17:02:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #tagmem
17:02:45 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/03/12-tagmem-irc
17:02:57 <noah> zakim, list
17:02:57 <Zakim> I see TAG_Weekly()1:00PM, WAI_UAWG()1:00PM, HTML_WG()12:00PM, T&S_EGOV(F2F2)9:00AM, WS_WSRA(F2F)9:00AM active
17:02:59 <Zakim> also scheduled at this time is WS_Policy(Editors)1:00PM
17:03:02 <noah> zakim, tihs is TAG
17:03:02 <Zakim> sorry, noah, I do not recognize a party named 'tihs'
17:03:09 <noah> zakim, this is TAG
17:03:09 <Zakim> ok, noah; that matches TAG_Weekly()1:00PM
17:03:13 <noah> zakim, who is here?
17:03:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see Masinter, Raman, Noah_Mendelsohn, alanr
17:03:15 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, jar, johnk, noah, raman, masinter, DanC, ht, trackbot
17:03:20 <DanC> Zakim, this is tag
17:03:20 <Zakim> DanC, this was already TAG_Weekly()1:00PM
17:03:21 <ht> zakim, please call ht-781
17:03:21 <Zakim> ok, DanC; that matches TAG_Weekly()1:00PM
17:03:25 <Zakim> ok, ht; the call is being made
17:03:27 <Zakim> +Ht
17:03:31 <Zakim> +DanC
17:03:33 <Zakim> +John_Kemp
17:03:38 <plh> plh has joined #tagmem
17:03:50 <noah> zakim, alanr is jar
17:03:57 <Zakim> +jar; got it
17:04:01 <Zakim> +Plh
17:04:05 <noah> zakim, who is here?
17:04:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see Masinter, Raman, Noah_Mendelsohn, jar, Ht, John_Kemp, DanC, Plh
17:04:11 <Zakim> On IRC I see plh, RRSAgent, Zakim, jar, johnk, noah, raman, masinter, DanC, ht, trackbot
17:04:41 <johnk> Meeting: TAG Weekly
17:04:50 <johnk> CHAIR: Noah
17:05:06 <jar> chair: Noah
17:06:09 <johnk> NM: canceling the call for the 19th
17:06:36 <DanC> (26 Mar TAG call conflicts with HTTP bis IETF meeting, which I hope to attend)
17:06:42 <johnk_> johnk_ has joined #tagmem
17:07:04 <masinter> link to agenda
17:07:08 <johnk_> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/03/12-agenda
17:07:42 <johnk_> TOPIC: pending action items
17:07:55 <jar> +1
17:07:59 <johnk_> NM: propose that we resolve procedures for closing open issues via email
17:08:09 <johnk_> (agreement)
17:08:29 <johnk_> NM: HT, can you scribe?
17:08:31 <masinter> s/issues/actions/
17:08:33 <jar> noah: "Our clocks are fine"
17:08:35 <johnk_> HT: OK...
17:09:08 <masinter> Note I sent email asking to not close actions that (a) have no associated ISSSUES and (b) have no other followon
17:09:46 <DanC> action-243?
17:09:46 <trackbot> ACTION-243 -- Dan Connolly to assemble minutes from SFO for day 1 based on http://www.w3.org/2009/03/03-tagmem-irc -- due 2009-03-17 -- OPEN
17:09:46 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/243
17:10:12 <johnk> johnk has joined #tagmem
17:10:14 <johnk> (the guilty wave hands)
17:10:45 <masinter> q+
17:11:22 <johnk> NM: will schedule ongoing activity to review priorities + "big themes"
17:11:34 <masinter> pop
17:11:36 <johnk> NM: any need to discus this more now?
