IRC log of xhtml on 2008-07-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:43:57 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xhtml
13:43:57 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:44:14 [RolandMerrick]
RolandMerrick has changed the topic to:
13:44:21 [RolandMerrick]
13:44:42 [RolandMerrick]
Meeting: XHTML2 WG Weekly Teleconference
13:45:35 [Roland]
Zakim, this is XHTML2
13:45:35 [Zakim]
ok, Roland; that matches IA_XHTML2()9:45AM
13:45:51 [Roland]
Zakim, list
13:45:51 [Zakim]
I see MWI_(DWEU)8:00AM, Team_W3M()8:00AM, IA_XHTML2()9:45AM active
13:45:53 [Zakim]
also scheduled at this time are MWI_BPWG(Checker TF)10:00AM, I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM, T&S_EGOV()9:00AM, Team_(rifc)11:53Z
13:47:04 [Zakim]
13:47:11 [yamx]
yamx has joined #xhtml
13:47:34 [Roland]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:47:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Roland
13:47:41 [Roland]
rrsagent, make log public
13:47:47 [Zakim]
13:48:07 [Roland]
Chair: Roland
13:48:17 [Steven]
zakim, dial steven-617
13:48:17 [Zakim]
ok, Steven; the call is being made
13:48:19 [Zakim]
13:48:21 [Zakim]
13:48:23 [oedipus]
oedipus has joined #xhtml
13:48:36 [yamx]
zakim, ??P10 is yamx
13:48:36 [Zakim]
+yamx; got it
13:48:42 [Steven]
Scribe: Steven
13:49:24 [Steven]
Steven has left #xhtml
13:49:32 [Steven]
Steven has joined #xhtml
13:49:34 [Zakim]
13:50:14 [oedipus]
ScribeNick: oedipus
13:50:28 [Steven]
rrsagent, here?
13:50:28 [RRSAgent]
13:50:57 [oedipus]
Yam: wait for more participants for mobile profile 1.3 and xhtml basic 1.1 PR - stable, can now make tests
13:51:08 [Steven]
13:51:40 [Steven]
Meeting: XHTML2 Weekly Teleconference
13:51:57 [oedipus]
Yam: OMA liaisoning finished, but my mission is mobile browsing, so i cannot continue to physically participate so i am saying goodby to group but if have any questions about mobile or testing, just ping me
13:52:06 [Steven]
13:52:07 [oedipus]
RM: thank you Yam for all your valuable contributions
13:52:14 [Steven]
13:52:40 [oedipus]
Yam: any issues on mobile browsing, will be more than happy to help
13:52:42 [Zakim]
13:52:44 [oedipus]
SM: thank you yam
13:53:06 [oedipus]
TOPIC: Draft TAG finding "Passwords in the Clear"
13:53:15 [oedipus]
RM: Shane & Tina were going to explore
13:53:22 [oedipus]
SM: running battle in TAG about it
13:53:29 [oedipus]
SP: background?
13:53:30 [yamx]
Just drop mail to "" for any i12n or mobile browser issues.
13:53:38 [Steven]
13:53:40 [oedipus]
thanks yam -- you will be missed
13:53:55 [Steven]
Regrets: MarkB
13:54:45 [oedipus]
SM: some in TAG adamant that policies stated in doc are good idea, others who don't - impossible to reengineer all tech to support passwrods in clear; weird thing is they are ignoring SSL which is most widely used security layer - my comment what is wrong with SSL?
13:55:15 [oedipus]
TH: didn't see anything more than last time i looked prior to f2f; no comments on it - good idea, but is it practical?
13:55:40 [oedipus]
SM: not much in there - basically "make sure don't send passwords in clear and if you do, fix it"
13:56:02 [oedipus]
RM: request to group to review - next steps? shane propose response from group on list
13:56:52 [oedipus]
TH: the document won't be read by those except by those already involved in issue; don't understand why XHTML review needed? of course, shouldn't send passwords in clear
13:56:59 [oedipus]
RM: 2 ways of rendering password
13:57:06 [oedipus]
TH: both still need to be translated
13:57:48 [oedipus]
SP: when you fill in things like a password in an HTML/XHTML form, what you type in is stored somewhere, so are passwords subject to attack via javascript
13:57:51 [oedipus]
SM: sure
13:58:02 [oedipus]
TH: possibly - no check of what's on disk
13:58:10 [oedipus]
SM: once typed in, stored in DOM
13:58:19 [oedipus]
SP: so susceptible to javascript attack and is in clear
13:58:44 [oedipus]
SM: not encryption, just a specially rendered field - will check DOM spec
13:59:00 [oedipus]
RM: question of DOM should say if such a DOM feature exists, use that
13:59:28 [oedipus]
SP: XForms has same problem; input control has property that says "password" and nothing else - field is subject to javascript attack
14:00:14 [oedipus]
TH: document in question talks about transmission - hacking way into DOM via javascript - thin connection - don't know if any point in commenting on it other than "this looks good in theory, but ..."
