17:36:23 RRSAgent has joined #tagmem 17:36:23 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-tagmem-irc 17:36:30 Zakim, agenda? 17:36:30 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda: 17:36:31 4. Issue abbreviatedURI-56 (ISSUE-56) [from DanC_lap] 17:36:32 5. Issue passwordInTheClear-52 (ISSUE-52) [from DanC_lap] 17:36:33 6. Issue namespaceDocument-8 (ISSUE-8) [from DanC_lap] 17:36:34 7. Vancouver F2F [from DanC_lap] 17:36:35 8. XRI comments [from DanC_lap] 17:36:41 Zakim, clear agenda 17:36:41 agenda cleared 17:37:07 Agenda = http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/02/26-agenda 17:37:36 Stuart has joined #tagmem 17:38:26 ht has joined #tagmem 17:38:48 timbl_ has joined #tagmem 17:40:03 agenda + Convene 17:40:13 agenda + Aims and Objectives 17:40:18 Zakim, take up item 1 17:40:18 agendum 1. "Convene" taken up [from DanC_lap] 17:40:24 agenda + WebArch Vol 2 17:40:36 Welcome Jonathan, ashok 17:40:43 agenda + XMLVersioning-41 17:40:50 scribenick: hy 17:40:52 scribenick: ht 17:41:08 Meeting: TAG f2f 17:41:26 Scribe: Henry S. Thompson 17:41:31 Zakim, pick a scribe 17:41:31 sorry, DanC_lap, I don't know what conference this is 17:41:32 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/02/26-agenda.html 17:41:44 Zakim, this is tag 17:41:44 sorry, ht, I do not see a conference named 'tag' in progress or scheduled at this time 17:41:53 present: Stuart, Jonathan, Ashok, Noah, Dave, Norm, Henry, Dan, TimBL 17:41:56 zakim, what conferences? 17:41:56 I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM, XML_ET-TF()11:00AM active 17:41:57 also scheduled at this time are WS_SAWSDL()12:00PM, SW_RIF()11:00AM 17:42:02 Zakim, pick a scribe 17:42:02 sorry, DanC_lap, I don't know what conference this is 17:42:05 Zakim, this is tag 17:42:05 sorry, DanC_lap, I do not see a conference named 'tag' in progress or scheduled at this time 17:42:11 Zakim, room for 10? 17:42:13 ok, DanC_lap; conference Team_(tagmem)17:42Z scheduled with code 26631 (CONF1) for 60 minutes until 1842Z 17:42:36 Chair: Stuart Williams 17:42:39 +YVR 17:42:47 YVR holds Stuart, Jonathan, Ashok, Noah, Dave, Norm, Henry, Dan, TimBL 17:42:58 Zakim, pick a scribe 17:42:58 sorry, DanC_lap, I don't know what conference this is 17:43:05 Zakim, you're a ninny 17:43:05 I don't understand 'you're a ninny', DanC_lap 17:44:30 Those present record their thanks to DO for bringing us back to the big hole in the ground 17:45:13 Topic: Agenda 17:45:54 SW: Possible addition to the agenda for a telephone slot for a discussion of ARIA-related issues 17:46:11 ... Proposed to put it into the tagSoupIntergration-54 slot 17:46:23 ... May take quite a lot of time 17:47:34 TW: We shouldn't land them with the burden of long-term TAG issue resolution 17:47:53 ... So we should review this in advance 17:48:10 SW: We could use last slot this afternoon for this. . . 17:48:36 NW: What kind of preparation? 17:48:47 s/TW/TBL/ 17:49:09 TBL: Long-term planning, around issue of validation 17:50:09 SW: So, tsi-54 slot is confirmed for call-in from Al Gilman and Michael Cooper on ARIA, possible one other 17:50:29 SW: Other agenda issues? 17:50:47 HST: UAR-50 unlikely to take 90 mins 17:51:08 DC: Issue ScalableAccess-58 might benefit from some time 17:51:18 SW: Noted 17:51:23 Topic: Aims and Objectives 17:53:31 SW: Want to get us moving on WebArch v2 before next f2f 17:53:46 ... Close some long-open issues, 34, 50, maybe 57 17:54:07 q+ to think out loud about the value of a one-time publication (webarch v2) vs a community/journal (TAGlines blog, W3C Q&A blog) 17:54:27 SW: Welcome other proposals for early closure candidates 17:55:32 q+ to offer that the TAG issue list is fairly valuable as a long-time holding place 17:56:33 q+ to note satisfaction with weekly agendas 17:57:53 q+ to emphasize ftf events (SXSW, Linked Data, KM Australia, ...) and journal/blog 17:58:35 q? 17:58:37 q+ to suggest promoting WebOnt WG patterns to ESW wiki as medium/long-term approach to versioning 18:01:00 (note to timbl: the errata process starts with somebody sending mail to public-webarch-comments@w3.org ) 18:01:40 TBL: I would like us to resurrect the Webarch 1.0 Errata doc't as a place we record things, for example 'resource' should be 'thing' 18:02:26 (hmm... "n3 rules for how you follow your nose"... interesting.) 