14:46:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #xhtml
14:46:50 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/11/21-xhtml-irc
14:46:57 <Steven> rrsagent, make log public
14:47:03 <Steven> zakim, this will be xhtml
14:47:03 <Zakim> ok, Steven; I see IA_XHTML2()10:00AM scheduled to start in 13 minutes
14:47:16 <Steven> Meeting: Weekly XHTML2 WG Teleconference
14:49:03 <Steven> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Nov/0029
14:49:10 <Steven> Steven has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Nov/0029
14:49:25 <oedipus> oedipus has joined #xhtml
14:49:31 <Steven> Chair: Roland
14:49:37 <Steven> Scribe: Steven
14:50:02 <Steven> -> Previous http://www.w3.org/2007/11/14-xhtml-minutes
14:50:19 <Steven> -> http://www.w3.org/2007/11/14-xhtml-minutes Previous
14:50:29 <oedipus> http://www.w3.org/2007/11/14-xhtml-minutes
14:50:56 <Steven> Yes, but the order of the -> command is what I can't remember
14:51:12 <Steven> Regrets: Yam, Tina
14:51:19 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
14:51:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/21-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
14:51:58 <Steven> Neither seem to have worked ;-)
14:52:03 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
14:52:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/21-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
14:55:12 <Roland> Roland has joined #xhtml
14:57:56 <Nick> Nick has joined #xhtml
14:58:30 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #xhtml
14:59:23 <Zakim> IA_XHTML2()10:00AM has now started
14:59:30 <Zakim> +Roland
14:59:31 <Rich> Rich has joined #xhtml
14:59:42 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
14:59:42 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
14:59:43 <Zakim> -Roland
14:59:44 <Zakim> +Roland
14:59:45 <Zakim> +Steven
14:59:55 <Zakim> +ShaneM
15:01:10 <Zakim> +Gregory_Rosmiata
15:01:27 <oedipus> zakim, Gregory_Rosmiata is Gregory_Rosmaita
15:01:27 <Zakim> +Gregory_Rosmaita; got it
15:02:49 <Zakim> +??P2
15:03:23 <Steven> zakim, ??p2 is Rich
15:03:23 <Zakim> +Rich; got it
15:05:19 <Steven> Regrets+Alessio
15:05:47 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has joined #xhtml
15:07:44 <Steven> Topic: Reviews
15:08:00 <Steven> Roland: ITS Best Practices
15:08:01 <Roland> ITS Best practices [Note new version]
15:08:30 <Steven> Shane: I reviewed it, and my general feeling is "it's fine" and thanks to them for doing what we asked (making a module)
15:09:12 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
15:09:12 <Zakim> the conference code is 94865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
15:09:16 <Steven> Steven: You had some remarks about ruby?
15:09:41 <Zakim> +markbirbeck
15:09:45 <Steven> Shane: The ruby spec doesn't mention a namespace
15:10:02 <Steven> ... they see, to have added it to their namespace as well (as ours)
15:10:46 <Steven> Steven: So there are two rubys
15:10:57 <Steven> Shane: But that is in their spec, not this document
15:11:20 <Steven> Steven: So you don't think there are any comments to make?
15:11:23 <Steven> Shane: No
15:11:55 <Steven> Roland: CSS Mobile
15:12:07 <Steven> ... who was reviewer?
15:12:11 <Steven> Steven: Yam
15:12:56 <Steven> ... I have a vague feeling that I shoould have been given an action last week to forward Yam's review
15:12:59 <Steven> ... I will
15:13:07 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to forward Yam's CSS review
15:13:18 <Steven> Topic: Call times
15:13:36 <Roland> This questionnaire is open from 2007-11-14 to 2007-11-21.
15:13:42 <Steven> Roland: the deadline is today
15:13:58 <Steven> Steven: So we can make a decision now
15:14:27 <Steven> ... looking at the results, the only time that has no "No" is Wednesday 14:00UTC
15:14:36 <Steven> Roland: Will we review this?
15:15:41 <Steven> ... in the spring?
15:16:15 <Steven> Steven: No need, becauser it only makes it easier for Japanese (it is puinned to Boston time, so it becomes 13:00UTC
15:16:24 <Steven> s/ser/se/
15:16:33 <Steven> s/puin/pin/
15:16:50 <Steven> Roland: Propose moving call time one hour earlier.
15:16:58 <Steven> Roland: Objections?
15:17:04 <Rich> no objection
15:17:15 <oedipus> +1 from GJR
15:17:31 <Steven> RESOLVED: Call will be at 14:00 UTC forthwith
15:17:42 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to change teleconference slot
15:18:24 <Steven> Topic: Marking up assertions
15:18:34 <Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Nov/0024.html
15:18:52 <Steven> Roland: We need to do something about the presentation of assertions in current documents
15:20:19 <Steven> Steven: I think we should make them prettier and document them at the beginning of each document
15:22:19 <Steven> Gregory: They are useful. I am currently investigating the best way to use CSS in these cases (to support assistive software). I will report later.
15:24:25 <Steven> Gregory: Many screen readers can't cope with things that are only different by color
15:24:41 <Steven> Steven: And we don't use del and ins?
15:24:50 <Steven> Shane: No, because of validation problems
15:25:37 <Rich> q+
15:25:52 <Steven> Roland: This is a semantics issue, not just styling
15:26:06 <Steven> ackk r
15:26:09 <Steven> ack r
15:26:19 <Steven> Rich: I agree strongly
15:26:56 <Steven> Gregory: Separating style and content doesn't guarantee accessibility
15:27:42 <Roland> http://new.eic-community.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=441
15:28:03 <Steven> Roland: There are other groups doing similar things
15:28:57 <Steven> ... that even include stronger constraints than schema, that can be automatically extracted
15:29:10 <Steven> Shane: How about role?
15:29:15 <Steven> Steven: Or RDFa?
15:29:22 <Steven> Roland: Good idea
15:29:58 <Steven> Shane: Is there a subject and object?
15:30:18 <Steven> Roland: I think it can be done
15:30:34 <Steven> Rich: In any case we need to map it to a framework for accessible software
15:31:09 <ShaneM>  @role could easily be used to annotate the assertions instead of @class, which is what I am doing today.
15:31:14 <Steven> Gregory: Let's continue on list
15:31:24 <Steven> Topic: Future FtFs
15:33:07 <Steven> Roland: So we just need a host for the second FtF. THe rest is clear
15:33:16 <Steven> 1. 18-20 Feb Venice Italy (Host Alessio) 
15:33:16 <Steven> 2. 16-18 June NE USA (such as NY or Boston, looking for a host)
15:33:16 <Steven> 3. xx-yy October, France (TPAC 2008)
15:33:29 <Steven> Topic: Testing XHTML Basic 1.1
15:33:40 <Steven> Roland: No Yam, so we will postpone
15:33:54 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to tell Yam about test reports
15:34:14 <Steven> Topic: Title issue (RDFa vs role)
15:34:14 <Steven> http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xhtml2-issues/RoleAttrib?id=8023
15:34:27 <Steven> Gregoty: I took it to PF
15:34:32 <Steven> s/ty/ry/
15:34:53 <Steven> Gregory: and what came back was that PF is very interested in the DC usage
15:35:17 <Steven> ... and RDFa syntax uses colonised attribute values
15:35:24 <Steven> ... which is a risk wrt HTML56
15:35:28 <Steven> s/56/5/
15:35:50 <Steven> Shane: I appreciate the basic issue
15:36:28 <Steven> ... but what is the problem?
15:36:41 <Steven> Steven: Thery asked for a value of @role for title
15:36:51 <Steven> ... and we repled that RDFa supports that usage
15:36:58 <Steven> s/repled/replied/
15:37:14 <Steven> Steven: But role has colonised values too!
15:37:22 <oedipus> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2007OctDec/0194.html]
15:39:38 <Steven> Steven: And I thought that the problem with HTML5 was colonised *attributes* not the values.
15:40:27 <Steven> Rich: title isn't a section of a document surely?
15:40:42 <Steven> Steven: Quite, it is a property of some content
15:41:25 <Steven> ... which is why property="dc:title" is better than role="title"
15:42:02 <oedipus> RDFa Sufficient Post: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2007OctDec/0191.html
15:42:08 <Steven> \Shane: I don't think property="dc:title" covers it
15:42:26 <Steven> Steven: Well, if you use an @about if it is not the title of the document, but a section
15:42:29 <Steven> Shane: Oh, ok
15:42:59 <Steven> Gregory: I have asked them (PF) to explain more, and we'll see
15:43:23 <Steven> Rich: Let's hold off until PF meets (later today)
15:43:40 <Steven> Roland: So this is in progress, and we don't have to do anything more yet
15:44:01 <Steven> Topic: TAG role comment (continued from last week)
15:44:01 <Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Nov/0013
15:44:23 <oedipus> GJR notes that "title" and RDFa is on the agenda for the 21 november 2007 PF telecon
15:45:33 <Steven> Shane: They replied to my informal reply http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2007OctDec/0025.html
15:46:00 <Steven> ... the comment is not actually on the role spec, so I don't think we need to treat it as a LC comment
15:46:25 <Steven> ... it is about CURIES in the context where a URI ref might be used
15:46:33 <oedipus> TAG tracker issue cited in TAG comments: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/56
15:47:00 <Steven> Shane: my epiphany yesterday is that the URI aspect of CURIEs is not interesting to me.  I dont care that I can express a compact URI (e.g. in @resource or @about)
15:47:03 <oedipus> larger TAG issue: "Do the expected benefits of CURIEs outweigh the potential costs in introducing a third syntax for identifiers into the languages of the Web?"
15:47:23 <Steven> Mark: Do we need to make a formal response?
15:47:36 <Steven> Shane: Yes, it is framed as a LC comment
15:47:46 <Steven> Mark: But there is not a lot of substance to their comment
15:48:26 <oedipus> TAG issue is named: "Abbreviating URIs in Web Languages"
15:48:39 <Steven> Shane: in the role document CURIEs are not used in URI contexts, so their comment doesn't count
15:50:56 <Steven> Steven: [argument about how IRIs do this already]
15:51:27 <Steven> Shane: A fine argument, but we don't need to use it
15:51:43 <Steven> ... we don't use CURIEs in such positions anyway
15:52:45 <ShaneM>  they did request:  The TAG requests language to the following effect be included in the normative specification of CURIEs. 
15:52:45 <ShaneM>  
15:52:45 <ShaneM>         "CURIEs, including safe_curies, MUST NOT be used in attribute or element 
15:52:45 <ShaneM>         content where URI content is specified in the relevant language 
15:52:45 <ShaneM>         specification."
15:52:56 <Steven> Mark: I don't think we need to consider their argument at all, since it is just not clear enough
15:53:22 <Steven> Shane: I think we should react to that for the role spec
15:53:35 <Steven> ... but put off the wider issue until the CURIE spec
15:55:43 <Steven> Steven: Can't we just say "Thanks, this is what we do in role already"
15:55:59 <Steven> Shane: We don't want to piss of the TAG
15:56:28 <Steven> s/of/off/
15:57:14 <Steven> Roland: So how do we reply?
15:59:57 <Steven> RESOLUTION: Reply to TAG that we don't use CURIEs in URI context in the role module
16:00:20 <Steven> ACTION: Reply to TAG about CURIEs in role
16:00:59 <Steven> Roland: They can respond on CURIEs when that spec is published
16:01:13 <ShaneM>  publication of the updated CURIE spec is imminent
16:01:18 <Steven> [ADJOURNED]
16:01:33 <Zakim> -ShaneM
16:01:35 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
16:01:37 <Zakim> -Gregory_Rosmaita
16:01:39 <Zakim> -Roland
16:01:44 <Steven> zakim, who is here?
16:01:47 <Zakim> -Rich
16:02:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see Steven
16:02:17 <Zakim> -Steven
16:02:19 <Zakim> IA_XHTML2()10:00AM has ended
16:02:27 <Zakim> Attendees were Roland, Steven, ShaneM, Gregory_Rosmaita, Rich, markbirbeck
16:02:33 <Zakim> On IRC I see markbirbeck, Rich, ShaneM, Nick, Roland, oedipus, RRSAgent, Zakim, Steven, myakura, Lachy, krijnh
16:03:11 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
16:03:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/21-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
16:04:11 <NickVdB> NickVdB has joined #xhtml
16:09:12 <Rich> Rich has left #xhtml
17:19:09 <Lachy> Lachy has joined #xhtml
17:20:14 <Lachy> Lachy has joined #xhtml
18:17:11 <Lachy> Lachy has joined #xhtml
18:18:27 <Zakim> Zakim has left #xhtml
19:47:09 <Roland> Roland has joined #xhtml
20:02:19 <Roland> Roland has joined #xhtml
21:07:52 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #xhtml
21:11:12 <ShaneM_> ShaneM_ has joined #xhtml
21:21:37 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #xhtml
23:10:48 <sbuluf> sbuluf has joined #xhtml