14:00:42 [oedipus]
SP: if both HTML and XHTML store passwords where can be attacked by JS, can grab passwords
14:01:07 [oedipus]
TH: what do with passwords after grabs them? could use XML HTTPRequest object to send somewhere, but not to separate host
14:01:56 [oedipus]
TH: could add note that when comes to transmission of passwords in clear, it doesn't affect us directly, but would like to poinot out the following DOM concerns and parts of DOM spec (if contained there)
14:02:12 [oedipus]
RM: OSes do not hold passwords in clear
14:02:15 [oedipus]
SP: right
14:02:27 [oedipus]
RM: encrypted as one-way encryption
14:02:55 [oedipus]
SP: DVD player did store passwords in clear and allowed hackers to hack into DVD security layer
14:03:02 [oedipus]
SM: will address by posting to list
14:03:11 [oedipus]
TOPIC: XSD 1.1 by the SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group
14:03:29 [oedipus]
RM: can you do this for us - volunteered to review new Schema draft by last call
14:03:35 [Steven]
14:03:37 [oedipus]
TOPIC: Calls over the Summer
14:03:47 [oedipus]
14:03:52 [oedipus]
TOPIC: CURIE Syntax: status
14:03:57 [oedipus]
SP: sent transition request
14:04:16 [oedipus]
SP: question about role - issue together?
14:04:24 [oedipus]
RM: Role not ready
14:04:29 [oedipus]
SP: can't do together
14:04:36 [oedipus]
RM: will address role shortly
14:04:42 [oedipus]
RM: rather not hold up CURIEs
14:04:53 [oedipus]
SP: good news with CURIEs is loads of implementation already
14:05:12 [oedipus]
SP: already have implementation reports for RDFa which include a lot of tests for CURIEs
14:05:21 [oedipus]
SP: may be a quick CR
14:05:32 [oedipus]
TOPIC: M12N transition: status
14:05:57 [oedipus]
RM: bits that changed as result of f2f -- short names to be fixed by Shane and IanJ
14:06:11 [oedipus]
SM: half-way -- can't do anything to next pub anyway
14:06:28 [oedipus]
TOPIC: M12N transition and RelaxNG
14:06:42 [oedipus]
SM: have draft - sent out note; no response
14:07:38 [oedipus]
SM: done the proof-of-concept heavy lifting; oxygen doesn't choke on it, may not be Relax Best Practice - trying to get Norm Walsh and another individual as well as Chris Lilley to review
14:08:13 [oedipus]
SM: ChrisL the one who asked the question; think can release as PER after 1.1 out the door
14:08:26 [oedipus]
SP: know too little about RelaxNG
14:08:30 [oedipus]
GJR: that makes 2 of us
14:09:51 [oedipus]
SM: RelaxNG nor Schema not as powerful; we will have to define something perhaps, given the right URI here is the right Schema
14:10:13 [oedipus]
SP: says "module not found" in a number of places
14:10:21 [oedipus]
SM: thanks for reminder will grok right know
14:10:31 [oedipus]
TOPIC: XHTML Basic 1.1 transition to PR: status
14:10:38 [oedipus]
RM: when will make transition - any idea?
14:10:55 [Lachy]
Lachy has joined #xhtml
14:10:57 [oedipus]
SP: searches for messages
14:11:34 [oedipus]
RM: just a pulse check
14:11:40 [oedipus]
TOPIC: XHTML 1.1 SE status
14:11:51 [oedipus]
RM: proposed 1.2, have to get 1.1 SE out door
14:12:25 [oedipus]
TH: question: XHTML Basic 1.1 changed - some debate on mailing list - ignoring that or address it?
14:12:59 [oedipus]
RM: complaint from mobile, why i asked yam about spec - mobile profile may define input mode not in Basic; XHTML Mobile Profile + Basic needed
14:13:10 [oedipus]
SM: think TH talking about deprecating @style
14:13:29 [oedipus]
RM: 2 issues: start of thread addressed being able to enter data, then moves on to deprecation issue
14:13:40 [oedipus]
TH: setting input fields in node debate?
