IRC log of sml on 2009-04-13
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 16:32:06 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #sml
- 16:32:06 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/13-sml-irc
- 16:32:44 [johnarwe_]
- johnarwe_ has joined #sml
- 16:33:07 [Kirk]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:33:07 [Zakim]
- sorry, Kirk, I don't know what conference this is
- 16:33:08 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see johnarwe_, RRSAgent, Zakim, Kirk, lencharest, Sandy, trackbot
- 16:33:17 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, this is SML]
- 16:33:17 [Zakim]
- sorry, johnarwe_, I do not see a conference named 'SML]' in progress or scheduled at this time
- 16:33:22 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, this is SML
- 16:33:22 [Zakim]
- ok, johnarwe_; that matches XML_SMLWG()12:30PM
- 16:34:28 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 16:34:28 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Microsoft], +1.603.823.aaaa, +1.845.433.aabb
- 16:34:37 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, aabb is me
- 16:34:37 [Zakim]
- +johnarwe_; got it
- 16:34:44 [lencharest]
- zakim, [Microsoft] is me
- 16:34:44 [Zakim]
- +lencharest; got it
- 16:34:50 [Kirk]
- zakim, aaaa is me
- 16:34:50 [Zakim]
- +Kirk; got it
- 16:35:40 [johnarwe_]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2009Apr/0024.html
- 16:35:59 [johnarwe_]
- *blush* seems I forgot to hit Send on this Friday. My bad.
- 16:35:59 [johnarwe_]
- If anyone is uncomfortable proceeding, since it was not posted 1 business
- 16:35:59 [johnarwe_]
- day in advance of the call,
- 16:35:59 [johnarwe_]
- we will skip this week.
- 16:37:29 [lencharest]
- scribe: Len Charest
- 16:37:41 [lencharest]
- scribenick: lencharest
- 16:37:55 [lencharest]
- rrrsagent, make log public
- 16:38:15 [lencharest]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 16:39:01 [lencharest]
- meeting: SML WG teleconference
- 16:39:22 [Zakim]
- -johnarwe_
- 16:39:43 [Zakim]
- +johnarwe_
- 16:39:44 [lencharest]
- Attendees agree to proceed with the meeting despite not having the agenda available prior to the meeting.
- 16:40:06 [lencharest]
- Topic:
- 16:40:36 [lencharest]
- Topic: Approval of minutes from April 6
- 16:40:37 [johnarwe_]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2009Apr/att-0011/20090406-sml-minutes.html
- 16:41:46 [lencharest]
- RESOLUTION: Minutes approved
- 16:42:52 [lencharest]
- ACTION: Len to repost corrected minutes of 3/30 meeting
- 16:42:53 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-219 - Repost corrected minutes of 3/30 meeting [on Len Charest - due 2009-04-20].
- 16:43:54 [lencharest]
- Topic: Bug 6786
- 16:48:10 [johnarwe_]
- Telecon of 2009-04-13: fix as proposed, editors to incorporate section number of original text, and license given for editorial cleanup. No need for further wg review was expressed.
- 16:49:07 [lencharest]
- RESOLUTION: fix as proposed, editors to incorporate section number of original text, and license given for editorial cleanup.
- 16:49:35 [johnarwe_]
- http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6805
- 16:49:38 [lencharest]
- Topic: Bug 6805
- 16:55:19 [lencharest]
- Kirk: Re issue #2, are there targets for "local name" and "namespace name" in the Infoset spec?
- 16:55:34 [ginny]
- ginny has joined #sml
- 16:56:33 [johnarwe_]
- compare with http://www.w3.org/TR/sml-if/#Base_URI
- 16:56:44 [lencharest]
- Len: No. And it seems to me that sending the reader to a definition of attribute information item is confusing.
- 16:57:03 [johnarwe_]
- (for Ginny) see http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6805 1st comment item 2
- 16:57:04 [lencharest]
- John: Treatment of [base URI] is different.
- 16:57:43 [lencharest]
- John: Suggest we let the editors work this out.
- 16:58:52 [Zakim]
- +Ginny_Smith
- 17:00:29 [lencharest]
- Len: Or remove the square brackets and link to the defn. in XML Namespaces.
- 17:00:48 [lencharest]
- John: The intent was to refer to the Infoset properties.
