See also: IRC log
<michael> hello all
<hsivonen> hmm. Skype isn't working :-(
<DanC> scribe: Lachy
<mausonio> hi all
DanC: My thought is to have 2 separate times. One chaired by me, other by Chris
Chris: I think bi-weekly meetings would be good
DanC: that's probably good enough
<dsinger> 2300Z is +6 from now...
<DanC> times in Sydney, Los Angeles
[discussion of new time for meeting]
<DanC> "Thursday, August 30, 2007 at 14:00:00 Thu 7:00 AM * Midnight Thu-Fri"
<DanC> my favorite: "Thursday, August 30, 2007 at 23:00:00Z Thu 4:00 PM * Fri 9:00 AM"
<DanC> PROPOSED: to meet Thu 30 Aug 4pm Pacific/2300Z, and to meet weekly, alternating between 1pm Boston time and 4pm Pacific.
<oedipus> 2300z Thursday is 08:00:00 Friday in Asia/Tokyo
<oedipus> 2300z Thursday is 09:00:00 Friday in Australia/Melbourne
<hsivonen> this is hsivonen
<Lachy_> what's the difference between Pacific and Boston time zones?
<Chris> 3 hours.
<Chris> PST = UTC/GMT -7/8
<DanC> PROPOSED: to meet Thu 30 Aug 4pm Pacific/2300Z, and to meet weekly, alternating between 1pm Boston time and 4pm Los Angeles
<oedipus> 2300z Thursday is 04:30:00 Friday in Asia/Calcutta
RESOLUTION: to meet Thu 30 Aug 4pm Pacific/2300Z, and to meet weekly, alternating between 1pm Boston time and 4pm Los Angeles
<scribe> ACTION: ChrisW to try to find a Seattle/OZ/Asia time [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
<scribe> ACTION: DanC to reserve a bridge for this alternating schedule [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
<hsivonen> advance regrets for Aug 30th
<DanC> ACTION: [DONE] Maciej to send out wrap-up about design principles [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
DanC: Maciej seems to want to start a review of the design principles, I want to ship the draft
<oedipus> one concern is that rearranging the Proposed Design Principles will break a lot of link on the wiki, so we should procede with caution
GR: If we accept mjs suggestion, the
problem is that the references to the old proposals will be
... MoinMoin doesn't have ability to move wiki pages
DanC: I was going to do a survey
about the design principles
... Mjs finally sent a wrap up, which seems to say "let's start reviewing" - that's not what I expected
... I was hoping we were 2/3 of the way through review process
... Chris, have you read the summary from gsnedders?
<DanC> summary from Sneddon
Chris: I have not
DanC: I was hoping to publish the document in a week
Chris: mjs did not have a time frame
for when the clean up would be done
... I think we need a short time frame
... we should have it out for reveiw within a week, then clean up and then agree within 2 weeks
... we should respond to mjs and say we like the plan, we want to make sure we're at step 5 by next week.
DanC: let's review gsnedders message
<DanC> (I'm also opening http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposedDesignPrinciples in another window, last edited 2007-08-16 12:26:51)
RB: I thought the support existing content principle was fairly solid
DanC: I wonder what gsnedders means by how it's being implemented in "I've not to my knowledge heard anything against this, though there have been people questioning how it has been implemented."
<oedipus> the last comment on implmentation and HTML5 test suites for degrading gracefully was GJR
<oedipus> need practical not theoretical data
RB: I'm not sure his changes to the Wheel principle made too much difference, I don't have any problems with it myself
<gsnedders> It may well be just how some things in the spec degrade.
<mjs> hi everyone
DanC: is the survey a cost effective way to proceed?
<gsnedders> I cannot find anything more specific than that, so I'm assuming that's all I meant.
Chris: how long to put it
... [need to decide which principles are stable and finsish the survey with DanC]
<DanC> ACTION: DanC to discuss survey with Chris W and issue it, based on the most mature/agreed ones [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
<gsnedders> I expect even from survey the majority would have consensus
<oedipus> +1 from GJR to DanC & ChrisW's action item
<DanC> [later...] bringing up http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/dprv/
<mjs> fwiw I don't think a survey will be very helpful to improving the document, but I'll look over the results if there is one
<DanC> ACTION: [WITHDRAWN] Gavin_Sharp to review design principles in the next two weeks [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
DanC: What hasn't been done in the spec reviews? [checks wiki, list archive...]