14:13:43 [oedipus]
RM: yes
14:13:52 [oedipus]
TH: do we need to address before move forward
14:14:01 [oedipus]
RM: problem with XHTML Mobile rather than Basic
14:14:06 [Steven]
Voting on Basic 1.1 is open until July 15th
14:14:06 [oedipus]
SM: disagree
14:14:29 [oedipus]
RM: one in past to set nodes - never in XHTML Basic 1.0 - through XHTML Mobile Profile addition
14:14:39 [oedipus]
SM: and we added input mode to address shortcoming in Basic
14:14:55 [oedipus]
RM: have to ensure that we have covered all of the input modes in Mobile
14:15:05 [oedipus]
SM: didn't consider list extensible
14:15:20 [oedipus]
RM: perhaps we can take up Yam on his offer to answer questions on mobile
14:15:46 [oedipus]
SM: think should ignore - no LC or other comments nor follow up
14:16:02 [oedipus]
RM: 2 statements: 1) input mode; 2) no @style
14:16:47 [oedipus]
RM: need to understand answers to input mode - is answer/feature we want in Mobile profile
14:17:00 [oedipus]
SP: WAP background and mindset
14:17:33 [oedipus]
RM: @style in WAP different, but don't know what OMA now says about Mobile profile - did they support new input modes not found in Basic?
14:17:44 [oedipus]
RM: need to address - could be a future flash point
14:17:55 [oedipus]
RM: used WAP features in mobile work - very powerful
14:18:07 [oedipus]
SM: next steps?
14:19:07 [oedipus]
RM: i will write Yam and ask him what has happened in this area with new Mobile profile; question comes from someone dealing with XHTML Mobile Profile 1.2 or 1.3; not sure where question lies
14:19:39 [oedipus]
RM: been working in Mobile space for some time - question is XHTML Basic 1.1 to corresponding mobile profile is what need to ascertain
14:20:18 [oedipus]
RM: also concerned about @style deprecation - interesting discussion - touched on it during F2F; no binding conclusion, but support for nested STYLE
14:20:42 [oedipus]
SP: use of @style for putting restrictions on input is bending spec to breaking point from W3C POV
14:21:06 [oedipus]
RM: don't think restricted himself to saying @style useful only for that purpose
14:21:12 [oedipus]
SP: but is a misuse of @style
14:21:42 [oedipus]
RM: we can think of no compelling use of @style, but if look at his use cases, might understand issue better
14:21:54 [oedipus]
RM: no answer because we followed up in discussions on XHTML2
14:22:14 [oedipus]
TH: use cases advanced so far is complaint about quality of managers, not spec
14:22:30 [oedipus]
RM: component for mashup without getting into style in HEAD
14:22:50 [oedipus]
RM: @style been solution to that; adding to HEAD very difficult; nested STYLE better
14:23:35 [oedipus]
TH: taking 1 piece from point a and one from point b and putting together - where collisions happen; cascade of CSS - local style may collide with global style; assembling pieces should be done with content, not style
14:23:59 [oedipus]
RM: still need to talk @style versus nestable STYLE outside of HEAD
14:24:16 [oedipus]
TH: "real world" query - can't satisfy that
14:24:24 [oedipus]
RM: no resolution because still under discussion
14:24:39 [oedipus]
TH: might take his comments and simply tell discussion on table
14:24:44 [oedipus]
SP: say that in spec
14:24:58 [Steven]
We already say it in the spec
14:25:12 [oedipus]
RM: haven't published latest version of XHTML2 - when have schedule for new draft and then query
14:25:21 [oedipus]
RM: for use cases for solutions
14:25:38 [oedipus]
SM: already replied to say "topic on table" he replied he was happy, so think we are done with this
14:25:46 [oedipus]
RM: question of INPUT mode still open
14:26:04 [oedipus]
RM: will look into input mode and talk with Yam about it
14:26:07 [Steven]
Question of style attribute I think
14:26:27 [oedipus]
SP: voting until 15 july 2008 - be sure to encourage people to vote
14:26:59 [oedipus]
14:27:10 [oedipus]
SP: be here next week, then away for 3 weeks
14:27:29 [oedipus]
14:27:51 [Steven]
ACTION: Steven to write strawman on XHTML2/HTML5 wording
14:28:24 [oedipus]
RM: need to think through all ramifications of resolution on @style logged in:
14:28:50 [oedipus]
RM: where is Role
14:29:04 [oedipus]
GJR: did AlG ever reply to ShaneM's post to pf on Role
14:29:22 [oedipus]
SM: updated after last minute
14:29:35 [oedipus]
s/last minute/last teleconference in june
14:29:49 [oedipus]
SM: transition document in space
14:29:54 [oedipus]
RM: additional comments?