17:11:36 <masinter> q-
17:11:40 <DanC> ack next
17:11:42 <johnk> group: no
17:12:40 <johnk> NM: been sent a survey inquiring about TAG interest in 2-6 Sept. TPAC meeting, we should decide by the 18th 
17:13:07 <johnk> TOPIC: XHTML
17:13:26 <johnk> http://www.w3.org/2009/02/status.html#hot
17:14:05 <johnk> LMM: would like to understand this issue better
17:14:33 <masinter> we'd like to understand the proposal and possibly refine it
17:15:00 <johnk> PLH: two groups using the same ns/media type
17:15:19 <johnk> PLH: HTML, XHTML
17:16:42 <DanC> q+ to note Device Independent Authoring Language http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-dial-primer-20071101/
17:16:43 <masinter> q?
17:16:47 <johnk> PLH: can we resolve conflict by getting XHTML to stop using the ns/media type?
17:17:01 <johnk> LMM: is there a written proposal?
17:17:14 <johnk> PLH: no fully-fledged proposal - 
17:17:26 <johnk> PLH: what is impact on XForms, for example?
17:17:39 <masinter> ack danc
17:17:39 <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note Device Independent Authoring Language http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-dial-primer-20071101/
17:18:06 <johnk> DanC: DIAL is a way that XHTML is used
17:18:12 <johnk> TVR: it's a profile
17:18:52 <masinter> what is the relationship of DIAL to the issue being raised?
17:19:03 <johnk> DanC: It's not critical for DIAL to use the 1999 ns/media type 
17:19:04 <raman> q+ arch issue media type, namespace, versioning
17:19:41 <johnk> TVR: this is a TAG Issue because: 
17:20:03 <DanC> the relevance of DIAL is that I'd like to know if those who recently showed interest in XHTML 2 would be happy if it were renamed "DIAL"
17:20:23 <johnk> TVR: how to support in webarch how to discover what language you are  getting at each point?
17:20:50 <masinter> the application/xhtml+xml media type has 'failed'
17:21:00 <johnk> TVR: xhtml+xml has failed as a media type
17:21:17 <johnk> TVR: media type is thus useful
17:21:35 <johnk> TVR: ns is also being abused
17:21:47 <johnk> TVR: 3rd thing is versioning
17:22:08 <johnk> TVR: Larry started discussion in HTML5 about ns as versioning mechanism
17:22:24 <johnk> TVR: XHTML2 went back to using the old ns
17:22:34 <johnk> TVR: two groups in the same space is certainly sub-optimal
17:22:57 <johnk> TVR: your proposal is interesting, but from webarch perspective, we will not be in any better place
17:23:10 <johnk> PLH: agree, this doesn't resolve all the issues
17:23:20 <johnk> PLH: but that is not my goal
17:23:44 <noah> q+ to make sure I understand what's intended
17:24:11 <ht> q+ to discuss XForms
17:24:19 <masinter> politics intertwined with architecture
17:24:46 <johnk> TVR: web is bigger than browser
17:25:05 <johnk> PLH: proposal is to address one specific issue
17:25:19 <DanC> ack next
17:25:20 <Zakim> noah, you wanted to make sure I understand what's intended
17:25:30 <johnk> s/thus useful/thus not useful/
17:25:37 <masinter> q+ to suggest we work with PLH to make the choices clearer
17:25:48 <johnk> NM: agrees with TVRs points
17:26:36 <johnk> NM: who "owns" the namespace and media type?
17:27:07 <johnk> NM: we've decided to put new NS, and media type on XHTML2
17:27:48 <johnk> NM: is my understanding correct?
17:27:51 <johnk> PLH: yes
17:28:08 <masinter> need to come up with agreement on what the issues are and what the choices really are, put into a form where the membership can really review and comment on it. as currently framed, the "idea" is incoherent and disruptive
17:28:39 <johnk> PLH: new namespace solves the bootstrap problem
17:28:58 <masinter> different architectural choices in this space will impact companies and their businesses in different ways, and consensus will be hard because of the economic impacts
17:29:11 <johnk> TVR: what I hear is we create YA media type
17:29:20 <DanC> ("that won't work" ... umm... really? as far as I understand the DIAL use cases, they don't need MS IE to grok a new media type)
17:29:43 <masinter> zakim, unmute ht
17:29:43 <Zakim> Ht should no longer be muted
17:30:13 <DanC> larry, when you verbally ack somebody, it helps to simultaneously "ack next"; Zakim is smart enough to unmute people who get the floor
17:30:17 <johnk_> johnk_ has joined #tagmem
17:30:21 <noah> q?