18:02:39 (pointer to the work TimBL attributes to David Booth?) 18:03:47 q? 18:04:40 q+ to note Hypertext CG tech blocks to look at... e.g. offline web apps in the news (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/technology/25adobe.html?em&ex=1204174800&en=b6f473cf0fa73b0a&ei=5087%0A ) 18:04:46 ack danc 18:04:46 DanC_lap, you wanted to think out loud about the value of a one-time publication (webarch v2) vs a community/journal (TAGlines blog, W3C Q&A blog) and to offer that the TAG issue 18:04:50 ... list is fairly valuable as a long-time holding place and to note satisfaction with weekly agendas and to emphasize ftf events (SXSW, Linked Data, KM Australia, ...) and 18:04:55 ... journal/blog and to suggest promoting WebOnt WG patterns to ESW wiki as medium/long-term approach to versioning and to note Hypertext CG tech blocks to look at... e.g. offline 18:04:59 ... web apps in the news (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/technology/25adobe.html?em&ex=1204174800&en=b6f473cf0fa73b0a&ei=5087%0A ) 18:05:51 q+ to debrief on video workshop 18:07:02 . http://www.semantic-conference.com/ 18:07:15 . http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/#travl 18:08:52 I think the someday pile is important. 18:09:09 But it has to be so labelled. 18:09:41 "deferred" state 18:09:51 ping 18:10:01 DC: The issues list has value as it identifies for the community that certain issues are recognised, even if we don't know what to do about them 18:10:07 ping 18:10:17 DaveO has joined #tagmem 18:11:15 Stuart, can you change the versioning link to 18:11:23 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-compatibility-strategies 18:11:46 +1 for forward-facing radar 18:14:58 this meeting: self-describing web "all but done" and/or grows n3 rules in 6 months... 18:15:06 ... Bristol: hypertext tech blocks 18:15:17 ... this year: if people are talking about the TAG blog at influential ftf events 18:17:03 (urns and registries... what's the relevant ftf event for that? Norm, what about the XML UK event?) 18:17:21 (or some lifesci event, jar ?) 18:19:39 (as for XMLFunctions... I think that's a big one... feels like about a dozen N3 rules with 5 test cases each ) 18:20:51 ("1st WD by december" tells me it's too big for a WD; a WD takes at most 3 months to produce) 18:21:48 well, maybe it could be 3 mo if we started in earnest, I'm assuming there'll be a few months of ramp up time 18:24:06 (oh yeah... security... what happeend after the W3C mobile ajax workshop?) 18:25:30 DO: New topics we should be looking at, where there's a lot of innovation: social stuff, in particuler 18:25:35 (re tagging... I'm fairly content that we're not talking about that... it uses webarch just fine. maybe we can use it as a hook to introduce our topics. re social, that's hugely important, but I tend to approach it more in my research work, though I'm speaking at KM Australia 2008 which is all about social stuff and tagging) 18:25:35 s/particuler/particular/ 18:27:46 http://www.pearsonhighered.com/educator/academic/product/0,3110,013613517X,00.html 18:28:09 NM: Not sure that volume 2 is the for-sure right focus for WebArch -- possible _version_ 2 18:29:57 (hmm... I agree a lot of good stuff goes into findings, but the community review process is not all that smooth; www-tag sorta works for a crowd of a hundred or so, but I wonder if a different mechanism would increase the size of our audience substantially.) 