16:43:11 RRSAgent has joined #tagmem 16:43:12 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-tagmem-irc 16:43:22 zakim, this will be TAG 16:43:22 ok, Stuart; I see TAG_Weekly()1:00PM scheduled to start in 17 minutes 16:43:42 Meeting: TAG Weekly 16:43:54 Chair: Stuart Williams 16:44:07 Scribe: David Orchard 16:44:36 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/10/16-agenda 16:46:22 Regrets: Norm Walsh, Tim Berners-Lee, Ashok Malhotra 16:47:09 jar has joined #tagmem 16:51:24 raman has joined #tagmem 16:58:17 noah_away has joined #tagmem 16:58:48 TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has now started 16:58:50 +Jonathan_Rees 16:59:04 +[IBMCambridge] 16:59:05 -[IBMCambridge] 16:59:05 +[IBMCambridge] 16:59:14 zakim, [IBMCambridge] is me 16:59:14 +noah; got it 16:59:17 +Raman 16:59:27 zakim, who is here? 16:59:27 On the phone I see Jonathan_Rees, noah, Raman 16:59:28 On IRC I see noah, raman, jar, RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart, DanC, ht, trackbot 17:00:00 FYI, I am muted 17:00:18 zakim, please call ht-781 17:00:18 ok, ht; the call is being made 17:00:20 +Ht 17:01:46 +DanC 17:02:46 dorchard has joined #tagmem 17:03:15 +??P2 17:03:27 zakim, ?? is me 17:03:27 +Stuart; got it 17:04:40 +Dave_Orchard 17:05:04 scribenick: dorchard 17:05:08 scribe: dorchard 17:07:25 +1 cxl 30 Oct (I'll be jet-lagged) 17:07:38 stuart: propose next meeting after tpac is Nov 6th 17:07:52 -Jonathan_Rees 17:07:58 Approved: Next meeting after TPAC is Nov 6th 17:08:06 +Jonathan_Rees 17:08:09 Jonathan will scribe Nov 6th 17:08:21 zakim, agenda? 17:08:21 I see nothing on the agenda 17:08:37 zakim, next agendum 17:08:37 I see nothing on the agenda 17:08:44 topic: abbreviated URIs 17:08:47 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Oct/0012 17:08:58 http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts#curie 17:08:58 topic: abbreviatedURI-56 17:09:38 -Dave_Orchard 17:10:10 scribenick: ht 17:10:22 HT: There appears to be a new draft, URI above 17:10:37 ... Dated 8 October 17:10:44 +Dave_Orchard 17:10:46 ... I've had a look at it 17:10:56 scribenick: dorchard 17:11:06 (above? hmm.. this one? http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-curie-20081008/ ) 17:11:16 Yes, I think that's it. 17:11:44 ht: I looked at the draft, they tried to address all the points (#curie ref). 17:12:33 ht: they have changed whether :foo is a curie or not over time. 17:12:50 ht: this is now legal and is a valid curie 17:13:09 as I believe is "" 17:13:12 (it _is_? I can't derive :foo from the grammar in http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-curie-20081008/ ) 17:13:22 ht: the problem is that implies that this is a curie with an empty string prefix as opposed to no prefix 17:13:41 ht: the main part of the prefix is optional 17:13:42 [[prefix]:] 17:13:43 (ok. I see now.) 17:13:47 curie := [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference 17:14:24 I thought that in ':foo', the ':' gets replaced by some distinguished prefix (e.g. the base URI?) -- as in Turtle/N3 17:14:24 ht: they must tell us what this means 17:14:44 The draft says "A host language MAY interpret a reference value that is not preceded by a prefix and a colon as being a member of a host-language defined set of reserved values. Such reserved values MUST translate into an IRI, just as with any other CURIE 17:16:20 -Jonathan_Rees 17:16:29 yes, me. let me dial back in. sorry 17:16:37 (I'd like our minutes to quote text that's responsive to our comment. I don't remember the gist of our comment.) 17:16:49 +Jonathan_Rees 17:18:05 zakim, who's here? 17:18:05 On the phone I see noah, Raman, Ht, DanC (muted), Stuart, Dave_Orchard, Jonathan_Rees 17:18:07 On IRC I see dorchard, noah, raman, jar, RRSAgent, Zakim, Stuart, DanC, ht, trackbot 17:18:26 "Accordingly, CURIEs and Safe_CURIEs MUST NOT be used as values for attributes or other content that are specified to contain only URIs, IRIs, URI-references, IRI-references, etc." 17:19:41 ack me 17:20:54 is it worth recording a TAG decision contingent on jar's review? 17:22:08 action jonathan to review the current CURIE editors draft against the changes requested by the TAG and inform the group of his disposition. 17:22:09 Created ACTION-186 - Review the current CURIE editors draft against the changes requested by the TAG and inform the group of his disposition. [on Jonathan Rees - due 2008-10-23]. 17:22:48 topic: TAG @ TPAC 17:23:02 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/10/tpac 17:24:18 stuart: EXI would like to meet mon/tues 17:24:25 noah: not intereste in evening meetings 17:26:33 discussion about tag and exi continues.. 17:27:01 ChrisL has joined #tagmem 17:27:08 zakim, code? 17:27:08 the conference code is 0824 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), ChrisL 17:27:44 q+ 17:28:18 henry: I gave them feedback about xml and exi distinction 17:28:21 +ChrisL 17:28:28 stuart: they are meeting mon/tues 17:28:45 henry: and I think they wanted to at least meet about my feedback. 