15:58:26 RRSAgent has joined #html-wg
15:58:26 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-html-wg-irc
15:58:28 RRSAgent, make logs public
15:58:28 Zakim has joined #html-wg
15:58:30 Zakim, this will be HTML
15:58:30 ok, trackbot; I see HTML_WG()12:00PM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
15:58:31 Meeting: HTML Issue Tracking Teleconference
15:58:31 Date: 05 June 2008
15:58:37 Zakim, code?
15:58:37 the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), MikeSmith
15:58:52 Zakim, call doug-work
15:58:52 ok, shepazu; the call is being made
15:58:53 HTML_WG()12:00PM has now started
15:58:54 +Doug
15:59:00 +Julian
15:59:21 +[IPcaller]
15:59:34 +Gregory_Rosmaita
16:00:11 Zakim, who's here?
16:00:11 On the phone I see Julian, Doug, [IPcaller], Gregory_Rosmaita
16:00:12 On IRC I see RRSAgent, joshue, oedipus, Steve_f, robburns, smedero, Lachy, Julian, anne, zcorpan, tlr, trackbot, ROBOd, MikeSmith, tH, heycam, shepazu, Yudai, Philip, beowulf,
16:00:16 ... gsnedders, gavin_, gavin, Navarr, jgraham, jmb, Dashiva, matt, Shunsuke, xover, krijnh, takkaria, wilhelm, Hixie, jeremy, deltab, hsivonen, DanC, drry, t
16:00:42 Laura has joined #html-wg
16:00:47 Zakim, IPcaller is me
16:00:47 +MikeSmith; got it
16:01:02 +[IPcaller]
16:01:35 Topic: Convene weekly HTML WG issue-tracking conference
16:01:41 +Laura_Carlson
16:01:43 RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:01:43 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
16:02:31 Zakim, who is here?
16:02:31 On the phone I see Julian, Doug, MikeSmith, Gregory_Rosmaita, [IPcaller], Laura_Carlson
16:02:33 On IRC I see Laura, Zakim, RRSAgent, joshue, oedipus, Steve_f, robburns, smedero, Lachy, Julian, anne, zcorpan, tlr, trackbot, ROBOd, MikeSmith, tH, heycam, shepazu, Yudai, Philip,
16:02:36 Zakim, passcode?
16:02:38 ... beowulf, gsnedders, gavin_, gavin, Navarr, jgraham, jmb, Dashiva, matt, Shunsuke, xover, krijnh, takkaria, wilhelm, Hixie, jeremy, deltab, hsivonen, DanC, drry, t
16:02:40 the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), anne
16:03:16 Chair: MikeSmith
16:03:52 RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:03:52 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-html-wg-minutes.html MikeSmith
16:04:21 Wow, there are a lot of overdue actions. :-/
16:05:01 most aren't toooo overdue though.
16:05:08 +??P11
16:05:08 Present+ Gregory, Laura, Steve_f, Julian, shepazu, MikeSmith
16:05:25 Zakim, ??P11 is anne
16:05:25 +anne; got it
16:06:07 Zakim, IPcaller is Steve_f
16:06:07 +Steve_f; got it
16:07:04 minutes of previous meeting: http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-html-wg-minutes.html
16:07:55 GJR gives big plus one to mikeTMsmith's bugzilla proposal (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2008Jun/0022.html)
16:08:07 minutes look fine.
16:08:10 HTML5 homepage question: what is source of the blockquote at: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#issues? there is no "cite" attribute, and blockquotes were EXPLICITLY deprecated for presentational effect in HTML4 (and that has not changed with HTML5) -- if this isn't a direct quote from a referencable document, then it shouldn't be in a blockquote, which lends the appearance of it being an excerpt from an "official" statement -- if that is the case, then the refer
16:09:43 Scribe: MikeSmith
16:09:48 Scribenick: MikeSmith
16:09:57 recapping last week's call
16:10:08 we discussed issue-27
16:10:14 issue-27?
16:10:14 ISSUE-27 -- @rel value ownership, registry consideration -- OPEN
16:10:14 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/27
16:10:40 also issue-31?
16:10:52 issue-27: haven't heard back from MNot yet.
16:11:02 issue-31?