17:30:28 <masinter> ack ht
17:30:28 <Zakim> ht, you wanted to discuss XForms
17:31:07 <DanC> q+
17:31:13 <johnk_> CORRECTION: by using the OLD namespace in XHTML2, you solve the bootstrapping problem by using JS to handle the XHTML
17:31:52 <johnk_> HT: from TAG perspective, NS competition is place where we should start
17:32:01 <masinter> ack next
17:32:02 <Zakim> masinter, you wanted to suggest we work with PLH to make the choices clearer
17:32:34 <johnk_> LMM: clear that is important for w3c, decision is not speculative or forward-looking
17:32:48 <johnk_> LMM: choices for members are not clear
17:33:13 <johnk_> LMM: cannot see it being possible to make an informed choice on a proposal that is not fully-fledged
17:33:41 <raman> q+ to add that defining Web purely as a browser for N years after having defined it *without* the browser fo r8 years is a mistake. We need a balance
17:33:47 <DanC> q- later
17:33:52 <johnk_> LMM: would be a good service to the community to write out the issues and choices
17:34:21 <johnk_> LMM: TAG should take on such a work item
17:34:46 <DanC> ack raman
17:34:46 <Zakim> raman, you wanted to add that defining Web purely as a browser for N years after having defined it *without* the browser fo r8 years is a mistake. We need a balance
17:35:27 <johnk_> TVR: risk is that you equate the browser with the Web
17:36:08 <noah> q+ to discuss content creators
17:36:14 <DanC> (good point; the risk that "future of browser" will be understood as "future of W3C" is pretty high. not a bet I'd take)
17:36:47 <johnk_> TVR: problem is that we have made the mistake of ignoring the browser, and don't wish to swing back too far the other way
17:37:39 <johnk_> PLH: yes, it is a difficult balance
17:38:00 <johnk_> PLH: we will have a panel at the AC meeting
17:38:15 <johnk_> (scribe missed most of the names)
17:38:54 <noah> PLH: Steven Pemberton will be at the AC meeting and on the panel.  
17:38:54 <masinter> people come to the AC meetings to represent their companies, and need to review their company's point of view. That point of view needs to be based on choices that have been explained clearly. The current proposal isn't.
17:38:56 <johnk_> TVR: DAISY has been based on XHTML2
17:39:06 <noah> q?
17:39:27 <masinter> q+ to ask TAG members if they're willing to take on this issue and immediate actions
17:39:30 <jar> http://www.daisy.org/ ?
17:39:49 <johnk_> http://www.daisy.org/, yes
17:39:51 <noah> Larry, I'd be curious to know what the specific goal would be of TAG work (not unsympathetic, by the way)
17:40:26 <ht> I will now be at the AC, with my Edinburgh hat on
17:40:33 <masinter> create a background document which lays out the issues and considerations we've already discussed, and the relevant sections of AWWW and the impact it would have
17:41:17 <masinter> q?
17:42:00 <masinter> ack next
17:42:39 <DanC> ack next
17:42:40 <Zakim> noah, you wanted to discuss content creators
17:42:42 <johnk_> TVR: back to language design issues
17:42:45 <DanC> q+ noah
17:42:47 <DanC> oops; sorry
17:42:50 <masinter> i'm using the queue but giving raman slack
17:43:14 <johnk_> TVR: web has always been extensible (netscape plugins eg)
17:43:24 <DanC> q+ noah to discuss content creators
17:43:35 <johnk_> TVR: then JS+DHTML
17:43:37 <jar> yay greasemonkey!
17:43:43 <johnk_> TVR: then greasemonkey
17:44:14 <DanC> (hmm... stack: plug-in API, browser extension, greasemonkey)
17:44:17 <masinter> different kinds of extensibility: protocol, MIME type, namespace, ....
