See also: IRC log
<Steven> too soon
<Steven> ha
<Steven> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/08/20-xhtml-minutes
<Steven> Please Gregory!
<scribe> Scribe: Gregory_Rosmaita
<scribe> ScribeNick: oedipus
happy man ray day! and happy REAL president's day (it's a great way to improve your sax life)! http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/obfuscation.html#august27
TP Registration - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Aug/0000.html
SP: may add TAG discussion to agenda
... issues surrounding TPAC2008 - TP Day, call for presentations, etc.
Outstanding Reviews: MarkB - review XSD 1.1 - Due: 2008-09-12
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Aug/0044.html
SP: how many coming to tech plenary - asked to
co-chair presentations and lightning talks - if have any, let me know
... review of XSD 1.1 due mid-september
... had request from XSD WG member, asking for opinion on XSD 1.1
... added assertions to schemas -
... schematron allows one to say almost anything about an element and
relationship to other elements; in XSD only judge element by children, not by
parents
... in most cases that is fine, but not in XHTML and HTML input elements
which are children of the FORM element
... XSD cannot say this element is a child of this other element
... thought of hack to HEAD element - number of INPUT elements that are part
of FORM element, but that is putting restriction on BODY element - can only
be valid if number of input elements are the same as in xform
... what is requested is what we say in prose; do we need to do anything
else?
SM: is XML Schema a long-interim strategy for
w3c?
... synchronization with w3c long term strategy
SP: think can expect Schema something W3C officially supports
SM: in that case, we need this capability
... need not just for INPUT
SP: nested A works with children - can say
number of child elements A zero
... in that case we are covered
... disallowing something as child is easy, but ensuring / requiring things
be a child of something else have to go in other way in general
... M12n where it really matters - don't know if have BODY element on which
to put restriction - can't put restriction on BODY unless know about forms
SM: really good point - has nothing to do with xforms
SP: a bit much putting it on our shoulders -
think is valid use case; don't know why schema people want to allow this;
when explanation advanced, not yet convinced
... XHTML example of where this happens - no good way of doing it, should
allow - but is this an issue we want to highlight or comment upon? can only
define things in english prose
... attempt to rework relationship with schema people
SM: fundamental problem - redefine doesn't allow an element in more than one group, so can't use? why the restriction?
SP: don't feel that strongly about issue - XSD
people are set on an internal roadmap they are closely adhering to, don't
know if worth arguing the point, but can make comment about this in review of
XSD, but don't want to make fuss about it
... there is a counter-argument to "save" XSD as well
... too bad markB isn't here
SM: should make comment about it - not
something to formally object to - make that clear in communication
... XSD limitations make use cases less urgent to me
SP: any other opinions?
GJR: no - PF is also reviewing XSD
SP: was discussion about this in another forum;
i18n people learnt of our opinion that XHTML should be deliverable as
text/html and discovered that that causes problem for i18n in XHTML 1.1 -
reason: if UA knows about XML, uses xml:lang served as text, only @lang
works
... HTML5 is proposing to require both @lang and xml:lang - both having same
value; want change to one or the other or both; request for reference to
decision that XHTML should be delivered as text/html so pointed him to
mediatypes document
... plan was to tell HTC about it this week - would like to announce it to
them this week
GJR: plus 1
SM: plus 1 - fine if point to editor's draft - it's not "done", but ready to socialize
SP: will add that document to XHTML2 report to
HTC and see what happens
... a Note is a final state - working draft should state the aim of document
is to become a Note
SM: check pub rules - all our developmental documents should be marked clearly as editor's drafts
SP: vertical bar on side says "W3C Note"
SM: please point out any similar instances you or anyone else finds
SP: will report to HTC
SP: received reply from commentor--happy with
reply; made changes to references and ready to go; sent off transition
request - hope to hear from TBL or SteveB if want transition call - may not
be necessary - hope to publish in early September, depending on CommTeam's
time
... draft ready?
SM: M12n - yes
SP: reviewed and added updated section
<scribe> ACTION: Steven - produce new section for M12n - [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/27-xhtml-minutes.html#action01]
<ShaneM> XHTMLMIME document updated at http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtmlmime-20080827/
GJR: have posed open question on discoverability of remapped keys, especially when character isn't in label text to all of the WAI, but the UA group in particular is investigating discoverability for those who need - for example - a high level of zooming, but no dedicated assistive tech to provide in particular notification of mnemonic when key binding changes and character isn't present in labelling text
SP: if haven't got mnemonic keys on keyboard, mobile keyboard, for example, have limited range of keys - "m" key could translate to 6, but want person to use the 6 but not going to be in label
GJR: following every rabbit hole -- even those that lead to dead ends
SP: nothing to discuss then via access --
thanks SM for making changes - great stuff
... suggest we adjourn early
... speak to you all next week
ADJOURNED
<Steven> Thanks again Gregory
no problem - i'll push them through and announce to list - have fun at the forms call
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/TOPIC: Agenda Shaping/TOPIC: Access Module/ Succeeded: s/have an open to WAI but UA group/have posed open question on discoverability of remapped keys, especially when character isn't in label text to all of the WAI, but the UA group in particular is investigating discoverability for those who need - for example - a high level of zooming, but no dedicated assistive tech to provide/ Found Scribe: Gregory_Rosmaita Found ScribeNick: oedipus Default Present: Gregory_Rosmaita, +04670855aaaa, ShaneM, Steven, Tina Present: Gregory_Rosmaita ShaneM Steven Tina Regrets: Roland Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Aug/0046 Got date from IRC log name: 27 Aug 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/08/27-xhtml-minutes.html People with action items: steven WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]