18:30:35 (now should we be pushing JSON?) 18:31:41 (I push JSON a little in my research/dev blog(s), but I don't see it as all that influential on architecture, except in wierd cases where JSONRPC has a different security model than XMLRPC) 18:31:48 NW: We can't _make_ anything a success, but we can and should look to providing the background/ammunition for groups who choose for their own reasons to move in the right direction -- RESTful WS are a success story in this regard 18:32:01 s/NW:/NM:/ 18:32:07 [TVR arrives] 18:32:29 (a few JSON items: http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/96 http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/99 ) 18:34:11 NM: The new interactive media are a potential threat to WebArch: FLASH is qualitatively different from XHTML+SVG, and we need to look at that 18:35:22 AM: I come at the access to metadata issue from a different angle 18:35:48 ... but it's something I care about 18:36:23 ... I'm also involved with OpenID in my day job, so would like to hear what's going on there 18:37:06 ... Also starting an IG on mapping relational data to RDF+OWL, so there's possible interaction there 18:38:22 raman has joined #tagmem 18:38:36 JR: Still trying to get up to speed -- learning requirements from the TAG perspective is a goal for me 18:38:36 q? 18:39:55 JR: I'm on the hook to the HCLS IG for a document about URIs, and although I 18:40:32 ... am not happy with my current draft, I expect it's likely to disagree with some TAG findings 18:40:52 HST: Hope we can talk about this under UAR-50. . . 18:41:19 Zakim, what did I queue to say? 18:41:19 I don't understand your question, DanC_lap. 18:44:52 q- danc 18:45:23 JR: I think there are some standards missing which are holding up the SemWeb project 18:45:29 DO: What kind of standards? 18:45:39 JR: Ontologies -- foundational stuff 18:46:19 ... AWWSW for example, and bibliography and provenance -- lots of duplication of effort in these areas 18:46:46 DO: Microformats guys did something like this, e.g. with vCard. . . 18:47:06 JR: Problem isn't technical, it's organisational 18:47:37 TVR: Not technical, same problem as AI has -- any success is no longer considered AI 18:48:04 (yup; when it works, it's no longer called AI. SemWeb has some of that. meanwhile, re "ignition", see http://esw.w3.org/topic/SeedApplications and http://esw.w3.org/topic/VocabularyMarket ) 18:48:50 (I've also heard about Open Source Semantic Web, Drupal in particular) 18:49:03 JR: SemWeb only works if vocabs get shared -- I don't believe the 'precipitation' approach in which 10 different ontologies are built for the same domain is going to work very well, if at all 18:52:50 TVR: Hoping to make my finding on issue ???-60 as something useful for the Web 18:53:33 ... Not by being proscriptive, but by collectiing and tabulative current uses, detecting conflicts, and making best practice recommendations 18:55:08 s/???-60/WebApplicationState-60/ 18:55:34 [Break until 1110] 19:06:06 Stuart has joined #tagmem 19:12:28 q? 19:13:56 [Resuming] 19:14:02 Topic: WebArch 2.0 19:14:18 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/05/webarch2-outline.html (invisible on IE) 19:16:50 NW: I would start to fill this in with content, and only then address the 2nd edition vs. volume 2 question 19:16:54 NM: Both, I suspect 19:17:12 DC: Specific success criteria? 19:17:58 NW: Just as v. 1 put identification, interaction and ??? as the foundations of the Web, we add what we need for Linked Data, [scribe missed] 19:18:09 q+ daveo 19:18:19 q? 19:18:41 ack daveo 19:19:15 DO: Wrt adding something to do with Social Computing, maybe it's just applications of what we have already 19:19:43 ... but I'm not convinced. Consider stuff like Twitter for example 19:19:47 NM: (correction of above, which as incorrectly ascribed to Norm: Sample goal: Just as AWWW First Edition set in place the foundations of the Web itself, 2nd Edition will additionally provide equivalent conceptual foundations for linked data and semantic reasoning. 19:19:57 DC: Are you endorsing that as the right goal? 19:20:08 (I carefully avoided "the") 19:20:12 NM: No, not necessarily. I thought you asked for an example. That's a potentially goood goal? 19:20:14 q? 19:20:16 ... Or a tabulation I just added to my blog of all my 'activities' -- this on Flickr, that on Digg, etc. 19:20:19 Sounds like personal data integration. 