17:29:29 noah: can you write up a summary for me? 17:29:48 q? 17:29:55 Or just send some links 17:30:06 stuart: perhaps we should not meet if that's too hard. 17:30:40 noah: the big issues are around not speed, and perhaps test case selection. 17:30:52 noah: they don't even claim speed yet. 17:31:42 stuart will continue to set up a meeting 17:32:00 stuart: any other comments on meeting schedule? 17:32:39 topic: tech plenary day 17:32:39 Actually, I think speed is a big issue, and I think we've said that in the past. What I was pointing out is that they don't >claim< to have a quantitative justification speed-wise until CR, or at least that's my recollection. My notion would be to remind them that they either need to come up with a justification based on speed as well as compactness, or else make the case that EXI is... 17:32:48 ...justified without a speed claim. 17:33:21 chrisl: origins of tag on plenary day 17:34:18 chrisl: ian said that web arch was useless, etc. But then retracted to 3 specific positions 17:34:36 raman: and I responded saying that 3 positions were not Google official positions 17:35:34 WRT TAG-EXI interaction, here's one relevant pointer (not on the encoding issue): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-exi/2007Nov/0004.html 17:35:51 chrisl: invited ian to tech plenary day but he declined, and more said privately. 17:36:39 chrisl: Issues should be done case by case, but not opt out of the whole thing. 17:37:06 chrisl: Wanted a bit of discussion, perhaps some updates to web arch, but most of it is good and should be followed. 17:38:06 chrisl: title of talk at plenary changed over time, the first was a little too rushed. 17:38:25 ... hoping you find the new title better 17:38:45 raman: I like the title 17:39:02 I won't be there.. 17:39:12 I think the missing bit in recipe vs. blueprint is that the consequences of bad cooking are pretty localized to those eating the meal. With Web arch, your app my run just fine, while the collection of such badly coded apps gradually sink the Web as a whole. 17:39:27 I could have easily played devil's advocate on EPRs, but no joy. 17:39:33 q? 17:39:37 q- 17:39:43 q+ to ask about format 17:40:09 raman: how many people actually know what web arch says? cynical answer is no... 17:40:21 raman: and you need to conform or be hit on the head.. 17:40:30 q? 17:40:46 raman: people do understand HTML 17:41:06 q? 17:41:11 ack noah 17:41:11 noah, you wanted to ask about format 17:41:39 noah: definitely want skeptics. 17:41:54 noah: format in mind? 17:42:51 noah: add Larry Masinter? 17:42:54 3-5 minute intros would be good 17:43:01 +1 to Larry. 17:43:48 raman: some of what is going on should be tag's responsibility for solving, he has a *lot* of experience. 17:44:09 .... But one more "old guy" that the 20 year olds won't listen to 17:44:25 ack me 17:44:52 Noah, more background on the TAG-EXI discussion: minutes from last year at http://www.w3.org/2007/11/08-exi-minutes.html; my message referenced there (with a different conclusion than I would now reach, but useful background): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Nov/0014.html 17:45:58 noah: would like to talk about more than just web arch, and talk about findings 17:46:09 raman: +1 on findings 17:46:54 I think that some positive war stories would be good, and indeed some that may motivate us to re-think. 17:46:55 Findings update the webarch dod; webarch is not just the one document 17:46:59 q? 17:48:11 chrisl: henri sivonen was suggested, but he's alread on the xml vs html 17:50:58 q? 17:51:29 chrisl: I'd like to invite larry 17:52:57 how many have benefitted from tag work 17:56:30 -Ht 17:59:26 stuart: meeting adjourned 17:59:36 -Jonathan_Rees 17:59:46 zakim, generate minutes 17:59:46 I don't understand 'generate minutes', dorchard 17:59:55 zakim, please generate minutes 17:59:55 I don't understand 'please generate minutes', dorchard 18:00:07 zakim, pretty please generate minutes 18:00:07 I don't understand 'pretty please generate minutes', dorchard 18:00:24 rrsagent, generate minutes 18:00:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-tagmem-minutes.html dorchard 18:00:32 rrsagent, make minutes public 18:00:32 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', dorchard. Try /msg RRSAgent help 18:01:21 rrsagent, make logs public 18:11:54 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda (IIRC) 18:12:36 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/09/f2fkc-agenda#HTMLandTheWeb 18:13:01 zakim, who is on the phone 18:13:01 I don't understand 'who is on the phone', Stuart 18:13:03 zakim, who is on the phone? 18:13:03 On the phone I see noah, Raman, DanC, Stuart, Dave_Orchard, ChrisL 18:15:49 -Dave_Orchard 18:30:26 -DanC 18:33:59 -noah 18:34:00 -Stuart 18:34:00 -ChrisL 18:34:02 -Raman 18:34:04 TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended 18:34:05 Attendees were Jonathan_Rees, noah, Raman, Ht, DanC, Stuart, Dave_Orchard, ChrisL 20:22:49 IanJ has joined #tagmem 20:22:53 IanJ has left #tagmem 20:48:39 Zakim has left #tagmem 21:30:39 DanC has joined #tagmem