16:00:36 RRSAgent has joined #html-wg
16:00:36 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/07/09-html-wg-irc
16:01:50 trackbot, start meeting
16:01:59 RRSAgent, make logs public
16:02:01 Zakim, this will be HTML
16:02:02 Meeting: HTML Weekly Teleconference
16:02:02 Date: 09 July 2009
16:02:04 Zakim has joined #html-wg
16:02:06 Zakim, passcode?
16:02:12 sorry, Lachy, I don't know what conference this is
16:02:16 Zakim, this will be HTML
16:02:18 ok, DanC, I see HTML_WG()12:00PM already started
16:02:20 Zakim, passcode?
16:02:24 the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Lachy
16:02:28 +DanC
16:02:32 +Murray_Maloney
16:02:40 zakim, who's on the phone
16:02:47 Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:02:48 I don't understand 'who's on the phone', masinter
16:03:02 + +49.251.280.aaaa
16:03:04 On the phone I see Sam, ??P5, Matt_May, Masinter, Murray_Maloney, DanC, +49.251.280.aaaa
16:03:13 Zakim, I am 49.251.280.aaaa
16:03:16 Zakim, +49.251.280.aaaa is me
16:03:18 +??P30
16:03:28 sorry, Lachy, I do not see a party named '49.251.280.aaaa'
16:03:34 +Julian; got it
16:03:37 Zakim, aaaa is Lachy
16:03:44 + +1.218.340.aabb
16:03:46 sorry, DanC, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
16:03:48 I guess I might be ??P5- no mic though..
16:04:03 Topic: Convene, take roll, review agenda
16:04:17 Topic: ISSUE-32 (table-summary)
16:04:21 Zakim, I am ??P30
16:04:25 +Lachy; got it
16:04:29 i suggest calling this a "straw poll" rather than a "vote"?
16:04:29 regrets+ Joshue
16:05:08 LMM: i suggest calling this a "straw poll" rather than a "vote"
16:05:40 +??P36
16:05:47 DanC: that would make it non-binding
16:06:01 LMM: yes, but it would predict the results of a binding vote pretty well
16:06:01 zakim,??P30 is Stevef
16:06:01 I already had ??P30 as Lachy, Stevef
16:06:10 Laura has joined #html-wg
16:06:13 MikeSmith has joined #html-wg
16:06:31 zakim, ??P36 is Stevef
16:06:31 +Stevef; got it
16:06:48 Zakim, call Mike-Mobile
16:06:48 ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made
16:06:50 +Laura
16:06:50 +Mike
16:06:55 DanC: there's a possibility that a vote will be avoided consensus?
16:07:16 LMM: but a straw poll would help in any case; it eliminates possibilities that noone supports
16:07:31 I would prefer a straw poll
16:07:42 MM: I have my doubts [about a straw poll]
16:07:50 Laura: we could do a straw poll and then a vote
16:08:02 wouldn't need to review "good standing" of wg members who haven't been active
16:08:33 DanC: I think a straw poll is a good idea
16:09:31 action-59 due 2009-07-03
16:09:32 ACTION-59 Track progress on edits related to issue-38 style-attr-syntax in section html5/#style0 due date now 2009-07-03
16:09:32 MM: on research... I'm in contact with Jutta Trev. [sp?] at [u. toronto?]; perhaps next week I can give more info on usability studies
16:09:41 oops
16:09:53 issue-59?
16:09:53 ISSUE-59 -- Should the HTML WG produce a separate document that is a normative language reference and if so what are the requirements -- OPEN
16:09:53 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/59
16:09:54 Title: ISSUE-59 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:09:56 Topic: ISSUE-59 (normative-language-reference)
16:10:18 action-109?
16:10:18 ACTION-109 -- Michael(tm) Smith to hand out work to reviewers of H:TML -- due 2009-06-25 -- OPEN
16:10:18 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/109
16:10:20 Title: ACTION-109 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:10:33 action-109 due 2009-07-23
16:10:33 ACTION-109 hand out work to reviewers of H:TML due date now 2009-07-23
16:10:44 question about whether document compliance ("authoring requirements") might be better handled here
16:10:48 action-110 due 2009-07-23
16:10:48 ACTION-110 Add note to H:TML draft about what's currently missing and planned to be added due date now 2009-07-23
16:11:13 dbaron has joined #html-wg
16:11:31 LMM: there was a bugzilla bug and such about authoring requirements...
16:11:32 +Cynthia_Shelly
16:12:32 ... whether they belong in the same spec with how-to-build-a-browser...
16:12:39 ... so that's something to consider
16:12:50 Mike: not much news on my action; moved them back a couple weeks.
16:13:06 Topic: ISSUE-60 (html5-xhtml-namespace)
16:13:27 zakim, who is making noise?
16:13:33 Sam: I suggest that the recent announcement about the XHTML 2 WG addresses my action
16:13:38 rubys1, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sam (19%), Murray_Maloney (19%)
16:13:50 close ACTION-105
16:13:50 ACTION-105 Should arrange a meeting between chairs of HTML WG and XHTML2 WG to ensure there is a plan for coordination of vocabularies to avoid incompatibilities. closed
16:14:03 yes, close this issue
16:14:34 LMM: there may be some follow-up
16:14:55 XHTML 2.0 will end life as a WG NOTE
16:15:04 MM: does this announcement mean XHTLM 2.0 won't be produced?
16:15:09 Sam: I expect it'll become a Note
16:15:46 q+
16:16:08 ack Julian
16:16:09 ack Julian
16:16:25 Julian: if XHTML 2 is published as a Note, which namespace woudl it use?
16:16:40 Lachy: It won't matter, as a Note isn't something people are likely to deploy/implement
16:17:54 MM: I'm a little confused... HTML 5 uses which namespace?
16:19:03 MM: does W3C have namespace policies?
16:19:07 I suppose someone could take an ISSUE to contact the XHTML-WG and ask that their work be published as a NOTE using the previously used 2002/02/xhtml2 (I think) namespace from older working drafts
16:19:08 DanC: yes
16:19:20 s/an ISSUE/an ACTION/
16:19:31 MM: is there a missing policy?
16:20:54 DanC: I don't think so; I think what we need re this issue is done; there were 2 WGs specifying the /1999/xhtml namespace and now there's one
16:21:22 Murray is still concerned about the continuity of the xhtml namespace
16:21:42 I will take an action item in 2 weeks to insure that the versioning discussion at least touches on this
16:21:43 OK?
16:22:09 ACTION: Larry insure that the versioning discussion at least touches on XHTML 2 interactions with the /1999/xhtml namespace
16:22:09 Created ACTION-129 - insure that the versioning discussion at least touches on XHTML 2 interactions with the /1999/xhtml namespace [on Larry Masinter - due 2009-07-16].
16:22:19 action-129 due 23 July
16:22:19 ACTION-129 insure that the versioning discussion at least touches on XHTML 2 interactions with the /1999/xhtml namespace due date now 23 July
16:22:20 i think there needs to be another action to review any "Note" that comes out about XHTML2 to make sure that it doesn't contain text redefining 1999/xhtml incompatibily
16:23:01 Murray, XHTML5 retains compatibility with existing XHTML 1.0 namespaced documents.
16:23:02 this 'issue' was an administrative one, there's likely a technical one too
16:23:36 MM: I'm concerned that if HTML 5 use the /1999/xhtml namespace it'll upset compatibility expectations
16:24:14 Sam: if HTML 5 used a different namespace it would break existing content on the web
16:24:41 Topic: ISSUE-63 (origin-req-scope)
16:24:44 action-96?
16:24:44 ACTION-96 -- Henri Sivonen to to ensure editor removes Origin header: from spec -- due 2009-07-08 -- OPEN
16:24:44 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/96
16:24:45 Title: ACTION-96 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:24:55 Topic: ISSUE-4 (html-versioning)
16:25:38 LMM: the TAG discussed this in a recent ftf... [see www-tag for minutes]... I expect the document discussed will be revised w.r.t. that discussion...
16:26:23 ... my hope was to relate some well-understood principles to the doctype/versioning issue... I'm optimistic
16:27:00 ACTION-108 due 23 July
16:27:00 ACTION-108 Report back on the TAG's work on versioning wrt HTML due date now 23 July
16:27:35 Topic: ISSUE-35 (aria-processing)
16:27:50 Cynthia: we put out a WD 8 Jun
16:27:51 q+
16:28:10 ... things are on track...
16:28:23 ... I have a TF participant from Opera; still hoping for particpation from Apple
16:28:31 acton-114 due 1 Aug
16:29:03 Cynthia: the draft is "aria implementation guide"
16:29:54 (re versioning, TAG discussed it at its F2F meeting, http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/06/23-agenda.html, based on document http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-html/versioning-html-20090611.html ). Minutes forthcoming, but update to document based on discussion should be out in 2 weeks
16:29:55 Title: About http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/06/23-agenda.html (at www.w3.org)
16:30:13 DanC: does the draft have examples, sorta seeds of test cases?
16:30:20 Cynthia: perhaps... it does have some examples
16:30:45 ack danc
16:31:09 Topic: TPAC 2009 admin
16:31:48 Mike: I did it... interested to know if the chairs are OK with it
16:31:54 Sam: OK by me; go ahead
16:32:00 [pointer?]
16:32:11 laplink has joined #html-wg
16:32:16 action-115?
16:32:16 ACTION-115 -- Michael(tm) Smith to set up WBS for HTML WG participants to attend HTML WG f2f during TPAC 2009 -- due 2009-05-28 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:32:16 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/115
16:32:17 Title: ACTION-115 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:32:18 action-115?
16:32:18 ACTION-115 -- Michael(tm) Smith to set up WBS for HTML WG participants to attend HTML WG f2f during TPAC 2009 -- due 2009-05-28 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:32:19 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/115
16:32:34 draft seems to be http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/2009-11-f2f/
16:32:35 -Murray_Maloney
16:32:58 DanC, yep
16:33:22 action-123 due 23 July
16:33:23 ACTION-123 Discuss choice of embedding vcard microdata instead of referencing IETF spec and defining conformance reqs for HTML5 due date now 23 July
16:34:11 Topic: URI/URL issue @@
16:34:15 action-125?
16:34:15 ACTION-125 -- Julian Reschke to coordinate with LMM and DanC to get an Internet Draft that addresses some HTML 5 href issues -- due 2009-07-02 -- OPEN
16:34:15 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/125
16:34:17 Title: ACTION-125 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:34:44 Julian: we're organizing a BOF at the next IETF, and Larry is working on updating the IRI spec
16:35:40 Larry: I started from the IRI spec, thinking this is a new protocol element, separate from IRIs and and LEIRIs, but I think this [?] is a change to the mapping from IRI to URI...
16:36:09 ... but I think the mapping needs another parameter, i.e. the encoding of the document character set, which defaults to utf-8...
16:36:30 ... also, space handling should be tweaked...
16:36:55 q+
16:37:28 q-
16:37:39 (yup, sounds right to me)
16:38:01 -Cynthia_Shelly
16:38:09 Larry: that's the design I have in mind ... I haven't gotten around to soliciting review by email
16:38:50 +Cynthia_Shelly
16:39:33 Julian: hmm... that's not the case in Atom documents... have to be careful about that default
16:39:38 Larry: ah; right... yes.
16:40:08 (need to be careful about to which document formats the new encoding consderations apply - HTML5 would, Atom not (?))
16:40:20 ACTION-125 due 1 Aug
16:40:20 ACTION-125 Coordinate with LMM and DanC to get an Internet Draft that addresses some HTML 5 href issues due date now 1 Aug
16:41:12 Topic: Overdue actions
16:41:25 ACTION-38 due 30 July
16:41:25 ACTION-38 Chairs to review need for amending charter with Director due date now 30 July
16:41:32 Sam that was pending on the XHTML 2 stuff.
16:42:31 Topic: ISSUE-7 video-codecs
16:44:04 DanC: two minds, like image -- don't need to spec it, other hand, might be important
16:44:17 q+
16:45:21 LMM: I think the factors affecting the choice of codec are largely outside the control of this WG: perceptions about licensing, quality, etc. ...
16:45:45 ... I'm more concerned with the perception that some decision got made when it didn't
16:46:07 ... my suggestion is: the issue is still open...
16:47:53 LMM: one idea is a note on the small number of choices and why we haven't chosen
16:48:40 +Shepazu
16:49:16 LMM: is it possible to move the