19:20:20 DC: Can you give me something you would endorse? 19:20:46 DO: Maybe this could/should be mapped to RDF, so it could be merged, etc. . . 19:21:03 NM: Prefer not to now. I'd rather have the rest of the TAG iterate to the right high level goal. I'm not ready to say that I know what it should be just yet. 19:21:10 (re dave's points on I chaired a teleconference on data aggregation and syndication, hoping an XG would form; no joy) 19:22:37 TVR: Do we really need _architectural_ work to hook all these things (RDF, SemWeb, Web 2.0) together? 19:22:42 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/05/webarch2.oo3 I think 19:23:05 ... My preference would be just to make sure that they all are based on the same architectural foundations 19:23:14 ... then integration should follow 19:27:23 q? 19:28:12 TBL: New thing on the web: Oauth 19:31:45 q+ to a) say self-desc is bigger than Formats and b) we need richer formats for Rich apps 19:33:12 SW: There's a theme here that maybe should be highlighted, which is activity 19:33:21 NM: Connects with Flash and Silverlight 19:34:27 ... Connects up with scheme/protocol issue, and with selfDescribingWeb 19:34:36 (Dave, if you're interested in this "if you want to comment on my blog, you have to be a friend of friend..." stuff, see the DIG blog. http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/taxonomy/term/4 ) 19:34:52 BTW the interraction involved in HTTP is under the hood of the web as an informationspace 19:34:56 q+ to support Noah, I think 19:35:01 ack noah 19:35:01 noah, you wanted to a) say self-desc is bigger than Formats and b) we need richer formats for Rich apps 19:35:51 TVR: Important to get level right 19:36:10 ... It would have been wrong 10 years ago to focus on shopping carts 19:36:20 ... Rather stateless vs. stateful 19:36:24 ... leading to cookies 19:36:40 ... So listing applications is the wrong level 19:37:45 DO: So better to talk about authentication, and managing the proliferation of identies 19:37:50 q? 19:38:11 TVR: So focus on primitives in the architectures 19:38:23 ... e.g. that we need URIs for things, including identities 19:38:42 ... If we could discover one more thing like like that, that would be good 19:38:44 ack ht 19:38:44 ht, you wanted to support Noah, I think 19:38:45 ack ht 19:38:48 +1 move naming/URIs to the top of the outline 19:38:51 http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/10/the_impact_of_javascript_and_x.html 19:40:10 q+ 19:40:16 dorchard has joined #tagmem 19:40:49 (Dave, if you're interested in this "if you want to comment on my blog, you have to be a friend of friend..." stuff, see the DIG blog. http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/taxonomy/term/4 ) 19:40:50 HST: Not sure when what a URI 'accesses' is determines by a rich interaction between Javascript and XMLHTTPRequest 19:40:56 q? 19:40:59 DaveO has joined #tagmem 19:41:05 ... not clear what is 'identified' by that URI 19:41:35 (hmm... http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/10/the_impact_of_javascript_and_x.html got 4 comments, all housekeeping. ) 19:41:52 TVR: We may not have a meaning for URIs for application states therein, but that's an area we can work on 19:42:00 q/ 19:42:03 q? 19:42:07 ... I agree that the URI certainly doesn't identify some page 19:43:06 NM: But there are successes -- I can work with a Google map interaction for a while, and get a URI which reconstructs that for a 3rd party 19:43:24 TVR: and bookmark and Back 19:43:28 q? 19:43:30 ack tbl 19:43:34 ack timbl_ 19:44:11 TBL: If you build everything you do on the basis of RDF, then by definition you get a URI for all aspects of the experience 19:44:12 raman has joined #tagmem 19:44:34 on through biota -- thanks jar! 19:44:49 q? 19:45:27 TVR: Time was when URIs were all the same -- that is, there was no sense of a URI which worked on my machine and not on yours 19:45:45 ... but with the advent of history tokens tagged on the end of URIs, that's