14:29:57 [oedipus]
SM: checked and changed
14:30:09 [oedipus]
RM: are we truly there - all comments that we have agreed solutions to?
14:31:29 [oedipus]
RM: take look at latest draft
14:31:54 [oedipus]
SM: Tina please check "badness" of bad examples
14:31:57 [oedipus]
TH: i will
14:32:11 [Steven]
ACTION: Roland to remind IBM AC rep to vote for
14:32:13 [oedipus]
SM: typed URI into log of meeting as updated in realtime
14:32:36 [oedipus]
SM: dependent upon CURIEs anyway
14:33:05 [oedipus]
SM: question to PF is ARIA talks about role, but not cited as an extension of role
14:33:15 [oedipus]
RM: overlap check between ARIA and Role
14:33:32 [oedipus]
SM: yes - ripped out roles (in response to document) - normative in #vocab
14:33:50 [oedipus]
SM: ARIA people in charge of it, have to trust when say no conflict
14:34:00 [oedipus]
GJR: believes all in harmony and no overlap
14:34:18 [oedipus]
s/all in harmony/roles not repetitive
14:34:26 [oedipus]
SP: actions coming out of discussion?
14:34:49 [oedipus]
RM: Role is ready for us to review and resolve to move to CR
14:34:57 [oedipus]
SP: vote on CR next week?
14:34:58 [oedipus]
RM: yes
14:35:21 [oedipus]
TOPIC: Access Module: status
14:35:24 [oedipus]
RM: comments?
14:35:34 [oedipus]
GJR: doug replied to request of SVG as individual
14:36:09 [Steven]
14:37:39 [oedipus]
GJR: summarizes Acess discussion at PF face2face
14:37:47 [oedipus]
RM: asked XForms?
14:37:52 [oedipus]
SP: go official reply
14:38:39 [Steven]
14:38:40 [Steven]
14:39:26 [oedipus]
PF face2face discussion of Access and HTML5/extensibility:
14:39:27 [oedipus]
14:40:12 [oedipus]
GJR notes that PF has formally asked for support for Access module in HTML5 or at least ability to use through extensibility
14:40:17 [oedipus]
TOPIC: I18n Issues
14:40:33 [oedipus]
SM: ok to leave Ruby references in XHTML 1.1 as normative def?
14:40:39 [oedipus]
SP: ok with it
14:40:58 [oedipus]
SM: good with i18n
14:41:20 [oedipus]
SM: considering recommending for compatibility HTML Mime
14:41:48 [oedipus]
SM: with regard to i18n - recommend that documents be in UTF-8 or UTF-16 if want them to be portable - take pulse on that?
14:41:54 [oedipus]
SP: think will be delighted
14:42:18 [oedipus]
TOPIC: XML Event timing issue
14:42:38 [oedipus]
RM: received feedback - might be worth asking if comments received by Forms WG
14:42:43 [oedipus]
SP: by timing you mean?
14:42:48 [oedipus]
RM: when bindings get done
14:42:56 [oedipus]
SP: did ask last week with some discussion
14:43:02 [Steven]
14:43:27 [Steven]
14:43:48 [Steven]
14:44:00 [Steven]
14:44:21 [oedipus]
SP: nick has action item to respond to XHTML2 WG on events
14:44:35 [oedipus]
SP: john boyer has action item to comment on Access
14:45:02 [oedipus]
GJR: got Access inserted into UAAG 2.0 under direct user control (previously only accesskey)
14:45:36 [oedipus]
SP: Shane and i have been testing XHTML11+RDFa Modularized Schema on w3c schema validator - some issues to be ironed out but making progress
14:45:37 [Zakim]
14:45:40 [Zakim]
14:45:41 [Zakim]
14:45:42 [Zakim]
14:45:43 [Zakim]
14:45:44 [Zakim]
IA_XHTML2()9:45AM has ended
14:45:45 [Zakim]
Attendees were Roland, ShaneM, Tina, Steven, yamx, Gregory_Rosmaita
14:45:48 [oedipus]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:45:48 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
14:46:23 [Steven]
thanks Gregory!
14:51:56 [oedipus]
rrsagent, please part
14:51:56 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in :
14:51:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Steven to write strawman on XHTML2/HTML5 wording [1]
14:51:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
14:51:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Roland to remind IBM AC rep to vote for [2]
14:51:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in