- 17:00:51 [johnarwe_]
- SML 4.3.1 is itself inconsistent: Len's citing of [ns] etc vs 2.a.ii.A handling of base uri
- 17:04:21 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 17:07:27 [johnarwe_]
- Is this what you mean? SML 4.3.1 item 1: An SML reference is identified as an instance of the SML URI Reference Scheme if and only if exactly one [element information] item whose local name is uri and whose namespace name is http://www.w3.org/ns/sml is present as a child of that reference element.
- 17:07:45 [johnarwe_]
- where [elem info item] hyperlinks to infoset spec
- 17:08:02 [lencharest]
- Not quite. Here's my suggestion:
- 17:08:46 [lencharest]
- "1.An SML reference is identified as an instance of the SML URI Reference Scheme if and only if exactly one element information item [XML Information Set] whose [local name] is uri and whose [namespace name] is http://www.w3.org/ns/sml is present as a child of that reference element."
- 17:09:32 [lencharest]
- where [XML Information Set] is hyperlinked in the same way it appears in 2.a.ii.A.
- 17:09:44 [lencharest]
- and [local name] and [namespace name] are not.
- 17:15:09 [lencharest]
- RESOLUTION: Text in 4.3.1, tem 1 shall be modified as shown above.
- 17:16:00 [lencharest]
- s/tem/item/
- 17:16:21 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 17:16:35 [lencharest]
- John: Any objections to the other issues in the bug -- i.e., cite tag and missing period?
- 17:17:13 [johnarwe_]
- 2009-04-13 telecon, see minutes for update to part 2. 1,3 approved. no need for further wg review expressed.
- 17:17:39 [lencharest]
- RESOLUTION: Issues 1 & 3 approved. No need for further wg review expressed.
- 17:19:57 [lencharest]
- Topic: Henry's proposed wording in repsonse to formal objection
- 17:20:05 [johnarwe_]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2009Apr/0002.html
- 17:20:22 [lencharest]
- John: Any objection to editors updating references using Henry's wording?
- 17:21:43 [lencharest]
- Len: The wording in the last sentence does not include a modification the WG previously approved.
- 17:21:58 [johnarwe_]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2009Mar/att-0044/20090330-sml-minutes.html#item06
- 17:22:17 [johnarwe_]
- Is the suggestion there from Len the revision you folks are talkingn about?
- 17:22:29 [lencharest]
- Len: Yes.
- 17:24:29 [lencharest]
- John: Any objections to the proposal from 3/30?
- 17:25:06 [lencharest]
- RESOLUTION: Adopt the change in wording as above.
- 17:25:42 [Kirk]
- s/talkingn/talking
- 17:25:44 [lencharest]
- John: I'll open a bug to track this change.
- 17:26:21 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 17:26:32 [lencharest]
- Topic: EPR Note
- 17:30:14 [lencharest]
- Kirk: References need to be updated and doc converted to HTML.
- 17:31:07 [lencharest]
- Kirk: Final draft will be available May 4th.
- 17:31:19 [lencharest]
- Topic: XLink note
- 17:33:26 [lencharest]
- Len: Latest draft in CVS includes all approved content changes.
- 17:35:15 [lencharest]
- Kirk: References in the Notes should use the same wording as SML/SML-IF specs.
- 17:37:21 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 17:39:57 [Zakim]
- -Ginny_Smith
- 17:39:58 [Zakim]
- -johnarwe_
- 17:39:58 [Zakim]
- -lencharest
- 17:40:00 [Zakim]
- XML_SMLWG()12:30PM has ended
- 17:40:01 [Zakim]
- Attendees were +1.603.823.aaaa, +1.845.433.aabb, johnarwe_, lencharest, Kirk, Ginny_Smith
- 17:40:17 [lencharest]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 17:40:17 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/13-sml-minutes.html lencharest
- 17:40:40 [lencharest]
- zakim, bye
- 17:40:40 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #sml
- 17:40:59 [lencharest]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 17:41:05 [lencharest]
- rrsagent, bye
- 17:41:05 [RRSAgent]
- I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/13-sml-actions.rdf :
- 17:41:05 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Len to repost corrected minutes of 3/30 meeting [1]
- 17:41:05 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/13-sml-irc#T16-42-52