17:44:20 <johnk_> TVR: can extend on the protocol handler, or on the MIME type, or on namespaces
17:44:28 <DanC> q+ to note that MS implements a namespace hook
17:44:37 <ht> q+ to disagree with TV about NS and media type dispatching
17:44:59 <noah> Seeing the list plugin, extension, greasemonkey all together for some reason reminds me that at the F2F we noodled on the TAG focusing more on Web security.
17:45:21 <johnk> johnk has joined #tagmem
17:46:05 <johnk> TVR: believe this is a big mistake
17:46:20 <johnk> DanC: what should we do instead?
17:48:24 <johnk> TVR: not concerned about the specific item per se
17:48:54 <johnk> LMM: panel should try and frame a TAG overview of the arch issues, pointing to relevant findings and issues
17:49:11 <noah> Larry, should we give someone an action to prepare a TAG position for either you or some other TAG member to present?
17:49:17 <johnk> LMM: I can't be on the panel as both TAG rep and company rep
17:50:11 <DanC> (then LMM said he *can* do both of those. hmm.)
17:50:48 <johnk> LMM: concerned that this topic has this proposal already as if there is some reasonable resolution already
17:51:02 <johnk> LMM: would like to frame the issues coherently first
17:51:54 <johnk> TVR: yes, feels like a fait accompli
17:52:04 <plh> q?
17:52:07 <plh> ack masinter
17:52:07 <Zakim> masinter, you wanted to ask TAG members if they're willing to take on this issue and immediate actions
17:52:16 <plh> ack noah
17:52:16 <Zakim> noah, you wanted to discuss content creators
17:52:56 <johnk> NM: if there's some chance that we need to present a TAG position, we need to work on this soon
17:53:10 <johnk> NM: should we assign an action to guide TAG through such a process?
17:53:46 <plh> q+
17:53:58 <johnk> NM: a possible issue about who represents TAG on this panel
17:54:04 <masinter> q+ to correct Noah's mischaracterization of what I said
17:54:11 <raman> q+ to add that Larry is well-respected as Larry --- I wouldn't split hairs about Tag concensus position and Larry being the message bearer 
17:54:35 <johnk> NM: wanted to mention the content creators
17:54:55 <masinter> I didn't volunteer to be on the panel to represent either Adobe or the TAG but to add what I hoped was an informed perspective
17:55:03 <johnk> NM: if we can have fair representation from content creators in this discussion, that would be good
17:55:57 <noah> ack DanC
17:55:57 <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note that MS implements a namespace hook
17:55:58 <johnk> DanC: MS has implemented ns support (URI-based extensibility) since IE6
17:56:01 <noah> ack ht
17:56:01 <Zakim> ht, you wanted to disagree with TV about NS and media type dispatching
17:56:08 <masinter> and representation can't really happen until we've discussed the issues and come to a conclusion, and I don't think we'll have a fully-fledged "considered position". I'm not proposing that the TAG have a "considered position" but that we document the analysis of the issues we've done so far in order to make the discussion at AC more productive
17:56:45 <johnk> HT: agree with Noah that we continue to struggle to find content-creators willing to talk about this issue
17:57:21 <johnk> HT: when NS + media-type extensibility is made available to developers, it *is* used
17:57:40 <johnk> HT: using HTML+SVG because MathML works now
17:57:53 <johnk> HT: this wasn't possible a year ago
17:58:08 <johnk> HT: that entry point into extensibility is worth fighting for
17:58:36 <noah> Henry reminds me that more specialized communities, like scientists, may have an important perspective on extensibility.
17:58:56 <johnk> HT: takes us back to the core question: are we prepared to declare text/html media-type and 1999 ns an "open" framework?
17:59:30 <johnk> HT: starting the discussion at the procedural level is a mistake
17:59:35 <masinter> q+ to point out that it is possible to have two different languages with the same namespace, as long as there is a versioning mechanism to distinguish between them
17:59:44 <ht> s/1999/1999.xhtml/
18:00:19 <masinter> i say 'versioning' in a named or branched sense, not just a linear way
18:01:28 <johnk> (agreement that browsers have NOT written off NS-based extensibility)
18:01:48 <masinter> it sounds like the proposal is based on false assumptions?
