See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 17 November 2009
<dug> who is 353?
<asoldano> I've muted my line
<dug> I blame martin :-)
<Bob> scribenick: Vikas
<dug> woo hoo - scribe volunteers! what a concept!
Dug: Request to defer 6463.
<scribe> AGENDA: Accepted within the working group
RESOLUTION: The minutes from 2009-11-05/06 meeting has been approved without objection.
Bob: Meeting of 11/24 and 12/22
is cancelled without objection
... Meeting of 12/29 is also cancelled without objection.
Bob: Calrify if an issue shows up after 11/13, will look at it after LC.
Issue-8273
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8273
<dug> what about just pointing to: http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicSecurity/SecurityChallenges-1.0-errata-2006-08-14.html
Bob: Any objection to make it LC issue?
<DaveS> Dave S Joins the phone call.
Dug/Gil: agrees to make it LC issue.
Bob: 8273 is placed in LC issue.
Issue: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8280
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-2 - Http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8280 ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/tracker/issues/2/edit .
<dug> s/MUST understand/MUST support/
<asoldano> someone need to rollack ^
<asoldano> *rollback
RESOLUTION: 8280 resolved as proposed
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8284
Bob: Any objection to make 8284 as possibly substantive issue.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8181
Bob: Any objection to accept 8181 as new issue
Asir: Asking for more details before accepting it
<asir> Yeah, but what if members don't understand the issue
Tom: The confusion highlighted in the issue need to be clarified...and looks a valid issue.
Bob: 8181 accepted and is placed in current issue category
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8182
<asir> Recommend that issue openers provide justification rather than creating placeholders
Bob: 8182 accepted and is placed in current issue category
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8185
Bob: 8185 accepted as LC issue without objection
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8192
Bob: 8192 accepted as current issue without objection
Ram: 8191 is missing from the list
Bob: 8191 is accepted without objection.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8193
Bob: 8193 accepted as LC issue without objection
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8194
<Vikas1> Bob, please assign Vikas1 as scribe
<Vikas1> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8195
<Yves> scribenick Vikas1
<Bob> scribenick: Vikas1
Asir: Asking for more substantive description on the issue.
<asir2> XML Schema, XQuery and XSLT uses XPath
<asir2> they have not bumped into these issues
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8231
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8257
Bob: 8257 accepted as LC issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8258
Bob: 8258 accepted as LC issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8164
Dug: Editorial which requires some discussion, sugegst it as a current issue.
Bob: 8164 accepted as current issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8165
Bob: 8165 accepted as LC issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8176
Dug: suggest pre-LC
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8271
Gil: Suggest it as a current issue, which requires some discusison.
Wu: Suggest it as LC
<asir2> should we document that this issue is limited to fixing RFC terms?
<dug> we can't make this determination until we see the proposal
<dug> I wasn't done
<asir2> What I am hearing is that the issue description is incomplete and is a place holder for future issues
<asir2> 2119 scan sounds good
<asir2> Did Bob invent the phrase '2119 scan'?
Bob: 8271 accepted as current issue
<scribe> scribenick: Vikas1
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8274
Bob: Closed with no action
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8275
Gil: LC
Dug: substantive
Bob: 8275 accepted as current issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8276
RESOLUTION: 8276 resolved with current proposal
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8277
RESOLUTION: 8277 resolved with current proposal
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8281
Bob: 8281 accepted as current issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8283
Bob: 8283 accepted as current issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8285
<li> noise
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8286
Bob: 8286 accepted as current issue
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8287
Bob: accepted as LC issue
<MartinC> pumpkin time
<asoldano> bye
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8288
<MartinC> night
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/133/13/ FAILED: s/MUST understand/MUST support/ Found ScribeNick: Vikas Found ScribeNick: Vikas1 Found ScribeNick: Vikas1 Inferring Scribes: Vikas, Vikas1 Scribes: Vikas, Vikas1 ScribeNicks: Vikas, Vikas1 WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: Ashok Ashok_Malhotra Asir Bob DaveS Gil MartinC P0 Ram Tom Tom_Rutt Vikas1 Wu Wu_Chou Yves asir2 asoldano dug gpilz joined li scribenick trackbot ws-ra You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access/2009Nov/0057.html WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 17 Nov 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/11/17-ws-ra-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]