no longer true 19:46:35 ... For example with Dojo or GWT you can push tokens on the interaction state, and sometimes the results are bookmarkable, but the results are rarely emailable 19:47:36 TVR: So more and more URIs are becoming dependent on browser/platform environment, the evaluation environment 19:47:41 noah has joined #tagmem 19:47:43 NM: Violates WebArch 19:48:00 dorchard has joined #tagmem 19:48:14 From WebArch: "Since the scope of a URI is global, the resource identified by a URI does not depend on the context in which the URI appears (see also the section about indirect identification (§2.2.3))." 19:48:23 I think it's pretty clear that what Raman's been describing conflicts with that. 19:49:17 TVR: How we model this/modify WebArch is not clear 19:49:17 cd 19:49:45 HST: WebArch is just wrong on that: All file: URIs and some http: URIs, e.g. http://localhost/... 19:49:49 q? 19:50:02 TBL: Those are edge cases 19:50:27 TimBL: The context-dependence of the file:// etc is a bug not a feature 19:50:32 NM: I'm not convinced that we need to relax the context-independence statement 19:51:12 TVR: Another example from Google -- URIs for identity -- Google calendar uses URIs for everything, you, calendar, events, etc. 19:51:33 ... The API will give you an Atom Feed 19:52:24 ... Suppose your Calendar doesn't use https, but you wish they did -- you construct https URIs, for the same events 19:52:34 [scribe is lost] 19:52:42 Let me clarify a bit. I said that I think we should try hard to keep the principle of Web Arch that the resource identified by a URI should not (except in oddball edge cases like file:) depend on context. I also said that with respect to local browser interaction models, "rich" interactions may (or may not) need from the user agent some richer history or navigation model than what a stack of context-independent URIs can supply. 19:53:03 TimBL: The fact that https: has a different scheme name is a bug too, though a bug we can't get out of. 19:53:09 ACTION: raman send email about that 19:53:09 Created ACTION-105 - Send email about that [on T.V. Raman - due 2008-03-04]. 19:53:22 NW: It's a shame that https is a different protocol 19:53:35 NM: Do you mean different protocol? 19:53:41 NW: No, I meant scheme 19:54:20 agenda? 19:54:47 agenda + tagSoup high level in prep for ARIA discussion 19:54:52 Zakim, close item 1 19:54:52 agendum 1, Convene, closed 19:54:53 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 19:54:54 2. Aims and Objectives [from DanC_lap] 19:54:56 Zakim, close item 2 19:54:56 agendum 2, Aims and Objectives, closed 19:54:57 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 19:54:58 3. WebArch Vol 2 [from DanC_lap] 19:55:14 Zakim, agenda? 19:55:14 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda: 19:55:15 3. WebArch Vol 2 [from DanC_lap] 19:55:16 4. XMLVersioning-41 [from DanC_lap] 19:55:17 5. tagSoup high level in prep for ARIA discussion [from DanC_lap] 19:56:42 HST: How do we connect the interest manifest in this discussion back to WebArch 2.0 19:57:09 ... I'm happy with the outline, although I'm terrified to open up the Pandora's box of browser as platform 19:58:09 NM: Do we need to change the form in which we publish? Is continuing to publish findings obviously wrong? 19:59:00 q+ 19:59:00 +1 series. journal. blog. 20:00:15 q? 20:00:46 q+ jar to ask if we know who audience is & what changes we want in their behavior 20:01:11 q+ to suggest that we, like the first time, take the outline as a very roughg andchangeable framework, and be directed by where the pain is, wher the issues are and the lng term concerns. 20:01:12 q? 20:01:34 ack timb 20:01:34 timbl_, you wanted to suggest that we, like the first time, take the outline as a very roughg andchangeable framework, and be directed by where the pain is, wher the issues are and 20:01:40 ... the lng term concerns. 