18:02:03 <masinter> HTML+SVG is being discussed
18:02:11 <noah> q+ to ask about HTML 5 and extensibility
18:02:34 <johnk_> johnk_ has joined #tagmem
18:02:36 <DanC> (I'm persuaded the current proposal is misleading)
18:02:37 <plh> ack plh
18:02:39 <masinter> want to push again on the framework of the panel and the AC meeting. The "panel" should be an explanation of the issues and the point of view, and not an uninformed debate
18:04:01 <noah> BTW: if you look at materials XML schema developed in exploring versioning they strongly support what Larry is saying about the distinction between namespaces and language versions
18:04:17 <johnk_> LMM: if you don't use NS for versioning, then you can use some other indicator (eg. DOCTYPE or explicit version number attribute)
18:05:01 <johnk_> LMM: should push on this notion of versioning being a linear progression
18:05:24 <noah> As I wrote in the TAG blog article, I think you only need to distinguish versions in the representation IF the same content would have different meaning in two or more versions.  If all that happens is that content becomes legal or becomes illegal, you can tell that without labeling the versions at all
18:05:50 <noah> See blog entry at: http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/12/version_identifiers_reconsider.html
18:06:20 <johnk_> LMM: different WGs are talking past each other - don't want to see a panel as a debate
18:06:39 <plh> q+
18:06:41 <johnk_> LMM: panel should be a discussion without a presumption that there will be some immediate vote or action
18:06:58 <ht> HST endorses LMM's analysis:  see http://www.pdfpower.com/XML2005Proceedings/ship/82/XML_2005_82.HTML
18:07:09 <noah> q?
18:07:17 <johnk_> LMM: TAG has worked on versioning extensively, and should use this chance to solicit opinion from members to create a coherent proposal
18:07:19 <raman> q, ack
18:07:33 <noah> q?
18:07:43 <noah> ack masinter
18:07:43 <Zakim> masinter, you wanted to correct Noah's mischaracterization of what I said and to point out that it is possible to have two different languages with the same namespace, as long as
18:07:46 <Zakim> ... there is a versioning mechanism to distinguish between them
18:07:48 <noah> q-
18:07:52 <noah> ack raman
18:07:52 <Zakim> raman, you wanted to add that Larry is well-respected as Larry --- I wouldn't split hairs about Tag concensus position and Larry being the message bearer
18:07:56 <noah> ack noah
18:08:34 <masinter> i'm really sorry, need to get off phone for a bit
18:08:39 <johnk> johnk has joined #tagmem
18:09:11 <johnk> NM: is it really only in HTML5 discussions that are saying "look, if I do SVG/MathML, I want to do it without ns?"
18:09:19 <johnk> HT: yes, my understaning
18:09:24 <johnk> TVR: (agrees)
18:09:31 <Zakim> -Masinter
18:09:40 <masinter> can stay on IRC
18:09:41 <masinter> sorry
18:09:51 <noah> q?
18:10:02 <noah> ack plh
18:10:18 <johnk> PLH: panel is not there for a debate or to make a decision
18:10:31 <johnk> PLH: but to get feedback
18:10:42 <DanC> (I don't know how to answer noah's question; many of the loudest voices in the HTML 5 discussion represent browsers)
18:10:44 <raman> q+plh, reason the panel has become critical is because of SB's phrasing of the AC agenda
18:10:55 <DanC> q+ raman
18:10:59 <ht> q+ to worry about version-dependent semantics
18:11:03 <johnk> NH: is there anything that the TAG can help with in support of this panel?
18:11:43 <johnk> PLH: if TAG was willing to write something about this issue, that would be helpful
18:12:13 <johnk> NM: this is a complex topic which includes opinions which do not yet converge
18:12:38 <noah> q?
