http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0417.html
paul: we are going to review 6 due and overdue actions, one new issue, no issues proposed to be closed, then we will touch on the proposed tasks forces
rubys: the plan is that this data
will go out of the spec, once it is out of the spec, there is
no coor issue?
... julain: I've contacted the IETF.. and they haven't
responded
... paulc: you moved the date?
... rubys: that's the date that it should be moved out of the
spec
... julian: if it is moved out of the spec, I'm happy with
that
paulc: do we need something more
specific in the action?
... new due date will be october 1
paulc: is steve on the call?
<Laura> http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/HTML5/img.html
laura: I believe he has been working on it
<Laura> http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/HTML5/textalternatives.html
michaelc: I can't give you a precise timeline
paulc: I'll get in contact with
Steve and get a new date...
... how about a two weeks extension?
<MikeSmith> action-131 due 2009-09-21
<trackbot> ACTION-131 Draft ALT spec due date now 2009-09-21
<paulc> Paul will follow up with Steve to check on revised date of ACTION-131
mike: I added a comment, and I do
think it can be closed
... action can be closed (issue can remain open)
<MikeSmith> action-96?
<trackbot> ACTION-96 -- Henri Sivonen to to ensure editor removes Origin header: from spec -- due 2009-09-09 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/96
paulc: why do you say that his
action is closed?
... if the actual work hasn't been done, we shouldn't close the
action
mike: the origin header is still mentioned, but it is unclear what action we should take (if any), henri's action is now moot
<shepazu> ISSUE-63?
<trackbot> ISSUE-63 -- Origin header: in scope? required for this release? -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/63
mike: [explains what the spec says re: origin]
paulc: proposal is to close action 96, noting that the issue is still open
<MikeSmith> action-96: there are still references to Origin in the spec, but as far as this particular, it has essentically been "overtaken by events" -- changes in the spec have rendered the particular action moot
<trackbot> ACTION-96 to ensure editor removes Origin header: from spec notes added
julian: is origin now known as sec-from?
rubys: my understanding is that sec-from addresses the origin use header use cases
mjs: indeed sec-from is a header that addresses the same use case, and is written in a way that won't need to be referenced from the HTML spec
close action-96
<trackbot> ACTION-96 to ensure editor removes Origin header: from spec closed
<MikeSmith> close action-96
<trackbot> ACTION-96 to ensure editor removes Origin header: from spec closed
paulc: can anyone give us an update?
mcooper: actively being developed and is being merged with other work
paulc: suggest moving this out two weeks...
action-138 due +2 weeks
<trackbot> ACTION-138 Produce a matrix based on Henri's work due date now +2 weeks
<MikeSmith> action-138 due 2009-09-24
<trackbot> ACTION-138 Produce a matrix based on Henri's work due date now 2009-09-24
mattmay: I've pushed it out a week
<Laura> Draft on wai-xtech http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2009Sep/0054.html
<MikeSmith> action-136?
<trackbot> ACTION-136 -- Matthew May to send draft to the list, due in three weeks -- due 2009-09-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/136
paulc: I've double checked and
Microsoft does not wish to pursue this issue, and I've checked
and don't believe that the creation of task forces will require
a charter update
... issue-64 notes a potential charter concern, and we dealt
with that last week and there is a call for consensus
open...
... I don't believe that there is any reason to keep this
action open...
<Julian> action-38?
<trackbot> ACTION-38 -- Paul Cotton to chairs to review need for amending charter with Director -- due 2009-09-10 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/38
jerryezrol: closing this action doesn't affect issue-64
paulc: no, I propose that we close action-38
<MikeSmith> close action-38
<trackbot> ACTION-38 Chairs to review need for amending charter with Director closed
paulc: any other actions?
<MikeSmith> issue-78?
<trackbot> ISSUE-78 -- Spec should use a term other than "URL" for Web Addresses -- RAISED
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/78
<MikeSmith> issue-56?
<trackbot> ISSUE-56 -- Bring "URLs" section/definition and IRI specification in alignment. -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/56
paulc: is this a dupe of issue-56 (per DanC's note to the list)?
mike: there are two different issues... issue-56 is about the spec text, issue-78 is about the term.
<DanC> you really want 2 separate issues? 2 separate discussions? I don't. But oh well.
paulc: so strongly related, but not a dupe?
mike: yes
paulc: these issues can be
addressed separately....
... at the moment, neither have actions?
mike: not at the moment
paul: no issues were no nominated this week
<MikeSmith> issue-78: during 2009-09-10 telcon we resolved that this issue is not a duplication of issue 56 and so it should be kept open
<trackbot> ISSUE-78 Spec should use a term other than "URL" for Web Addresses notes added
paulc: co-chairs had an
(implicit) action item to discuss how to proceed, and I've sent
an email to the list with an 8 point outline, and the PF
working group agrees
... the only thing holding the co-chairs back is further
comment (if any) and an action on plh to check into from a
patent policy point of view
<scribe> ACTION: plh look into some questions we have about how the W3C Patent Policy obligations would apply to a joint TF. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/10-html-wg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-142 - Look into some questions we have about how the W3C Patent Policy obligations would apply to a joint TF. [on Philippe Le Hégaret - due 2009-09-17].
mcooper: plh suggested that this could be simply a task force of the html working group
<kliehm> Philippe's response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0460.html
mcooper: that might work, but I think the PF working group would prefer a joint mandate
paulc: the suggestion was a way to make the patent policy issue go away... should we revisit this next week?
mcooper: we won't have a teleconference next week... I would hate to have this delayed for two weeks...
rubys: can we start out with an
HTML task force and change it if (and only if) there is an
objection?
... mike: I would suggest that we resolve this up front
... paulc: I agree with mike
paulc: mcooper, please reply to plh's note on the list
close action 142
paulc: looking for volunteers,
already have one (Jason)
... [notes discussion that has already occurred on the
list]
... any comments on the call?
... volunteers should respond either to the co-chairs or the
list
... I recommend that the co-chairs simply set up this task
force
... I'm aware of some w3c work in the past week... any
update?
doug: we are not quite production ready, we should ready to discuss it on the 15th
<takkaria> I volunteered a while ago to co-ordinate testing but haven't had the time
paulc: should we take an action to bring an action to the working group.
<takkaria> and we had a decent conversation on this channel before the telecon which should probably be posted to the list in summarised form
<scribe> ACTION: paulc to get co-chairs to bring forward a concrete proposal for a testing task force (including scope) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/10-html-wg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - paulc
<MikeSmith> trackbot, status?
<scribe> ACTION: paul to get co-chairs to bring forward a concrete proposal for a testing task force (including scope) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/10-html-wg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-143 - Get co-chairs to bring forward a concrete proposal for a testing task force (including scope) [on Paul Cotton - due 2009-09-17].
paulc: who is available for next
week?
... I believe that we are ready to adjourn
... adjourned