20:02:14 q? 20:03:01 ack jar 20:03:01 jar, you wanted to ask if we know who audience is & what changes we want in their behavior 20:03:02 ack jar 20:03:51 (the audience I had in mind for webarch v1 was: the typical W3C WG member, working on new web standards) 20:03:57 I would as co-chair point out that Jonathan and Askok should feel free to use the benefit of their new eyes before they feel totally up to speed 20:04:06 s/sk/sh 20:04:34 JR: I would like to understand in each case who we are trying to influence people 20:04:44 s/who/how/ 20:05:08 (indeed; if "getting up to speed" means "making sure the TAG doesn't change", don't do that.) 20:06:27 NW: Worth a pass which adds a paragraph, and connects up to issues list 20:06:32 ... I will do that 20:06:44 trackbot, who do you know? 20:06:56 trackbot-ng, status 20:06:57 trackbot-ng, who do you know? 20:07:31 ACTION: Norman, make a pass over the WebArch 2.0 doc't which adds a paragraph, and connects up to issues list 20:07:31 Sorry, couldn't find user - Norman, 20:07:54 ACTION: Norman make a pass over the WebArch 2.0 doc't which adds a paragraph, and connects up to issues list 20:07:54 Created ACTION-106 - Make a pass over the WebArch 2.0 doc't which adds a paragraph, and connects up to issues list [on Norman Walsh - due 2008-03-04]. 20:08:15 trackbot-ng, chill, Henry is having a hard time 20:08:48 Zakim, close item 3 20:08:48 agendum 3, WebArch Vol 2, closed 20:08:49 I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:08:50 4. XMLVersioning-41 [from DanC_lap] 20:09:15 Zakim, break for lunch 20:09:15 I don't understand 'break for lunch', timbl_ 20:09:22 [break] 21:29:43 skw has joined #tagmem 21:32:30 noah has joined #tagmem 21:34:18 dorchard has joined #tagmem 21:34:55 q? 21:37:07 scribenick: jar 21:37:10 Norm has joined #tagmem 21:37:44 ? 21:38:28 DaveO has joined #tagmem 21:39:50 topic: XMLVersioning-41 21:40:12 i.e. ISSUE-41 21:41:41 daveo: summarizing past work 21:42:28 ... q: how to version xml-based languages. started tactically, wildcards in schemas, etc 21:42:47 ... how to generalize beyond xml schema? 21:42:55 ... how to generalize beyond xml? 21:43:23 ... terminology of versioning. what is a version, language, extension, consumer 21:43:34 ... information conveyed 21:43:54 ... after generalizing we came back to look at xml 21:44:24 ... exposition was quite long. 21:44:31 ... split into several documents 21:45:29 ... another reorganization of docs: 1. terminology, 2. languages, 3. xml [jar not keeping up]. 21:46:05 s/2. languages/2. compatibility strategies/ 21:46:28 ... hardest kind of compatibility: forwards. how to do compatible evolution. 21:47:04 (who's projecting? I guess I can get 1.2 on my own screen...) 21:48:26 (ah... a book... yes, this always felt more like a book, to me) 21:48:35 ... strategies document. tag had consensus partway through at last f2f. now working on book 21:49:02 (see agenda for links) 21:49:51 daveo: SOA patterns book takes up the versioning theme 21:50:39 (do the book parts get noted in pacificspirit? I wonder about aggregation in the TAG blog again) 21:51:30 ... features in schema 1.1 can be used to support versioning 21:52:09 stuart: there are three documents in play here 21:52:33 daveo: compatibility doc is the one the tag should be able to finish up with 21:53:07 (pointer to the strategies document that dave nominates? [the agenda is wrong?]) 21:53:30 stuart: what we've done is to move the bar down through that document 21:53:57 daveo: was talking about strategies document 21:54:08 Ashok has joined #tagmem 21:54:09 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-compatibility-strategies 13 Nov, right? 21:54:55 noah: what daveo wrote about schemas for schema wg is focused on explaining new features of schema 1.1 21:55:47 daveo: compatibility strategies document is 10 pages + 4 pages biolerplate. tractable. 