TAG Weekly

16 Oct 2008


See also: IRC log


Norm_Walsh, Tim_Berners-Lee, Ashok_Malhotra
Stuart Williams
David Orchard, dorchard




<Stuart> Scribe: David Orchard

<jar> FYI, I am muted

<dorchard> scribenick: dorchard

<scribe> scribe: dorchard

<DanC> +1 cxl 30 Oct (I'll be jet-lagged)

stuart: propose next meeting after tpac is Nov 6th

Approved: Next meeting after TPAC is Nov 6th

Jonathan will scribe Nov 6th

abbreviated URIs

<ht> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Oct/0012

<ht> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts#curie


<ht> scribenick: ht

HT: There appears to be a new draft, URI above
... Dated 8 October
... I've had a look at it

<scribe> scribenick: dorchard

<DanC> (above? hmm.. this one? http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-curie-20081008/ )

<noah> Yes, I think that's it.

ht: I looked at the draft, they tried to address all the points (#curie ref).
... they have changed whether :foo is a curie or not over time.
... this is now legal and is a valid curie

<Stuart> as I believe is ""

<DanC> (it _is_? I can't derive :foo from the grammar in http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-curie-20081008/ )

ht: the problem is that implies that this is a curie with an empty string prefix as opposed to no prefix
... the main part of the prefix is optional

<ht> [[prefix]:]

<DanC> (ok. I see now.)

<Stuart> curie := [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference

<jar> I thought that in ':foo', the ':' gets replaced by some distinguished prefix (e.g. the base URI?) -- as in Turtle/N3

ht: they must tell us what this means

<Stuart> 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

<jar> yes, me. let me dial back in. sorry

<DanC> (I'd like our minutes to quote text that's responsive to our comment. I don't remember the gist of our comment.)

<DanC> "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."

<DanC> is it worth recording a TAG decision contingent on jar's review?

<Stuart> action jonathan to review the current CURIE editors draft against the changes requested by the TAG and inform the group of his disposition.

<trackbot> 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].


<Stuart> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/10/tpac

stuart: EXI would like to meet mon/tues

noah: not intereste in evening meetings

discussion about tag and exi continues..

henry: I gave them feedback about xml and exi distinction

stuart: they are meeting mon/tues

henry: and I think they wanted to at least meet about my feedback.

noah: can you write up a summary for me?

<noah> Or just send some links

stuart: perhaps we should not meet if that's too hard.

noah: the big issues are around not speed, and perhaps test case selection.
... they don't even claim speed yet.

stuart will continue to set up a meeting

stuart: any other comments on meeting schedule?

tech plenary day

<noah> 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...

<noah> ...justified without a speed claim.

chrisl: origins of tag on plenary day
... ian said that web arch was useless, etc. But then retracted to 3 specific positions

raman: and I responded saying that 3 positions were not Google official positions

<ht> 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

chrisl: invited ian to tech plenary day but he declined, and more said privately.
... Issues should be done case by case, but not opt out of the whole thing.
... Wanted a bit of discussion, perhaps some updates to web arch, but most of it is good and should be followed.
... title of talk at plenary changed over time, the first was a little too rushed.
... hoping you find the new title better

raman: I like the title

I won't be there..

<noah> 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.

I could have easily played devil's advocate on EPRs, but no joy.

raman: how many people actually know what web arch says? cynical answer is no...
... and you need to conform or be hit on the head..
... people do understand HTML

<Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask about format

noah: definitely want skeptics.
... format in mind?
... add Larry Masinter?

<ChrisL> 3-5 minute intros would be good

<ChrisL> +1 to Larry.

raman: some of what is going on should be tag's responsibility for solving, he has a *lot* of experience.
... But one more "old guy" that the 20 year olds won't listen to

<ht> 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

noah: would like to talk about more than just web arch, and talk about findings

raman: +1 on findings

<Stuart> I think that some positive war stories would be good, and indeed some that may motivate us to re-think.

<ChrisL> Findings update the webarch dod; webarch is not just the one document

chrisl: henri sivonen was suggested, but he's alread on the xml vs html
... I'd like to invite larry

<ChrisL> how many have benefitted from tag work

stuart: meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/10/16 18:00:31 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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)

Found Scribe: David Orchard
Found ScribeNick: dorchard
Found Scribe: dorchard
Inferring ScribeNick: dorchard
Found ScribeNick: ht
Found ScribeNick: dorchard
Scribes: David Orchard, dorchard
ScribeNicks: dorchard, ht

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Approved ChrisL DanC Dave_Orchard Ht IBMCambridge Jonathan_Rees P2 Raman Stuart dorchard henry jar noah noah_away scribenick trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Regrets: Norm_Walsh Tim_Berners-Lee Ashok_Malhotra
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2008/10/16-agenda
Got date from IRC log name: 16 Oct 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-tagmem-minutes.html
People with action items: 

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]