16:11:02 ISSUE-31 -- Should img without alt ever be conforming -- OPEN
16:11:02 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31
16:11:22 we also publications
16:12:06 to summarize publications, I had planned to publish next HTML5 WD this week, but will need to move to Monday
16:13:45 anne says html4-differences is ready to go
16:15:55 MS: planning to make multipage the default version
16:15:59 I will propose to use html5-pubnotes as short name for the pubnotes doc, and get to ChrisL tonight for transition approval
16:16:58 Topic: Open issues and actions
16:17:07 FYI: ACTION 54 (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/54) updated to reflect current status of action item
16:17:40 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
16:18:18 looking at overdue actions
16:18:24 action-54?
16:18:24 ACTION-54 -- Gregory Rosmaita to work with SteveF draft text for HTML 5 spec to require producers/authors to include @alt on img elements -- due 2008-05-29 -- OPEN
16:18:24 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/54
16:18:43 Steve, Josh, and I have started work on a second draft for Action 54.
16:18:43 http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/Action54AltAttributeSecondDraft
16:18:49 oedipus: I just updated... Laura is here
16:18:58 Laura: we have been working on the 2nd draft
16:19:22 ... waiting for more replies, beginning to incorporate comments me have received
16:19:31 We are beginning to incorporate First Draft Comments:
16:19:32 http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/Action54AltAttributeDiscussion
16:19:42 We are still waiting for a reply from PFWG for this action item regarding several issues:
16:19:42 http://tinyurl.com/48uyqv
16:19:42 http://tinyurl.com/3v68tn
16:19:52 One of the biggest changes is that we have removed the majority of the usage examples and code samples. Usage examples and code samples from the Action 54 first draft are being refined and most have now been submitted as Techniques for WCAG 2.0. If they are accepted, the action 54 document will link to them there. As Jason said in his comment, a format specification is not a tutorial. Including detailed guidance in ALT attribute techniques could be seen a
16:19:52 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.html
16:19:53 The W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) is the accessibility authority.
16:20:01 Submission for WCAG 2.0. Techniques
16:20:02 http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/TECHS-SUBMIT/
16:20:09 Action 54 first draft
16:20:09 Sorry, couldn't find user - 54
16:20:09 http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/Action54AltAttribute
16:20:20 "the majority of the usage examples and code samples. Usage examples and code samples from the Action 54 first draft are being refined and most have now been submitted as Techniques for WCAG 2.0"
16:20:29 ... we removed some use-case code samples (because it's not in our realm to decide what is accessible and what's not)
16:20:47 awaiting review from PF
16:22:11 ... next step is we are already proposing to PFWG to comment on those and forward them to WCAG as guidelines
16:22:28 good
16:23:07 oedipus: I'm working on trying to set up a specific HTML5-focused TF within the PFWG
16:23:36 ... and Al has put out feelers to see who from the HTML WG might be willing to participate in that
16:23:56 ... so that we can find a way to move forward and quit talking past each other
16:25:01 hober has joined #html-wg
16:26:30 oedipus: action-54 will take some more time
16:26:52 Steve_f: yeah, a couple more weeks
16:27:05 Yes, it will take some more time
16:27:26 oedipus: I will communicate with Al about it later today and try to accelerate the process of getting the review back to you
16:28:43 Topic: Action-56
16:28:48 action-56?
16:28:49 ACTION-56 -- Chris Wilson to wilson to follow up with Forms WG to make sure they understand this plan of action by 5/1/2008 -- due 2008-05-29 -- OPEN
16:28:49 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/56
16:29:38 MikeSmith: oedipus, anne: please give brief status on what the state of things are with the Forms TF
16:31:33 oedipus: the status at last telcon was that the chairs were going to talk and change it to a 7-person TF instead of 6-person TF
16:32:07 Where would the seventh person come from?
16:32:33 that is what the chairs were to discuss (chrisW, danC, and JohnB)
16:34:20 q+
16:35:38 shepazu: work on this from the Forms WG side has been going on
16:36:47 http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features
16:37:13 ... if the HTML WG members have not put work into [trying to engage with the Forms WG]
16:37:34 http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms11/
16:37:56 anne: the HTML WG members have actually put work into it; e.g., Maciej has put forward a proposal
16:38:33 shepazu: it should just be more bilateral
16:38:34 GJR notes that Forms WG is working on specifics, HTML WG interpreted TF focus as more abstract alignment
16:38:41 anne: yeah, I agree
16:39:05 q+
16:39:59 joshue has left #html-wg
16:40:11 anne: we've invested quite a bit of effort and if there's no outcome from the TF
16:40:53 shepazu: the possibility remains that the HTML WG can engage directly with Forms WG
16:41:44 maybe the Forms TF should be dissolved if it's not effective, and a new liaison should be attempted
16:42:48 anne: forms are definitely in our scope
16:43:34 if a group can't operate within the scope of its charter, maybe the charter is wrong :)
16:44:00 yes, shepazu, yes!!!
