See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 18 February 2009
<scribe> Scribe: Gregory_Rosmaita
<scribe> ScribeNick: oedipus
previous: http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-minutes.html
SP: sorry sent out agenda late;
GJR: action item update - http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/tracker/actions/49
... we voting on sending ARIA 1.0 to last call today
... MCooper will provide Shane with updated info
SP: update at last call? should it not express only what is in rec?
SM: doesn't
... reflects what is in ARIA WD, needs to be updated to conform
SP: ok, fair enough
... action item - send PER transition request -- done; will keep my eye on it;
should hear within a week
... action to write intro to XHTML2
<Steven> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/xhtml2.html
SP: created very draf first version
... a) very early draft; b) in "telegram" style - listed what needs to be
explained and intent of each section; sections need populating; comments on
structure welcome
... composed of lots of pieces; have to check RDFa example for right triples;
bit about XFrames that probably needs to be cut, but is placeholder until we
decide what to do about XFrames; sketched out XForms section
... any comments welcome
GJR: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/tracker/actions/50 is still open (didn't finish - hope to do so today)
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/xhtml2/wiki/ProposedElements/ModificationMarkup
SP: word level for INS and DEL - normal to do DEL on false plural - dogs = dog<DEL>s</DEL>
GJR: best practice, should point out at least the
dangers of using internal INS and DEL for rendering especially alternate
rendering
... no, i still need to finish compiling the document
... will email list when ready to review
SP: voting on going to last call
GJR: correct
... plan is to get through as soon as possible -- 3 weeks from date of
announcement, probably a week from friday
latest ARIA editor's draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria
<ShaneM> I suspect a 3 week last call is a little naive - the rest of the membership needs to read the doc.
agreed
<ShaneM> Off topic: quote of the day (from Mark Birbeck):
<ShaneM> There are two aspects to this debate. Some people want RDFa to be added to HTML5, and that browsers do something with it. I'd love to see that too, but then I'd also like to solve world hunger, and teach the world to sing.
SP: amazed at how 1 thread generated so much
discussion
... Manu reported back from conference support and interest in RDFa;
discussion devolved into HTML5 versus RDFa argument
... quote of the day right on topic!
... discussion is one i had last year at TPAC when i attended HTML WG to
discuss RDFa and HTML5; Henri Sivonen still singing the same song against RDFa
-- counter arguments to use of RDFa is extensibility, namespacing, and control
attributes won't be removed from DOM when document parsed, so RDFa will just
work; only problem is validation, and HTML5 doesn't have a validation story
validator.nu
SM: generic validation - http://validator.nu
... thread traffic today - HS' argument interesting; HTML5 does remove
attributes from info stack
SP: which ones?
SM: anyone that is in xmlns
SP: how plan to declare version of HTML5
SM: are no versions
SP: either this is the last HTML ever, or need to
solve problem
... at some point in future going to have to have another iteration of HTML
which will need to be validated; could then have profile to validate HTML5 +
RDFa
SM: yesterday's quote of the day from TAG discussion on versioning; HTML5 Issue 41 - precludes extensibility in HTML5
<ShaneM> David Orchard said: This is also directly related to HTML5 WG issue 41, which is that HTML5 currently precludes support for distributed extensibility.
SM: source david orchard
GJR: no support for my "role for HTML5" proposal - http://esw.w3.org/topic/PF/XTech/HTML5/RoleAttribute
SM: problem is don't want distributed extensibility - want a locked-down developer-centric language
SP: done our best to make XHTML markup useable by everyone
<Zakim> oedipus, you wanted to say sam ruby has action to discuss HTML5 and XHTML alignment - Janina Sajka, co-chair of PF should be at meeting
SP: haven't received request from Sam
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/105
SP: good approach
GJR: would like Janina Sajka to be included in meeting
<Zakim> oedipus, you wanted to say HTML5 new PWD pushed without consultation with WG
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/markup-spec/
SP: objection from DanC about 1.0 PER
<Steven> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml1-20081121/
SP: DanC stated not enough time for community review
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/ED-xhtml-media-types-20090116
SM: make sure reviewing right draft of Media Types (16 January 2009)
SP: reference from normative section to the document
"Many people want to use XHTML to author their web pages, but are confused about the best ways to deliver those pages in such a way that they will be processed correctly by various user agents. This Note contains suggestions about how to format XHTML to ensure it is maximally portable, and how to deliver XHTML to various user agents - even those that do not yet support XHTML natively. This document is intended to be used by document authors who want to use XHTM
SP: complaint is in reference to Section 5
SM: think previous REC had same pointer -- pointed to appendix C, now points to Media Types
SP: was concern about a normative section pointed
to from an informative section
... what is normative about Section 5?
SM: nothing
SP: can we mark that "This section is
informative"?
... section 5 should be non-normative, and provide pointer to January 2009
draft
... definitely have had opportunity to review
<Steven> I presented it to the HCG
RESOLUTION: reply to DanC's comments on PER of XHTML 1.0 to state that Section 5 (of XHTML 1.0 PER) is non-normative and provide pointer to 16 January 2006 draft of XHTML Media Types - Second Edition
SP: discussion of XHTML2 and HTML5 combined?
... at Forms f2f, realized don't have dates for virtual face2face for XHTML2
WG -- do we want to plan a longer session (day, day and a half) to work on
XHTML2 draft
... need Roland to set but should start thinking about timing
AC: agree
ADJOURN
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/use of RDFa is ;/use of RDFa is extensibility, namespacing, and control/ Succeeded: s/stated not/DanC stated not/ Succeeded: s/PEF/PER/ Found Scribe: Gregory_Rosmaita Found ScribeNick: oedipus Default Present: Gregory_Rosmaita, McCarron, Steven, mgylling, Alessio Present: Gregory_Rosmaita McCarron Steven mgylling Alessio Regrets: Roland MarkB Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2009Feb/0033 Found Date: 18 Feb 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/02/18-xhtml-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]