18:12:56 <johnk> NM: (a little surprised at this issue taking the turn it has towards TAG action on the general issue)
18:13:30 <noah> s/action on the general issue/focusing on versioning vs. other HTML problems/
18:14:42 <johnk> NM: (repeats question to PLH about what specifically the TAG could do)
18:15:25 <johnk> NM: if we should do anything more than we're already doing, we need to decide that now
18:15:52 <raman> 1+ to HT presenting on behalf of the TAG 
18:16:07 <noah> Yes, I like that.  PLH, is there room?  Is that a good thing?
18:16:31 <johnk> HT: point that Larry raised - the media-type to namespace to formal version identifier should be made on the panel
18:16:34 <plh> there is room, and I welcome Henry
18:16:49 <noah> Great.  Let me set up the necessary actions when Henry is done talking.
18:17:03 <raman> at this point, even getting a one-level indirection/extension mechanism would be a win. With 3 possibilities, all 3 are abused, and people need to invent itunes:
18:17:54 <johnk> NM: HT, can you circulate a proposal?
18:17:58 <johnk> HT: accepts
18:18:16 <DanC> (I don't need to be in the critical path; I'm happy for HT and LMM to say what they like, whether on behalf of me, the TAG, or otherwise.)
18:18:37 <johnk> ACTION: ht to circulate a proposal framing this issue
18:18:38 <trackbot> Created ACTION-246 - Circulate a proposal framing this issue [on Henry S. Thompson - due 2009-03-19].
18:19:02 <masinter> will help, think this is quite valuable
18:19:59 <Zakim> -Plh
18:20:18 <johnk> TOPIC: Metadata
18:20:41 <johnk> NM: JAR took ACTION-227
18:20:50 <DanC> action-227?
18:20:50 <trackbot> ACTION-227 -- Jonathan Rees to summarize TAG work on metadata, with Larry -- due 2009-02-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:20:50 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/227
18:21:01 <johnk> NM: proposes to close 227
18:21:07 <johnk> (agreed)
18:21:34 <johnk> close ACTION-227
18:21:34 <trackbot> ACTION-227 Summarize TAG work on metadata, with Larry closed
18:21:41 <DanC> q+
18:22:00 <ht> q- ht
18:22:17 <johnk_> johnk_ has joined #tagmem
18:22:49 <johnk_> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/02/metadata-survey.html
18:22:53 <DanC> action-227: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/02/metadata-survey.html
18:22:53 <trackbot> ACTION-227 Summarize TAG work on metadata, with Larry notes added
18:23:13 <noah> ack raman
18:23:15 <masinter> sorry can't get back on phone
18:23:30 <noah> No problem, Larry.
18:23:35 <noah> Thanks for getting back to us.
18:24:03 <johnk_> DanC: would like to wait for Larry on this item...
18:24:09 <johnk_> proposal to adjourn
18:24:15 <jar> Discussion tabled pending Larry's participation.
18:24:24 <johnk_> ADJOURNED
18:24:39 <Zakim> -Ht
18:24:43 <Zakim> -Raman
18:25:11 <Zakim> -John_Kemp
18:25:28 <Zakim> -Noah_Mendelsohn
18:25:40 <plh> plh has left #tagmem
18:25:43 <masinter> sorry
18:25:45 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?
18:25:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see jar, DanC
18:26:01 <masinter> i'll check in with HT
18:26:33 <jar> 617 253-8581
18:26:43 <Zakim> -DanC
18:26:44 <Zakim> TAG_Weekly()1:00PM has ended
18:26:46 <Zakim> Attendees were Masinter, Raman, Noah_Mendelsohn, Ht, DanC, John_Kemp, jar, Plh
18:30:22 <johnk> johnk has joined #tagmem
20:06:15 <johnk> johnk has joined #tagmem
20:29:55 <Zakim> Zakim has left #tagmem
21:26:43 <johnk> rrsagent, generate minutes
21:26:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/12-tagmem-minutes.html johnk
21:36:21 <johnk> rrsagent, make logs public
21:59:15 <DanC> DanC has joined #tagmem
22:34:46 <johnk> johnk has joined #tagmem
23:43:24 <johnk> johnk has joined #tagmem