16:44:03 the charter says "Forms and ..." at the start of some bullet point in section 2.1
16:44:25 it's not anyone's fault, but a misalignment of assumptions
16:47:25 action-56?
16:47:25 ACTION-56 -- Chris Wilson to wilson to follow up with Forms WG to make sure they understand this plan of action by 5/1/2008 -- due 2008-06-12 -- OPEN
16:47:25 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/56
16:48:07 oedipus: by next telcon I will have posted something for discussion in the TF
16:48:14 q-
16:48:40 q-
16:48:44 Topic: Action-58
16:48:48 action-58?
16:48:49 ACTION-58 -- Anne van Kesteren to update public-html on Offline Web Applications extended-abstract, addressing a few bits of outstanding feedback -- due 2008-05-29 -- OPEN
16:48:49 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/58
16:48:57 close ACTION-58
16:48:57 ACTION-58 Update public-html on Offline Web Applications extended-abstract, addressing a few bits of outstanding feedback closed
16:49:05 q+ to ask if anyone has addressed aria integration into the XML serialization of HTML5?
16:49:18 ACTION-58 resulted in http://www.w3.org/TR/offline-webapps/
16:50:03 style attribute: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/embedded.html#the-style
16:50:38 um, shouldn't we be pointing to the W3C draft?
16:51:15 W3C doesn't have multipage yet, doesn't really matter either way though, as they're identical
16:51:32 not precisely - there is a difference in the patent policy for one
16:51:56 that shouldn't affect review of changes :)
16:51:58 A change was made to the spec to address the issue, and change was to the satisfcation of Daniel Glazman.
16:52:31 when will W3C have a multi-page view -- it's been discussed for months now...
16:52:41 action-61?
16:52:42 ACTION-61 -- Dan Connolly to ensure HTML WG responds to PF WG on Omitting alt Attribute http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.html -- due 2008-05-31 -- OPEN
16:52:42 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/61
16:53:04 oedipus: it is being worked on - I believe the next WD publication will address it
16:53:22 oedipus: I think this overlaps with 54
16:53:37 ... Dan has been active in conversations with PF on this
16:54:19 gjr thinks the "response" alluded to in 61 is ACTION 54
16:54:21 (oedipus: my comments refer to the multipage version of the spec....)
16:54:37 thanks, smedero
16:54:55 mjs has joined #html-wg
16:55:58 implications of namespacing / aria syntax / embedding in HTML5 and the XML serialization of HTML5
16:56:59 thanks philip
16:57:30 action-64?
16:57:30 ACTION-64 -- Dan Connolly to update teleconference schedule to just one time -- due 2008-05-29 -- OPEN
16:57:30 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/64
16:59:18 DS: working on getting a document together for SVG in HTML integration
16:59:21 DS: sorry it's taking so long
17:00:03 DS: working on different proposals, no concrete pointers
17:00:16 -Doug
17:00:42 Lachy: you around
17:00:43 ?
17:01:28 action-34?
17:01:28 ACTION-34 -- Lachlan Hunt to prepare "Web Developer's Guide to HTML5" for publication in some way, as discussed on 2007-11-28 phone conference -- due 2008-06-05 -- OPEN
17:01:28 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/34
17:03:27 MikeSmith: I'm wondering if we could get Robert on the telcons
17:03:35 oedipus: I will contact him and see
17:04:16 Topic: Issue-43?
17:04:24 issue-43?
17:04:24 ISSUE-43 -- Enhanced Client-side Image Maps -- RAISED
17:04:24 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/43
17:05:00 I am here on IRC
17:05:16 robburns: can you call in?
17:05:45 I'll try (not sure the state of my internet connection for voice)
17:08:07 Mike, you seem to drop off...
17:08:16 yes
17:08:39 any better? no
17:09:00 +??P0
17:09:30 Zakim, ??P0 is RobertBurns
17:09:30 +RobertBurns; got it
17:10:48 Mike's bugzilla proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2008Jun/0022.html
17:11:36 q+
17:11:41 q+ to say tracker itself needs to be ternary, not binary (issues: raise, propose, close)
17:12:32 micro-issues on bugzilla, meta-issues on tracker? definition of meta-issues?