21:56:02 s/biolerplate/boilerplate/ 21:56:57 daveo is going over the table of contents 21:58:25 daveo: soap, xslt specify things that must be understood 21:58:36 ... bulk of doc is on forward compatibility 21:58:43 q+ 21:59:28 danc: owl wg is doing work on versioning now. they have similar material - did a survey, picked a design 21:59:58 RIF WG on extensibility: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/Extensibility_Design_Choices 22:00:06 (Dan, I haven't posted the book stuff onto pacificspirit) 22:00:13 (ok) 22:00:16 ... background docs were similar in scope. ideally tag would synthesize their work & daveo's 22:00:30 ... oops! I meant RIF, not OWL 22:00:40 ping DaveO 22:01:10 ht has joined #tagmem 22:01:59 danc: we should steal what rif has done, then ask them to review our results 22:02:35 daveo: a lot of this material isnot covered. could be disruptive. 22:03:07 timbl: might it be better to get daveo's document out first, then compare? 22:03:24 raman has joined #tagmem 22:03:28 dorchard has joined #tagmem 22:03:54 danc: rif should review what daveo has already [this is not what jar recorded above. jar probably got it wrong] 22:05:11 danc: it has become less clear that everyone wants the same thing 22:05:37 agenda? 22:06:57 taking up section 2 of the compatibility strategies doc 22:07:52 I looked at http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-strategies-20070917.html . Probably the old version, but Dave thinks not much text has changed. 22:08:41 -> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-compatibility-strategies 22:08:47 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-compatibility-strategies-20071113.html 22:08:48 Zakim, take up item 4 22:08:48 agendum 4. "XMLVersioning-41" taken up [from DanC_lap] 22:12:38 q+ 22:13:15 q+ to wonder about "None" in section 2... my mind wants an example 22:13:54 q? 22:14:12 ack danc 22:14:12 DanC_lap, you wanted to wonder about "None" in section 2... my mind wants an example 22:14:37 (everyone nulling over section 2, through but not including 2.1) 22:15:03 s/nulling/mulling 22:15:16 example of 'none': docbook 22:16:00 stuart: html is going in the 'none' direction 22:16:07 (hmm... HTML WG as reviewers of this versioning stuff? ) 22:16:17 danc: a point of contention 22:17:03 s/example of 'none'/norm 22:17:38 danc: we're discussing whether html is 'none' or forward compatibility 22:17:48 timbl: forward compatibility 22:17:57 heated debate 22:19:41 q? 22:20:00 daveo: had an argument with xxx about whether it makes sense to report an error and then continue processing (e.g. when extra arguments to a function are ignored) 22:20:18 dorchard has joined #tagmem 22:20:46 noah: shades of gray between ignoring something and having default processing rules. policy constrains what you can do in future versions of language 22:21:42 ... example: CSV -- cannot be verisoned 22:21:48 s/verisoned/versioned 22:22:45 ... suggests splitting 'none' 22:22:59 stuart: into no stated strategy vs. no stated difference between versions [scribe is losing track a bit] 22:24:10 noah: there are no versions vs. there is no statement about versions (how they relate) 22:24:41 (I have made my peace with the "None" para, FWIW) 22:28:07 stuart: can we for each choice give one example of a language that makes that choice? 22:29:17 noah: hyperlink to definitions of terms (eg forward compatible), or give a brief informal definition? 22:30:30 daveo: html is an example of every category [yucks] 22:34:39 TimbL: Patterns. Peoploe understand and can re-use patterns. Re-use by analogy. Re-use with tweaks. 22:34:47 jar: how should this document be used - what behavior should it affect? (bears on question of whether to put examples into this exposition) 22:35:00 q+ 22:35:59 ack timbl 22:36:01 daveo: i wanted tag to advise on how to achieve compatibility; tag said no 22:37:01 +1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattern_language 22:37:04 ... so scope limited to setting up a structure for framing discussions. help wgs to talk about compatibility/versioning 22:37:16 ", an architect and author, coined the term pattern language. He used it to refer to common problems of civil and architectural design, from how cities should be laid out to where windows should be placed in a room. The idea was initially popularized in his book A Pattern Language." 