Marcin: I have reviewed the media elements
<DanC> review from marcin
<DanC> no reviews for Communications, no volunteers. hmm
ChrisW: I'll make sure Communications gets covered
<dsinger> apple has some comments of detail on the video/audio tags coming in soon...
<oedipus> KarlD on SMIL3
<oedipus> Dave Singer on SMIL3
<dsinger> we considered the SMIL media tags when doing the proposal, obviously, but the needs are different in SMIL and HTML
DanC: I want to figure out when to
... if we said something like 10 times as many yes, as no votes, that would be compelling
Chris: it would depend on the the
type of formal objections
... I expect there will be real objections
<Lachy_> I expect them too!
DanC: we have to publish, we don't necessarily need 100% concensus
<gsnedders> As I said in my email, I concluded that I doubt we'll ever have consensus, but rather almost always dissent
DanC: we owe a response to ..
<DanC> DanC: I think it makes some good points, e.g. "We don't build fire stairs just enough to evacuate 80% of the occupants."
DanC: Hixie said he intends to get to this in due course, but I would like to have a schedule
hsivonen: Hixie has implemented the implicit association algorithm, to anylise it's effectiveness
<oedipus> WAI PF Summary of goals for HTML5
hsivonen: the headers issue is a late comer in the first-come-first-serve queue, but he added a note to the draft about it being an open issue
<oedipus> quote To summarize, our goals for HTML 5 are as follow: (1) Support for issues highlighted in Table: 1 of the ARIA Roadmap; (2) Backward compatability to ARIA, including the role attribute. (3) Allow for full interoperability with assistive technologies; (4) A preference for access to accessibility information via the DOM; (5) reduced efforts by authors to support assistive technologies (6) Support for the access element or a version of it. (7) Maintain equ
<oedipus> discussed in http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ARIAIntegration
DanC: any volunteers to take an action this week? no? OK, we'll let it percolate.
DanC: XHTML2 WG want us to change our name from XHTML, I haven't seen any justifaction
<Lachy_> no justification
<Lachy_> We should both just use the name XHTML, changing the name is counter productive
<DanC> ACTION: ChrisW discuss XHTML name coordination with XHTML 2 WG in the Hypertext CG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
hsivonen: The media type and namespace still need to contain "xhtml", so the name should also be XHTML
DanC: yes, the namespace name is a bigger issue.
<oedipus> +1 on namespaces more important issue to address
<DanC> DanC: in consideration of the differences in sizes of the Working Groups, the Forms WG chairs and HTML WG chairs agree that each WG should be represented by 3 people.
<DanC> 14 volunteers currently
LH: I think it should include people
who are very familiar with WF2
... I like Hixie, Anne, Mjs, Henri, Matthew Raymond
<oedipus> GJR: john boyer may be one of the 3 from the Forms side
<oedipus> GJR: he may not be on the list, but what about asking TV Raman?
<oedipus> GJR: Raman has experience from both sides
DanC: what about Gregory,
... Anne and Mjs
GR: I think TV Raman would be an ideal person
<scribe> ACTION: Gregory to contact T.V. Raman about the Forms Task force [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
<hsivonen> Sander Tekelenburg is the active one
DanC: I suppose we could rotate task force members
<DanC> DanC: I'll fill in 2 (Anne, Maciej) and wait on the 3rd
DanC: we're scheduled to meet in a room that holds 50
<DanC> "President's D 66 HTML 50 " -- http://www.w3.org/2007/11/TPAC/overview.html
DanC: Hixie suggested an unconference
... that's easier for me, in some ways...
ChrisW: I would be comfortable with that for a while, but not the whole time
DanC: I set up the announcements list, but I still want to speak with chaals about how to operate the -announcements mailing list
<DanC> ACTION: [CONTINUES] DanC to set up an announcement mailing list, noodling with chaals [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
DanC: MikeSmith was going to write a summary of the CVS commit changes. Has that happened?
Chris: I haven't seen it.
<DanC> ACTION: [CONTINUES] MikeSmith to write up a summary of changes for last [period of time], description of where changes go [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-html-wg-irc]
DanC: Volunteers are welcome for writing up a summary of changes
DanC: I expect to migrate to MediaWiki, and I'm inclined to have a separate HTMLWG wiki
Chris: that seems like a good idea
<Lachy_> why don't we just start using the WHATWG wiki?