
... so they look different
... we could even let people define the separator
... but one scenario is that within the flexibility, we use xmlns as an option

[ADJOURN]

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128  of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/nex/next/
Succeeded: s/cary/cary/
Succeeded: s/cary/carry/
Succeeded: s/DO/Do/
Succeeded: s/namespaces/prefixes/
Found Scribe: Steven
Inferring ScribeNick: Steven
Default Present: Steven, Rich, yamx, markbirbeck, ShaneM
Present: Steven Rich yamx markbirbeck ShaneM
Regrets: Alessio Tina Susan
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007May/0015
Got date from IRC log name: 23 May 2007
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/23-xhtml-minutes.html
People with action items: