See also: IRC log
Gerrie: I am in San Diego, and representing
HP
... been away from HP for 7 months, just back. Used to work with Melinda on
XHTML Print, and other standards efforts
Steven: It is 6am with you?
Gerrie: Yes
<oedipus> it's even earlier for yam!
Steven: Sorry about that
... it is really hard to find a time that is suitable for all. In any case,
welcome!
Roland: One review is due by end of month, please finish it this week
Roland: Unfortunately no Rich today. Anyone know the status?
Gregory: Yes, some documents have been
combined
... awaiting approval to Wednesday to be made public
... Go to PF home page, to see status
<oedipus> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group
<oedipus> under "Current Work"
<oedipus> roles document and states and properties docment been combined
Gregory: Roles and states and properties have
been combined
... no links here because they are member confidential
<oedipus> 1. ARIA Specification (combined Roles plus States and Properties)
<oedipus> 2. ARIA Best Practices
<oedipus> 3. ARIA Primer
<oedipus> 4. ARIA Roadmap
Gregory: There is a remaining issue of getting
ARIA into HTML5
... HTML5 was released yesterday, without ARIA in it
Roland: Note that issue Caption positioning & binding example using WAI-ARIA markup
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jul/0012 has been closed
Gregory: There were two formal objections to the publication, but it went ahead anyway
Roland: Who is attending?
Steven: I am
Roland: I am
<yamx> Yam: I will.
<oedipus> GJR waiting to "see" if impending contract work will allow him to travel at that time -- remote participation?
<gshults> I likely will not
Steven: There will be a skype conference for remote participation
<oedipus> skype would be ideal -- even just IRC -- worked at TPAC 2008
<oedipus> GJR's post that closes action item: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jul/0012.html
Roland: Status?
<oedipus> reply to GJR's post by Gez Lemon with alternate syntax: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jul/0012.html
Steven: Shane produced a new draft, I made a draft 'implementation' report
Shane: Why not list the W3C Validator?
Steven: Good idea!
<oedipus> lol
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/m12n-11-implementation.html
<oedipus> GJR thought on Selectors API: from an accessibility standpoint, an advantage of using such an API for applications that need access to the live DOM (as opposed to the DOM that results from parsing the document). currently such applications use query languages like XPath, which dictate extra dependencies for that application and which do not support querying the live DOM; therefore, because the Selectors API would be integrated into the user agent, it would
Steven: At the call we will be asking for CR, but arguing we might as well go straight to PR.
Shane: We should look at Jabber, XMPP
Roland: CDF, DIAL
<oedipus> my left or yours?
Shane: The style sheet is wrong, it says PR
Steven: Thanks!
Yam: OMA refers to M12N, and we will have a meeting in February, and hope we will be able to refer to 1.1 by then
Roland: We talked about going to last call
... Shane did an update
... are we ready to go to last call?
Shane: It's a shame that Mark's not here.
... Mark indicated that he felt that some text about processing rules should
be in the CURIE spec
... I disagree, I have not put it in, and think we should consider it as a
last call comment
... there is an issue about RtL languages
... I'm sure we discussed this
<ShaneM> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-curie-20080122/#s_syntax
<ShaneM> end of that section has an embedded issue about RTL languages
Steven: Doesn't seem to be a blocking factor
for last call
... we do the same as QNames
Roland: Resolve to go to last call?
<oedipus> GJR: plus one to going to LC
Roland: Any objections?
RESOLUTION: Take CURIE spec to last call
<scribe> ACTION: Roland to negotiate last call period for CURIEs with HCG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/23-xhtml-minutes.html#action01]
Shane: I will work on this
... I need to integrate a couple of comments
Roland: And it can refer to the CURIE doc
Shane: Which adds a constraint on its progress
<scribe> ACTION: Shane to produce new draft of role for second last call [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/23-xhtml-minutes.html#action02]
Shane: By CoB Monday
Roland: So when M12N is moved, we can move XHTML 1.1 forward
Comments (PR#9715)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2007JanMar/0027
Shane: This is all fixed
... And it says so in the issue tracker
Roland: Media types (PR#9716):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2007JanMar/0029
<ShaneM> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml11-20070416/
Shane: Checking draft
<oedipus> quote XHTML 1.1 documents SHOULD be labeled with the Internet Media Type application/xhtml+xml as defined in [RFC3236]. They SHOULD NOT be labeled with the Internet Media Type text/html as defined in [RFC2854]. For further information on using media types with XHTML, see the informative note [XHTMLMIME]. unquote
Steven: "XHTML 1.1 documents SHOULD be labeled with the Internet Media Type "application/xhtml+xml" as defined in [RFC3236]." is in the spec
<oedipus> sounds good to me
<ShaneM> The working group agreed that the media type SHOULD be application/xhtml+xml. The group did NOT agree that we add the restriction about the document type text/html not being used because a document author may need to make that compromise.
Roland: Anyone with a problem with this wording?
Steven: ... and we don't believe we should prevent an author doing that
Roland: DOCTYPE
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-wg/2007JanMar/0082
<oedipus> are we "looking" at: http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xhtml2-issues/DocType?id=7336
Shane: Some people say that you can't get to the DOCTYPE in the DOM
Roland: You should be able to, but not all browsers accept it.
<oedipus> <?xml version="1.1" ?>
Steven: Why don't we use @version to distinguish family members?
Shane: It's there already, not deprecated, but
we've never used it
... it is CDATA, and we always produce a fixed value for it
... maybe
... To remove my objection, with regard to XHTML 1.1 the spec, let us say
that the version attribute is available
<ShaneM> The DTD implementation contains the following: >
<ShaneM> <!ENTITY % XHTML.version "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" >
Shane: We can use that convention
Steven: So we make the DOCTYPE a should, and add a note abuit version (also a SHOULD)
<scribe> ACTION: Shane to Add DOCTYPE stuff to XHTML 1.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/23-xhtml-minutes.html#action03]
[ADJOURN]