17:12:52 MikeSmith, yo
17:13:38 oedipus: we aren't in full control of the W3C tracker software - the W3C systeam (mostly Dom) manages it and what states are in the system.
17:14:00 oedipus: raise was added when several other WGs needed a similar state, not just because we asked for it
17:14:12 MikeSmith, I'm going to be taking a look at the authoring guide this weekend
17:14:16 yes, smedero, but they recently "upgraded" the interface - i think the system could add a "proposed" issue state
17:14:31 xover has joined #html-wg
17:14:58 oedipus: i just want to make the distinction for others clear - it is not like a self-hosted instance of bugzilla where we just go and configure it to our liking.
17:15:27 RB: issues compiled from list discussions that had been dropped or trailed off; reason put together issues -- not individual proposals, but arose form conversation with other WG members but ignored by editor
17:15:50 smedero, ok - systeam is overworked but pretty responsive
17:16:08 oedipus: agree on that. systeam is awesome.
17:16:52 RB: what is difference btw these issues and the others in the issue tracker? why one more important than another?
17:17:21 MS: not going to discuss on next week's call; will make decision about issues remaining open by then
17:17:36 zakim mute robburns
17:18:17 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
17:18:38 q+
17:18:46 ack Steve_f
17:19:41 SF: need process guidelines for use of issue tracker -- what consitutes a raised issue?
17:19:57 Steve_f: I would like to see some process whereby issues that people have raised to have [a clear route] for eventually getting into tbe Tracker
17:20:21 GJR notes new issues are "Raised" not "Open"
17:20:36 yeah it is confusing... again we didn't have much say in the labeling
17:20:38 Perhaps the issue is that the issue tracker lacks known policies and procedures?
17:20:45 labels are shared across WG projects
17:20:46 what is difference between raised and open -- they are distinct states, are they not?
17:20:51 yes
17:21:12 sadly RAISED == Bugzilla's OPEN (unverified)
17:21:20 OPEN == VERIFIED, picked up by Editor
17:21:46 I dunno... I asked that once but didn't get much of a response.
17:21:52 good point, philip - guess it's the same impasse that leaves us stuck with MoinMoin
17:22:14 issue-38?
17:22:14 ISSUE-38 -- Syntax of the style attribute -- RAISED
17:22:14 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/38
17:22:22 I think that maybe can be closed
17:22:36 MikeSmith: I will follow up with James about that
17:23:14 I should clarify that OPEN == Picked up by Editor, or WG as a whole (in the past that distinction has been left to the discretion of the Chairs)
17:23:23 FIVE MINUTE WARNING
17:24:11 smedero, so RAISED equals PROPOSED?
17:25:18 oedipus: that sounds like an adequate tier arrangement of issues already
17:25:32 robburns, agreed
17:25:52 Julian: my impression is that some of them or all of them have been discussed on the list, but the editor has so far ignored feedback from the HTTPbis WG
17:26:10 MikeTMSmith, does RAISED equal PROPOSED and OPEN equal "taken up by editors and/or chairs"
17:26:11 issue-33?
17:26:11 ISSUE-33 -- spec requires non-compliant Referer header -- RAISED
17:26:11 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/33
17:26:24 I don't have a definitive answer. I think we need some clarification on exactly how the Chairs+Editors intended RAISED to be used. RAISED was added when the Editors asked for some way to discern between things that were in-progress (active working going on) vs. those that they haven't reviewed yet.
17:26:40 HTML5 only says not to include the Referer header, it doesn't affect the syntax of it, fwiw.
17:26:52 smedero, sounds dangerously close to an "issue" :-)
17:27:17 see http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/structured.html#hyperlink0 for more information
17:27:46 need syntax / semantic decision for chairs to make -- does raised equal proposed until opened by an editor or chair
17:28:41 if RAISED equals PROPOSED then i retract my plus one to using bugzilla
17:29:25 mjs has joined #html-wg
17:30:26 http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=1234&to=1235
17:30:33 change for ping= ^^
17:30:46 anne: that relates to issue-33
17:30:57 thx
17:31:28 see ya!
17:31:34 I think we're having trouble separating a bugzilla style issue tracker vs. a high-level WG issue tracker that is largely there to help the Chairs+Editors+W3 staff facilitate to the WG: for instance a tool to help organize the weekly teleconference agenda
17:31:34 bugzilla usefull for micro-issues and micro-discussion
17:31:38