22:37:41 +1 "design patterns for versioning" [and/or "xml versioning"] 22:37:42 noah: maybe call it 'design patterns for versioning' 22:39:31 ht_ has joined #tagmem 22:39:43 daveo: maybe: keep the same namespace, but break everything that uses it... 22:40:12 ... while the language is under development 22:41:42 noah: be careful about assuming use cases. look at who the user community is etc 22:42:22 DO: I did write up 8 patterns 22:42:25 daveo: created the 8 design patterns, including the forward compatibility pattern 22:42:46 ... [see SOA patterns web page. link in agenda] 22:49:09 daveo: tim, did this framework guide xml schemas and namespaces 22:49:48 timbl: for namespaces, they decided the question was out of scope 22:51:50 http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/NOTE-webarch-extlang-19980210 22:52:00 discussion of tim & da's 1998 note on extensible languages 22:52:23 s/da/dan 22:54:52 noah: question came up, would someone doing a new version of the language, change the namespace? (schema 1.0) 22:55:58 daveo: got thru 2/3 of a page in 42 minutes 22:56:05 ... only 7 hours to go 23:03:37 jar: why uncomfortable reviewing: doesn't feel like fundamentals are solid. use of some formal tools would help me maybe 23:04:30 discussion of how daveo can find direction, based on feedback that tends to bloat the document and make work 23:04:42 doc was started in 2003... 23:06:22 daveo: it's worth spending 10 hours of together time to finish this 23:08:00 danc: how about if ashok and/or jonathan reviews what's left in detail? 23:10:38 q? 23:13:39 (danc leading the process of harvesting commitments to review sections) 23:18:47 trackbot-ng, status 23:19:17 ACTION on daveo: Revised version of compatibility strategies document by next telecon (13 march) 23:19:21 ACTION: Dan review compatibility-strategies section 3 (soon) and 5 for May/Bristol 23:19:21 Created ACTION-107 - Review compatibility-strategies section 3 (soon) and 5 for May/Bristol [on Dan Connolly - due 2008-03-04]. 23:20:14 ACTION: Ashok review compatibility-strategies section 2, 4 a week after DO signals review 23:20:14 Created ACTION-108 - Review compatibility-strategies section 2, 4 a week after DO signals review [on Ashok Malhotra - due 2008-03-04]. 23:20:49 ACTION: TVR review compatibility-strategies section 3, 4, 5 due 2008-04-10 23:20:49 Sorry, couldn't find user - TVR 23:21:00 ACTION: T.V. review compatibility-strategies section 3, 4, 5 due 2008-04-10 23:21:00 Created ACTION-109 - Review compatibility-strategies section 3, 4, 5 due 2008-04-10 [on T.V. Raman - due 2008-03-04]. 23:21:19 ACTION: DaveO to revise version of compatibility strategies document by next telecon (13 march) 23:21:19 Sorry, couldn't find user - DaveO 23:21:30 ACTION: Norman review compatibility-strategies section 3, 4, 5 23:21:30 Created ACTION-110 - Review compatibility-strategies section 3, 4, 5 [on Norman Walsh - due 2008-03-04]. 23:21:54 dorchard has joined #tagmem 23:22:18 ACTION: David to revise version of compatibility strategies document by next telecon (13 march) 23:22:18 Created ACTION-111 - Revise version of compatibility strategies document by next telecon (13 march) [on David Orchard - due 2008-03-04]. 23:27:53 ACTION: Noah to review compatibility strategies section 2 due 2008-04-04 23:27:53 Created ACTION-112 - Review compatibility strategies section 2 due 2008-04-04 [on Noah Mendelsohn - due 2008-03-04]. 23:46:43 agenda? 23:46:50 Zakim, close item 4 23:46:50 agendum 4, XMLVersioning-41, closed 23:46:51 I see 1 item remaining on the agenda: 23:46:52 5. tagSoup high level in prep for ARIA discussion [from DanC_lap] 23:52:18 hello. 23:52:38 (convening again after break) 23:54:33 Stuart: introducing issue brought up by ARIA. they want people to annotate scripts with info about purpose, for accessibility reasons 23:55:12 ... presenting email posted to www-tag 23:55:17 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Feb/0087.html 23:56:08 ht has joined #tagmem 23:59:37 (scribe got sidetracked by reading and listening)